So Czer is ISIS really just a Saudi front created to mess w/Iran?

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Utumno, Jun 14, 2014.

  1. AgelessDrifter

    AgelessDrifter TZT Neckbeard Lord

    Post Count:
    It would actually be kind of funny if at this moment in history with everything else going on it turned out to be nuclear war between India and Pakistan that ended the world
  2. Czer

    Czer I'm a poor person. The lambo is my cousin's.

    Post Count:
    Pakistan wouldn't last against Iran and India in any way, this makes me feel like someone is purposely trying to pull Pakistan apart.
  3. Utumno

    Utumno Administrator Staff Member

    Post Count:
  4. Czer

    Czer I'm a poor person. The lambo is my cousin's.

    Post Count:
  5. Czer

    Czer I'm a poor person. The lambo is my cousin's.

    Post Count:
  6. Czer

    Czer I'm a poor person. The lambo is my cousin's.

    Post Count:
  7. Czer

    Czer I'm a poor person. The lambo is my cousin's.

    Post Count:
  8. Czer

    Czer I'm a poor person. The lambo is my cousin's.

    Post Count:
  9. Czer

    Czer I'm a poor person. The lambo is my cousin's.

    Post Count:
    In Iraq, Iran-affiliated militias that helped rout Islamic State wield growing clout
    FEB 13, 2019

    In 2014, as Islamic State militants were seizing large chunks of Iraqi territory and advancing toward Baghdad, hundreds of thousands of volunteers rose to the capital's defense. They joined the Shiite-dominated militias known in Arabic as the Hashd al Shaabi.

    Though many of the militias were funded by neighboring Iran, they became a crucial part of the U.S.-led campaign to defeat the extremists.

    That campaign all but ended last year with the defeat of Islamic State, but the Hashd is not demobilizing.

    Instead, the militias have transformed themselves into a potent government institution, political entity and economic player whose strong ties to Iran are likely to complicate U.S. foreign policy in the region.

    The U.S. hopes to isolate Iran by pushing Iraq and other regional governments to stay out of its orbit.

    Iran was once a bitter enemy of Iraq. But since U.S.-led forces toppled Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein in 2003, Iran has become an important trading partner that wields increasing influence.

    A recent study commissioned by the U.S. Army concluded that “an emboldened and expansionist Iran appears to be the only victor” of the U.S.-led invasion.

    In the run-up to Iraqi elections last May, the Iranian-backed militias spawned a political party called Fatah, or Conquest, which netted 54 seats in parliament — more than all but one other party.

    That gave the militias the political wherewithal to turn the Hashd from a makeshift volunteer force into an official branch of Iraq’s armed services.

    In November, parliament passed a law granting the Hashd’s 122,000 to 140,000 personnel wage parity with their counterparts in the Iraqi military along with many of the same benefits. The Hashd’s budget this year was doubled to $2 billion.

    Last month, according to local media reports quoting key politicians and others, the Fatah party persuaded the government to give the Hashd control of the Mutassem Co., one of the largest state-owned construction contractors in Iraq. The Hashd intends to use its fighters to pour cement, pave roads and repair homes as part of the effort to rebuild the country after so many years of war.

    Its growing influence has stirred fear in Washington that the Hashd could help Iran circumvent U.S. sanctions, which severely limit its ability to export its goods and do business with other countries.

    The U.S. government also has reason to be concerned about its ability to maintain a military presence in Iraq.

    President Trump said in an interview on CBS last week that he intended to keep U.S. troops at Asad Air Base, about 100 miles west of Baghdad, to keep an eye on Iran. His comments renewed calls by the Hashd to terminate the agreement that allows the U.S. to station 5,000 military personnel in Iraq.

    “There are challenges before us that must be surmounted — the most important of which is the American presence,” Hadi Ameri, head of the Fatah alliance, told reporters in Baghdad.

    Hashd fighters in 2016.

    The Hashd’s rising profile has also worried many Iraqis, who say that the group is amassing a level of power that threatens to undermine the government and remains close with militias that were never absorbed by the military.

    Hakim Zamili, former head of parliament's security and defense committee, accused the government of being too weak to confront the militias and their growing economic might.

    “If there isn’t decisive action by the government, then of course we can’t succeed and achieve what the Iraqi citizen is demanding in terms of unemployment, corruption and services,” he said.

    Defenders of the Hashd contrast it with the Iraqi army of 2014, when many of its soldiers shed their uniforms and threw away their guns as Islamic State advanced.

    When Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani, a Shiite Muslim cleric and Iraq’s highest religious authority, issued a religious edict calling on every able-bodied man to defend the capital, hundreds of thousands left their jobs and joined new militias.

    Others enlisted in existing factions, including League of the Righteous, the Badr Organization and the Hezbollah Brigades — all of which receive funding, training and equipment from Iran and are sworn enemies of the United States.

    The militiamen participated in every major battle against the extremists even as the U.S., Iraqi politicians and others expressed misgivings about a Shiite-dominated force attacking Sunni Muslim areas.

    Some also worked with Iran across the border in Syria, bolstering troops loyal to Syrian President Bashar Assad against his rebel enemies.

    The U.S. and its coalition of 73 countries fighting Islamic State worked alongside the militias with the hope they would be disbanded after the fighting was over.

    Iran “should respect the sovereignty of the Iraqi government and permit the disarming, demobilization, and reintegration of Shia militias,” the State Department tweeted in October.

    Many of those militias still exist, even as the Hashd became a branch of the Iraqi military and some of its commanders were integrated into other defense agencies, including the Counter-Terrorism Service, a special operations force trained and equipped by the U.S.

    Officially, the Hashd no longer has anything to do with the militias. But the line between the two is murky.

    The Hashd still maintains many of its old bases and helps man military checkpoints.

    Parliamentarians and security personnel have accused the Hashd and its former militias — which have created so-called economic offices — of imposing levies on commerce, using their influence to grab real estate or charge protection money for safe passage.

    Ahmed Jabouri, a parliament member from the northwestern province of Nineveh, accused the provincial government of allowing “armed groups associated with the Hashd’s factions” to steal 70 to 100 tankers of crude oil a day from the town of Qayyarah. “The government is silent,” he said.

    “Nineveh is being robbed in broad daylight.”

    One researcher, who asked to withhold his name for reasons of security, estimated that one out of every 32 barrels of oil sold in the country benefited the coffers of militias such as the League of the Righteous.

    In the Sunni-dominated regions near Iraq’s western and northern border, the militias have also made money by taking over old smuggling routes to ferry food, clothing and many other goods from Syria and Turkey.

    “Before, Sunnis in west Iraq had to make deals with [Islamic State] to have goods coming through from Turkey or Syria. Now they're much better off making deals with the Hashd,” said one person close to both the Hashd and the Syrian government and who has brokered some of these deals. The source spoke on condition of anonymity for security reasons.

    “Likewise there are specific factions that cooperate with Syrians to bring in Syrian products, such as fruit, vegetables, soaps and plastics,” the source said.

    The Hashd’s plans to help rebuild the country have won praise in some quarters.

    “Since there isn’t a whole lot of fighting to do, there’s an intention to expand beyond military and to use Hashd personnel to provide services,” said Ali Mawlawi, a political analyst at the Baghdad-based Bayan Center think tank.

    “If you’ve got more than 120,000 people who can get things done much faster than others, and are a lot more versatile and dynamic, I think that has a public benefit,” he said.

    A highly visible role in public works projects and other popular programs also has enormous benefit for the Hashd.

    “Their aim is to entrench their patronage and social influence by creating a network of social service entities to go with their militia,” said Thanassis Cambanis, a senior fellow at the New York-based Century Foundation think tank.

    He said the approach is similar to the model used in Lebanon by Hezbollah — the Iran-backed paramilitary group and political party — to exert power over the government there.

    “If the state can’t build the highway and the Hashd can, what does that say about the state?” he said.
  10. Czer

    Czer I'm a poor person. The lambo is my cousin's.

