SU-34: Coming after Obunga's ISIS butt buddies....

...and I certainly expect that Obama OKed shooting down the Russians at slight provocation,

I'd be surprised if he did. The last thing he wanted was to make this situation an even bigger headache.

So surprising just how uninformed you can be.

I notice that you haven't pointed out a single fact that I am wrong about.

BTW based upon reaction from Washington today I think we know that Turkey followed the rules as understood by Washington.

Putin and Khamenei utilized the meeting on Monday to hammer home that they cherish the mutual trust between their two countries and intend to preserve it no matter what it takes. Khamenei hit out at the US’ perceived hegemonic ambitions in the Middle East, and underlined that Iran and Russia have a congruence of interests in countering the US’ regional strategies. Putin, on his part, went out of the way to describe Iran as a “trustworthy and reliable ally in the region and the world”, which Russia will never betray.

Clearly, a Russian-Iranian rift over Assad’s fate is not on the cards. On the fundamental principle that a future government in Syria ought to be elected by the people of that country through free democratic choice, Moscow and Tehran are unwilling to compromise. Obama’s diplomatic strategy on Syria is in shambles. Putin even took a dig at Obama that America should not fear the prospect of democratic elections in Syria.

Looking ahead, the US stance that Russia’s participation in an international coalition against the Islamic State is linked to its “strategic adjustment” over Assad’s fate is likely to become untenable. Obama expected Putin to dump Assad. But Putin has made it clear that it is not for Russia to dictate the terms of a settlement in Syria. On the other hand, Obama will be on shaky ground if he continues to caricature the war against the IS in Clausewitzean terms as ‘politics by other means’.

However, the most extraordinary thing about Putin’s visit to Tehran is that it takes the veil off a strategic decision taken by the Kremlin to elevate Russia-Iran relationship to a qualitatively new level. Putin had deputed one of his most trusted aides to Tehran last week to choreograph the new trajectory for the bilateral relationship with Iran, which is suffused with solid strategic content of a kind that the West cannot hope to match. Interestingly, Putin’s choice fell on Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin to undertake this mission, a Kremlin politician whom Washington loves to hate and is on the State Department’s ‘black list’ for visa.

It is now clear that initially seemed like a masterstroke was in fact Erdogan’s first major misstep. His jailing of much of the Turkish military leadership on the basis of outlandish conspiracy theories has left him with a less-than-effective fighting force. Unwelcome Syrian refugees have crowded into Turkish border towns and beyond. Turks overwhelmingly oppose the war policy vis-à-vis Syria, with especially powerful opposition coming from the Alevis, a religious community making up 15 to 20 percent of Turkey’s population, distinct from Syria’s Alawis but sharing a Shiite heritage with them. Assad took revenge by reviving support for the PKK, whose escalating violence creates a major domestic problem for Erdogan. Indeed, Kurds — who missed their chance when the Middle East was carved up after World War I — may be the major winners from the current hostilities; for the first time, the outlines of a Kurdish state with Turkish, Syrian, Iraqi, and even Iranian components can be imagined.

Damascus still has a great patron in Moscow, where the government of Vladimir Putin offers its assistance via armaments and United Nations vetoes. Plus, Assad benefits from unstinting, brutal Iranian aid, which continues despite the mullah regime’s deep economic problems. In contrast, Ankara may still belong, formally, to NATO and enjoy the theoretical privilege of its famous Article 5, which promises that a military attack on one member country will lead to “such action as . . . necessary, including the use of armed force,” but NATO heavyweights show no intention of intervening in Syria

Russia isnt exactly hitting ISIL either. They are allowing the ISIL guys to expand by targeting the rebels.

The plane in question was attacking Turkmen rebels, moderate ethnic Turks who have been persecuted under Assad. They're not IS, Assad released most of the leadership of IS, he doesn't want to go after IS because IS are making Assad's point for him.

It was a rare moment in international diplomacy and some diplomats were beginning to think Russia's policy on Syria and its support for Bashar al-Assad could be changed. Not quickly, or easily, but the chance was there.

And Erdogan has squandered it.

Over the years, Turkey has been the problem child in NATO. The Turkish invasion of Cyprus during 1974 caused a rift in the alliance, leading Greece to withdraw its forces from NATO's command structure until 1980. In 2012, Syria shot down a Turkish fighter jet after it apparently – and very deliberately – strayed into Syrian airspace. Later that same year, Turkey fired artillery at government targets in Syria as a response to claimed Syrian artillery hits in Turkey.

An optimist may say that Turkey resides in a geopolitically challenging part of the world, that trouble is bound to follow, and that Turkey is just the innocent victim of its less than desirable neighborhood. A more cynical realist would likely view the series of issues over the decades as part of Turkey's objective to simply leverage its NATO membership to achieve its own political goals – which generally do not coincide with NATO's interests.


Perhaps NATO's naivety towards Turkey was forgivable in the 20th century, but since Turkey began to clearly signal its devotion to Islamism in the early 2000s, the writing has been on the wall. Given Turkey's long and complex history, the Islamist writing has always been on the wall for those who wanted to take the rose-colored glasses off and see it.

The Islamists are – and always have been – far more of a civilizational threat to the West than the Soviets were. The West got played by the Islamists. We were their useful idiots throughout the Cold War and in the quarter-century that followed. It is time to right the trajectory and ally with Russia against the Islamists, and that includes the effectively Islamic State of Turkey.

Putin's Russia has been beating the drum against the Islamic threat for years. The West has failed to listen. French president François Hollande has now asked the U.S. to set aside its differences with Russia in order to "fight this terrorist army [the Islamic State] in a broad, single coalition." As Putin correctly noted, Turkey is already allied with ISIS via its support for the Islamic State's oil sales. Pakistan also plays this type of duplicitous game with the West, pretending to be its friend while stabbing it in the back. At least Pakistan wasn't admitted to NATO – although with the dearth of coherent leadership in the West, perhaps we should add "yet."

Much has changed over the past two years. Old adversaries need to be re-evaluated, as do old "allies" – which were never likely allies to begin with. Many admire Putin in the West, and for good reason. His geo-strategic vision is clear, his strength is palpable, and the success he has had in rebuilding Russia's economy, society, and military is evident for all who assess it objectively.

The time has come: Turkey should be removed from NATO, and Russia should be invited to join. The common causes the West has with Russia greatly outnumber those it has with the Islamic world.



Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2015/11/time_to_trade_turkey_for_russia_in_nato.html#ixzz3scNwxTfZ
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook