Russia “Violated” Turkish Airspace Because Turkey “Moved” Its Border

October 5, 2015

Russian planes in Syria "violated Turkish air space" the news agency currently tell us. But an earlier report shows that this claim may well be wrong and that the U.S. pushes Turkey to release such propaganda.

Reuters (Mon Oct 5, 2015 7:54am BST): Turkey says Russian warplane violated its airspace

A Russian warplane violated Turkish airspace near the Syrian border on Saturday, prompting the Air Force to scramble two F-16 jets to intercept it, the Foreign Ministry said on Monday.

The Foreign Ministry summoned Moscow's ambassador to protest the violation, according to an e-mailed statement. Turkey urged Russia to avoid repeating such a violation, or it would be held "responsible for any undesired incident that may occur."

AFP (10:20am · 5 Oct 2015): Turkey 'intercepts' Russian jet violating its air space

Turkey said on Monday its F-16 jets had at the weekend intercepted a Russian fighter plane which violated Turkish air space near the Syrian border, forcing the aircraft to turn back.
…
Turkey said on Monday its F-16 jets had at the weekend intercepted a Russian fighter plane which violated Turkish air space near the Syrian border, forcing the aircraft to turn back.

Here now what McClatchy reported on these air space violations in a longer piece several hours before Reuters and AFP reported the Turkish claim:

ISTANBUL – A Russian warplane on a bombing run in Syria flew within five miles of the Turkish border and may have crossed into Turkey’s air space, Turkish and U.S. officials said Sunday.
…
A Turkish security official said Turkish radar locked onto the Russian aircraft as it was bombing early Friday in al Yamdiyyah, a Syrian village directly on the Turkish border. He said Turkish fighter jets would have attacked had it crossed into Turkish airspace.

But a U.S. military official suggested the incident had come close to sparking an armed confrontation. Reading from a report, he said the Russian aircraft had violated Turkish air space by five miles and that Turkish jets had scrambled, but that the Russian aircraft had returned to Syrian airspace before they could respond.

The Turkish security official said he could not confirm that account.

So it is the U.S., not Turkey, which was first pushing the claims of air space violation and of scrambling fighters. The Turkish source would not confirm that.

But how could it be a real air space violation when Russian planes "flew within five miles of the Turkish border and may have crossed into Turkey’s air space". The Russian planes were flying in Syrian airspace. They "may have crossed" is like saying that the earth "may be flat". Well maybe it is, right?

Fact is the Russians fly ery near to the border and bomb position of some anti-Syrian fighters Turkey supports. They have good reasons to do so:

The town, in a mountainous region of northern Latakia province, has been a prime route for smuggling people and goods between Turkey and Syria and reportedly has functioned as a key entry for weapons shipped to Syrian rebels by the U.S.-led Friends of Syria group of Western and Middle Eastern countries.

One Russian plane may even indeed have slightly crossed the border while maneuvering. But the real reason why the U.S. military official and Turkey claim the above "violations" is because Turkey unilaterally "moved" the Turkish-Syrian border five miles south:

Turkey has maintained a buffer zone five miles inside Syria since June 2012, when a Syrian air defense missile shot down a Turkish fighter plane that had strayed into Syrian airspace. Under revised rules of engagement put in effect then, the Turkish air force would evaluate any target coming within five miles of the Turkish border as an enemy and act accordingly.

If Syrian rules of engagement would "move" its northern border up to the Black Sea would any plane in eastern Turkey be in violation of Syrian air space? No one would accept such nonsense and that is why no one should accept the U.S.-Turkish bullshit here. Russian planes should not respect the "new" Turkish defined border but only the legitimate one.

It would also be no good reason to start a NATO-Russia war just because such a plane might at times slightly intrude on the Turkish side due to an emergency or other accidental circumstances. Do we have to mention that the U.S., France, Britain and Jordan regularly violate Syrian airspace for their pretended ISIS bombing? That Turkey is bombing the PKK in north Iraq without the permission of the Iraqi government? What about Israels regular air space violations over Lebanon?

But what is this all really about? Germany, the Netherlands and the U.S. stationed some Patriot air defense systems in Turkey to defend Turkey and its Islamist storm troops in north-Syria. These systems were announced to leave or have already left. Are these claims about air-space violation now an attempt to get these systems back into Turkey? For what real purpose?