    Post Count:
    The war documentary the Marine Corps doesn't want you to see is finally hitting theaters
    • Combat Obscura, made by Marine Lance Cpl. Miles Lagoze, gives perhaps the most raw and realistic look at what an infantry Marine sees while deployed overseas.
    • As a Marine videographer, Lagoze's accompanied grunts out on patrol and at base, interviewing them and filming what they did on a daily basis.
    • His footage looks nothing like the recruiting pitch being sold to American teenagers, which is probably why the Marine Corps wanted nothing to do with it.
    The film jumps around, seemingly without structure. At times Marines are patrolling, other times they are sitting against walls, smoking, waiting. There are brief moments of combat, and then down moments of boredom.

    Titled "Combat Obscura," it offers no timeline to follow, and gives little thought to the strategic outlook of the Afghan War, which was just a quaint nine years old in 2011 when footage was first shot by Marine Lance Cpl. Miles Lagoze, then a combat cameraman attached to 1st Battalion, 6th Marines.

    Yet it gives perhaps the most raw and realistic look at what an infantry Marine sees while on a combat deployment overseas.

    It looks nothing like the recruiting pitch being sold to American teenagers, which is probably why the Marine Corps itself wanted nothing to do with it.

    What the Marine Corps doesn't want you to see
    "The actions depicted in the film of these few betrayed the trust and safety of their fellow Marines; they selfishly put their own self-interests over their unit, and by doing so put their entire team at risk," said Maj. Brian Block, a Marine Corps spokesman.

    Although the Corps previously threatened legal action against the Marine veteran— since he used government-issued equipment to capture much of it — Block now says Lagoze is in the clear.

    "While we contend that at least some of the content of the film — produced with Marine Corps equipment, during a Marine Corps deployment, and not cleared for public release by any official release authority — is rightly the property of the US Government, we do not plan to pursue any legal action against Mr. Lagoze at this time," said Block.

    "That definitely is a weight off," Lagoze told Task & Purpose, which first informed him the legal threat from Marine officials had been dropped on Thursday.

    There are many scenes that upend the image the Marine Corps wants to convey to outsiders.

    For more than a year, Lagoze had the threat looming over his head after his film premiered on the festival circuit. "Obscura" received even more attention from Marines young and old after Task & Purpose's James Clark offered a review. The reason why the Corps was so pissed at the hour-long documentary could perhaps be found within the opening moments of the film, as grunts wait for an airstrike on a compound.

    "Bout to have a drop right here, yeahhh!" one Marine says, as a camera focuses on an Afghan compound. Then seconds later, a blast is heard, and the camera turns to a house hundreds of meters away. "Holy shit. That's the wrong building. Holy shit! Yeah boy!"

    Read more:The 27 most powerful images of the US military in 2018

    It's just one of many scenes that upend the spit and polished image the Marine Corps wants to convey to outsiders. But as most Marines know (including this writer), the reality is much more than dress blues, marching in formation, and love of country.

    "We knew it was kinda bullshit when we were out there. We knew we weren't making that much of a difference," Lagoze said.

    Among the scenes you definitely won't find airing on AFN are Marines packing their own cigarettes with hash or others smoking marijuana while pulling security at their patrol base — most notably, a grunt fashions a bong out of an empty Pringles can.

    Lagoze's job was to film the "hearts and minds stuff of the war."

    There are Marines being wounded and evacuated. Another scene shows Marines aiming their weapons at an unarmed Afghan man, who is made to strip naked in order to be checked for weapons. Naturally, the scene is cut right after a Marine says in an interview ready-made for public affairs release that their mission was to "build relationships with the locals."

    "There's been so many fake depictions of the war, that it's worse not to show what it was actually like," said Lagoze. "People are really sick of the hero worship and stuff like that. [These Marines] were in a fucked up situation. This is more real."

    Read more:These are the incredible stories of US troops who've earned the Medal of Honor during the war on terror

    As a videographer for the Marine Corps, Lagoze's job was to accompany the grunts out on patrol and back at base, interviewing them and shooting footage of what they were doing on a daily basis. But what they were really doing was not what the brass wanted to see.

    He was told to film the "hearts and minds stuff of the war" — handing out candy to Afghan children, grunts patrolling with the Afghan Army, and interviews with Marines that could be released to the public showing they believed in the mission and were happy with what they were doing — all of which is standard fare that is uploaded daily to the Defense Department's imagery portal.

    But he was given limits: Don't capture footage with grunts smoking or using profanity — which is almost a prerequisite to being an infantryman. No casualties. And whatever you do, don't shoot videos of anyone without their full gear on.

    "That was actually a big one," Lagoze said. "If they were running around without their helmets on, their proper protective equipment, someone was gonna flip out."

    In one instance, Lagoze said, there were videos that ended up being released that "got a lot of flak" from higher-ups because some of the infantrymen were seen during a firefight wearing only green t-shirts underneath their body armor. Others were only in flip-flops.

    You can imagine the theoretical ass chewing to come later: In combat, gentlemen, you will be fully dressed before returning fire to the enemy.

    But as Lagoze states in the opening moments of the film with text appearing screen, a rare moment of narration, "we filmed what they wanted, but then we kept shooting."

    The Corps took issue with Lagoze retaining footage he and others shot while overseas that was used to make the film, which Block said could "set an unfortunate precedent." He went on to say that Marines on deployment should be focused on their mission, and not their "personal ambitions" — in other words, not going into the Marine Corps and gaining unfettered access to its personnel, solely for their personal benefit later.

    But Lagoze rejected that line of reasoning, telling Task & Purpose that he never thought about making a documentary until he had entered film school and started looking back through his old footage. He also brought up the mission of combat camera, which is to produce imagery for public consumption and to document for historical purposes.

    "I can only film what's happening around me. If they're looking for only certain things that fit into that historical documentation, then I see that as problematic," he said, adding: "I was providing an outlet so that these guys' stories wouldn't get lost and whitewashed in the sanitized version the Marine Corps wanted to perpetuate. It wasn't personal ambition."

    "Combat Obscura" gives a window into the un-sanitized world of the Marine infantry in combat.

    As for the alleged criminal activity depicted in the film — Marines taking drugs, for example — the statute of limitations has long since passed. And Block stressed that the film does not represent the "experience or attitudes of the vast majority of Marines who deployed and served with honor and distinction in Afghanistan."

    But it does provide a snippet, a brief moment in time, when there was still hope for a "win" in Afghanistan. It gives a window into the f---ed-up and un-sanitized world of the Marine infantry in combat, where a grunt's sanity is often tested by the thought that the next step could be their last.

    Real-world consequences for 'muddling along'
    This fear, usually unspoken among men whose leaders sometimes call them modern-day Spartans, is best captured in the film when one Marine is interviewed just moments after a Taliban attack on their compound. His head bandaged after taking shrapnel, which he initially brushes off as a "boo boo," and with one Marine being taken away for medical evacuation in a helicopter, the facade of toughness finally breaks down: "I don't, uh. I don't want any more combat. I think I'm good after this."

    "You're ready to go home, aren't you?"


    "I'm scared. I'm fine now, but when it was happening, it was like, f---, I never thought they'd get that close. I never thought they'd hit us in the compound."

    The Corps took issue with Lagoze retaining footage he and others shot while overseas that was used to make the film.

    More broadly, "Combat Obscura" gives people a look at the real-world consequences that can be wrought by generals who believe that "muddling along" in Afghanistan is a viable strategy. And that, at least, has to be worth something.

    "You can get your legs blown off or your head blown off at any moment," said Lagoze, a Purple Heart recipient. "It's a little unrealistic to expect 19-year-old kids to be these perfect soldiers, these perfect human beings, especially in as fucked up a situation as Afghanistan."

    "You can s--- on the guys on the ground out there, but who's running the war? Who thought what we were actually doing was going to work? That's what I think we should be more focused on than kids smoking hash."

    The film hits theaters on March 15.
  11. Czer

    Czer I'm a poor person. The lambo is my cousin's.

    Post Count:
    Turkey Rejects Latest U.S. Offer to Sell Patriot Missiles
    March 1, 2019

    Turkey has rejected a U.S. proposal to deliver one Patriot missile defense system by the end of 2019, which was conditional on Ankara abandoning a deal with Russia that’s strained ties between the NATO allies, two senior Turkish officials said on Friday.

    The U.S. administration made its offer before Feb. 15, and then increased the price of the multi-billion dollar system in return for quick delivery, according to the officials who are familiar with the talks but not authorized to speak to the media. The proposal didn’t include a loan agreement nor a technology sharing pact, a key Turkish demand, they said.

    Turkey said in its response that it can’t accept the U.S. offer and negotiations came to a standstill, the officials said.

    A U.S. Patriot missile system.

    Having balked for years at selling Turkey the Patriot system, the U.S. State Department notified Congress in December that it had proposed doing just that, a gambit designed to get Ankara to halt an agreement with Russia for a S-400-based system, which could compromise NATO technology.

    A U.S. official familiar with the negotiations said Turkey appeared to be looking for reasons to walk away from the U.S. deal. The U.S. has offered Turkey better terms on both pricing and co-production than Russia, in an effort to persuade it not to go through with the S-400 purchase, the official said.

    Turkey expects the first S-400 delivery in July. Russia has promised Turkey joint production and technology transfer as part of the agreement. Turkey’s determination to buy Russian missiles has fueled demands in the U.S. that planned supplies of F-35 jets be put on hold even though portions of the Lockheed Martin Co. fighter are being built in Turkey.

    The U.S. has threatened to impose sanctions on Turkey if it receives missiles from Russia.

    Turkish-U.S. ties remain rocky after a series of disputes including Washington’s support for a Syrian Kurdish force that Ankara regards as a mortal enemy; Turkey’s demand that the U.S. extradite a preacher it accuses of instigating the failed coup attempt in 2016; and the conviction in the U.S. of a Turkish banker on Iran sanctions violations charges.
  12. Czer

    Czer I'm a poor person. The lambo is my cousin's.

    Post Count:
    f-35's have already been delivered to turkey in june 2018 and you would have to force the turkish military to return them, and they will have the s-400's in July 2019.

    in other words, they can adjust the s-400 perfectly to the f-35 cross section without having to play cat and mouse because they possess both technologies, they will also have the specific identification designators for the F-35.

    both modern US jets the f-35 and f-22 'stealth' depends on holding their weapons inside the frame before use, the f-35 has the ability to ignore this and carry more munitions instead
    Last edited: Mar 2, 2019
  13. Czer

    Czer I'm a poor person. The lambo is my cousin's.

    Post Count:
    Iran Has a Big Advantage in the Battle for the Middle East
    The U.S. and its allies have the power and wealth, but Tehran’s small coalition is better integrated and disciplined.
    February 20, 2019

    Why can’t the U.S. and its allies get the better of Iran? To all appearances, the face-off is a colossal mismatch, with incomparably greater power arrayed against Tehran than for it. But Iran and its allies have several underappreciated advantages, not least the relative cohesion on their own side versus the disarray among their opponents.

    Last week’s U.S.-organized Warsaw Summit on “peace and security in the Middle East” was correctly regarded by most participants and observers as an effort by Washington to shore up the coalition opposing Iran’s regional Middle East ambitions. There were representatives of more than six dozen countries, all of whom are meaningfully opposed to Iran’s policies on nuclear proliferation, supporting terrorism and the like. They include most of Europe’s NATO members, many of the largest Arab countries and Israel. On its face, it’s a very large and formidable coalition.

    By comparison, Iran’s committed allies seem a small and ragtag bunch: the Assad regime in Syria, Hezbollah in Lebanon, Shiite militias in Iraq and the Houthi rebels in Yemen. True, in confrontations with the West Iran can call on the general sympathy of Russia and China. But those large powers are unlikely to bail Tehran out of a crisis, and they maintain good relations with many of Iran’s key opponents such as Saudi Arabia and Israel.

    The key to the strength of Iran’s Middle East coalition is its relative vertical integration and discipline. Most of its members are either beholden to or dependent on Iran. So most important decisions are made by the Republican Guards or National Security Council in Tehran. Dissent is rare, and usually contained or irrelevant. Even the outlying coalition members such as the Houthis, who do not pay much attention to Iran’s instructions, are valuable because their rebellion contributes to the chaos that Tehran strategically exploits.

    The relative vertical integration of decision-making on the pro-Iranian side is also buttressed by cultural and religious deference to authority among Shiite Muslims. Shiites are typically supposed to adhere to the judgment of senior clerics, and Iran’s revolutionary Islamist appeal is precisely to such religious-political authority.

    In sum, Iran is a revisionist, anti-status-quo power that flourishes amid regional instability. None of this is true for its opponents. The coalition of Gulf countries, other pro-U.S. Arab countries, Israel, the U.S., and most NATO states is quintessentially oriented to keeping the status quo, to preserving the global and regional order. And it is much harder to create and maintain structures than it is to blow them up.

    This is not made easier by the disarray in the anti-Iranian camp. The Gulf Arab countries and Israel don’t even have diplomatic relations. They remain profoundly divided over the Palestinian issue. All cooperation on security such as sharing intelligence must be limited and surreptitious. There’s no real possibility of an open alliance between them, as has become painfully clear to a disappointed Trump administration. And the Sunni-majority Arab countries are themselves bitterly divided, as the ongoing boycott of Qatar by Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain and Egypt demonstrates.

    NATO is badly divided on Iran as well. Since the Trump administration withdrew the U.S. from the 2015 nuclear deal, Britain, Germany and France, along with the European Union, have been trying to keep the agreement alive despite Washington’s opposition. They have created a “special purpose vehicle” for European companies to get payments for trading with Iran in currencies other than the dollar, bypassing the U.S. banking system and, therefore, American sanctions. They all sent junior delegations to Warsaw, except for Britain, whose foreign minister said he was only there to talk about Yemen.

    Another key NATO member, Turkey, opted out of Warsaw altogether, preferring to join Iran and Russia in a rival conference at Sochi, Russia, ostensibly to talk about Syria. Turkey is increasingly taking a neutral attitude toward Iran, which it views as a rival rather than an adversary.

    Finally, in contrast to the Shiite deference to clerical authority, most Sunni traditions encourage believers to judge everything for themselves and to pick and choose among various opinions for different purposes. This allows Sunni extremists such as Qaeda to reject denunciations of terrorism by senior Sunni clerics in favor of justifications by junior or marginal jurisprudents they claim to find more persuasive. It also makes it difficult, if not impossible, for Sunni Muslim powers to deploy religion as a politically unifying, integrating factor in a regional coalition that includes non-state actors and militias. The last time this was systematically attempted, by the U.S., Pakistan and Saudi Arabia during the Afghan war in the 1980s, it helped defeat the Soviet Union, but also produced Qaeda and the Taliban.

    None of this is to say that Iran is in a stronger position than its adversaries. It’s not. Its economy is in ruins, it suffers from increasing political dissent at home, and it’s struggling to keep a grip on Iraq, which a few years ago seemed completely lost to Tehran’s influence.

    No rational person would prefer to be in Iran’s position rather than those of its American and Middle Eastern adversaries. But Iran and its small but potent coalition do enjoy some clear advantages, including much stronger unity and relative integration, the advantages of being disruptive and, as Warsaw demonstrated so clearly, the utter disarray on the other side.
  14. Czer

    Czer I'm a poor person. The lambo is my cousin's.

    Post Count:
    Germany will not list Iran-allied Hezbollah as terrorist: minister
    A top official has said Germany will not ban Hezbollah's political wing following Britain's decision to do so. Germany is under pressure from the United States to take hard action against the Iran-backed Lebanese group.

    Germany will not declare Lebanon's Hezbollah movement a terrorist organization, a top official said Friday.

    Niels Annen, deputy minister in the Foreign Ministry, told newsmagazine Der Spiegel that the Iran-backed Shiite Islamist movement is a relevant factor in Lebanese society and part of the complex political landscape in the country.

    The comments come after Britain last month banned Hezbollah in its entirety, accusing the movement of destabilizing the Middle East.

    "The British move is a national decision that has no direct impact on the position of the German government or the EU," Annen said.

    The European Union had already added Hezbollah's military wing to a list of banned terrorist groups in 2013.

    Hezbollah is represented in the Lebanese parliament and holds three of 30 ministries in the government led by Western-backed Prime Minister Saad al-Hariri.

    The movement's armed wing has expanded its influence in recent years in Lebanon and Syria, where, alongside Iran and Russia, it backs the regime of Syrian President Bashar Assad. In Lebanon, it is considered to be more powerful than the Lebanese army.

    Berlin focused on political solutions

    Annen, who spoke to Der Spiegel after a visit to Lebanon, rejected US criticism that Germany was not doing enough to counter Iran's influence in the region. He said Berlin's foreign policy remained focused on finding political solutions to complex situations.

    Germany and the EU have sought to save the 2015 nuclear agreement with Iran, setting up an alternative financing mechanism to allow trade with Tehran despite unilateral US sanctions.

    Lebanon is host to nearly 1 million Syrian refugees, some of whom have started to return home as the war in the country winds down. The humanitarian crisis has made the safe return of Syrian refugees an important issue for Germany.
  15. Czer

    Czer I'm a poor person. The lambo is my cousin's.

    Post Count:
  16. Czer

    Czer I'm a poor person. The lambo is my cousin's.

    Post Count:
    Turkey, Iran to stage joint raid against PKK: Minister
    March 06 2019

    Neighbors Turkey and Iran will carry out a joint operation against PKK, Anadolu news agency quoted the interior minister as saying on March 6.

    Hosted at the Anadolu Agency's Editor's Desk, Süleyman Soylu said: "God willing, we will carry out a joint operation against the PKK together with Iran.”

    Soylu did not specify which PKK bases the planned operation would target but President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has previously said it would be against militant hideouts in Iraq.

    Soylu also said there are now less than 700 militants in Turkey as the country takes significant measures on its borders to block militant entries.

    “There are less than 700 terrorists in Turkey. The terrorist entry into the country is so little, as well. 12 people entered Turkey since January. We are taking serious measures at our borders,” Soylu said.

    Separately, Soylu slammed the PKK for recruiting teenagers in its combat against Turkey.

    The PKK is listed as a terrorist organization by Turkey, the U.S. and the EU.
  17. Czer

    Czer I'm a poor person. The lambo is my cousin's.

    Post Count:
    Russia, Turkey Conduct Joint Naval Drills in Black Sea
    March 8, 2019

    The Russian Black Sea Fleet’s naval ships together with the vessels of the Turkish Naval Forces have conducted a passing exercise to improve interoperability in possible mine danger areas, Black Sea Fleet spokesman Capt. 2nd Rank Alexei Rulyov said on Friday.

    “The crews of two vessels of the Novorossiysk naval base of the Black Sea Fleet — patrol ship Vasily Bykov and minesweeper Valentin Pikul — have held joint Turkish-Russian exercise PASSEX with the crews of corvette Burgazada and minesweeper Akcay,” Rulyov said.

    According to Rulyov, the crews worked on interoperability between the two naval forces in the Black Sea and conducted a passing exercise in possible mine danger areas.

    On March 6-8, Turkish warships were in the port of Novorossiysk with a business call as part of national naval exercises dubbed Mavi Vatan-2019.
  18. Czer

    Czer I'm a poor person. The lambo is my cousin's.

    Post Count:
    Turkey, Russia starting patrols around Idlib, Syria
    Maintaining cease-fire in Idlib is key step for securing stability in Syria, says National Defense Minister Hulusi Akar

    Under a deal reached last fall, on Friday Turkey and Russia will begin patrols in and around the northwestern Syrian city of Idlib, according to Turkey’s national defense minister.

    “Today, Russia will begin patrols in the border area outside of Idlib while Turkish Armed Forces patrols will start in the demilitarized zone," Hulusi Akar told Anadolu Agency’s Editors’ Desk.

    The deal last September set up a demilitarized zone in Idlib and other areas, but the Syrian regime has repeatedly violated the cease-fire in Idlib, Akar added.

    Maintaining the cease-fire in Idlib is a significant step for securing stability in Syria, he said.

    Akar also stressed that Turkey purchasing S-400 missile defense systems from Russia is "not a choice but a necessity."

    Starting this October, the S-400 systems will be installed in Turkey, he said, adding that the Turkish Air Forces are studying where to deploy the missiles.

    After repeated efforts to buy missile defense from the U.S., and finding no success, in 2017 Ankara decided to buy the Russian S-400 systems.

    The move was criticized by the Pentagon, which warned that purchasing the S-400 would hurt Turkish-U.S. ties as well as Turkey's role in NATO. U.S. officials also said U.S. Patriots might serve as an alternative.

    But Turkish officials have repeatedly said even if Turkey bought the U.S. Patriots, it would not cancel the S-400 deal, which it committed to.

    Contacts with Syrian regime 'out of the question'

    Akar also said Turkish policy towards neighboring countries, especially Iraq and Syria, is based on their territorial and political sovereignty.

    He called Turkey holding contacts with the Syrian regime "out of the question," but pointed out that Ankara has been holding talks with Moscow and occasionally Tehran on the situation in Syria.

    Turkey has never had any problems with the Kurdish population or other ethnicities in Syria, as its army only strikes at terrorist nests, he explained.

    Syria has been locked in a vicious civil war since early 2011, when the Bashar al-Assad regime cracked down on pro-democracy protests with unexpected ferocity.

    Since then, hundreds of thousands of people have been killed and more than 10 million others displaced, according to UN officials.
  19. Czer

    Czer I'm a poor person. The lambo is my cousin's.

    Post Count:
    We have already delivered the first shipment to Turkey

  20. Czer

    Czer I'm a poor person. The lambo is my cousin's.

    Post Count:
    ‘We aren’t slaves’: Erdogan defies US pressure over S-400 deal with Russia, says S-500 may follow
    7 Mar, 2019

    Ankara is not a slave to an America in which Washington decides which weapons system Turkey can purchase, the country’s president proclaimed, stressing its deployment of Russia's S-400 air defense systems will proceed as planned.
    Ankara’s resilience against US pressure over the purchase of the S-400 systems remains rock solid, President Recep Tayyip Erdogan clarified on Wednesday, stressing that Turkey is a sovereign nation which has the right to choose its trade partners and arms suppliers.

    “It’s done. There can never be a turning back. This would not be ethical, it would be immoral. Nobody should ask us to lick up what we spat,” Erdogan told Kanal 24.

    The fuss over the Russian deal is now even forcing Turkey to consider upgrading to the next-generation of Russian air defense systems, the S-500, once it enters Russian military service sometime in 2020, Erdogan said.

    Claiming the need to protect NATO interoperability and to conceal the technical characteristics of US hardware from the Russians, and specifically with the Lockheed Martin F-35s, Washington has been using coercive diplomacy against Ankara, trying to force it to back down from its S-400 deal. The US insists Turkey should instead spend $3.5 billion on US Patriot missiles, an offer Ankara has repeatedly turned down in the past but is now vaguely considering if the conditions were suitable.

    The S-400 remains “a problem to all of our aircraft, but specifically the F-35,” Gen. Curtis Scaparrotti told the Senate Armed Services Committee on Wednesday arguing that the US should stop the stealth fighter transfer to Turkey and “forfeit” sales of other military technology to its NATO ally, if Ankara deploys the Russian-made defensive weaponry as expected in July. Earlier this week a Pentagon spokesman warned of “grave consequences” and of “broader implications"unless Turkey cancels the purchase.