Posted by b on October 5, 2015 at 09:44 UTC | Permalink

Comments

Pardon the politically incorrect expression, but this is so “gay” on the part of the West, it’s pathetic. It’s tantamount to a football player complaining to the refs that an opposing player stepped on his toe. Just who is The West appealing to with this desperate propaganda at this point? Those who have never cared anyway and haven’t a clue and never will certainly can’t be the audience, and everyone within and around the realm of political power knows the score even if they don’t know the game, so what’s the point? It just makes them look so utterly feckless and pussified. But, what do you expect literally months after the White House was awash in rainbow colors? This, that’s what. Pettiness on steroids. “Ref, he stepped on my toe and muddied my pretty pink shoes. He doesn’t care about the victims of breast cancer.”

Posted by: Cold N. Holefield | Oct 5 2015 10:28 utc | 1

Erdogan just should have stayed neutral. He stands to loose so much due to his foreign policy.

Posted by: James lake | Oct 5 2015 10:32 utc | 2

Hopefully, sensible Turks will see this as yet another indicator that Erdogan’s a great danger to their interests and will vote him out in November.

Posted by: karlof1 | Oct 5 2015 10:45 utc | 3

I doubt if the Russians will be much bothered. They were reported as calling it a navigational error, I think.

Posted by: Laguerre | Oct 5 2015 10:49 utc | 4

There are apparently great rewards known and unknown for being a useful tool for US Israeli conquest, colonialism and full spectrum dominance. So many tools.

Posted by: fast freddy | Oct 5 2015 10:52 utc | 5

Justin Bronk, research analyst at the Royal United Services Institute:

The Russian forces now in place make it very, very obvious that any kind of no-fly zone on the Libyan model imposed by the US and allies is now impossible, unless the coalition is actually willing to shoot down Russian aircraft.”
“The Russians are not playing — they are just saying, ‘keep out of our way’.

Posted by: Harry | Oct 5 2015 11:10 utc | 6

This reaction to Russia’s cleaning house in Syria is not good.
Just look at the information coming out of the US government and MSM like the Wall Street Journal, about Russia’s involvement in Syria. It is just overwhelming. One can not talk about spinning information anymore, rather it is an all out, full-tilt combo of falsehoods and lies. For example they say that it is wrong for Russia to help keep this democratic elected government in Syria in power and that Russia should also not bomb the moderate types trying to destroy Syria. Russia will extend the war and make ISIS stronger, etc. Who makes this stuff up? And why no out-cry from the citizens?
In any case, this is disturbing news since this is the type of behavior one would expect to a ramp up to WWIII. Between the coming fall of the petrol dollar, overwhelming debt loads, zero interest money, no growth, resource depletion, derivatives, and no-value assets being valued on the books at banks and the FED for trillions, I am afraid that this might be the big one. I certainly hope that I am wrong, but I just do not have a good feeling about this one. I was really hoping for an American back down. Time will tell.
I guess the new york, london, jerusalem power axis crowd just does not like a multi-polar world.

Posted by: Peter B | Oct 5 2015 11:27 utc | 7

Great work b.

Posted by: jfl | Oct 5 2015 11:45 utc | 8

Peter B @ 7
Agreed, the push back is on. Check out our friend Mike Gordon’s piece in the NYT (How I miss Judy Miller). Turns out we were just about to ramp up our ISIL offensive anyway. How fortuitous.

Posted by: IhaveLittleToAdd | Oct 5 2015 12:23 utc | 9

@Peter B #7:
this is disturbing news …
I guess the new york, london, jerusalem power axis crowd just does not like a multi-polar world.
All of this is to be expected. It is part of the process of the US and its satellites adjusting to the new reality. Of course they don’t like it, but as Lavrov said on several occasions, there is a historical inevitability to the US losing its hegemonic status. And it never was “the sole superpower”. To be sole superpower, no one else must have nuclear parity with you. If there is a second nuclear superpower that is weaker in all respects than the first superpower, but is not a complete basket case, then that second power is still a superpower.
I think we’re seeing the same thing with the Anglosphere now that we saw with Hitler and the rest of the Nazis. Because of their ethnocentric hubris, both underestimated Russia. And Russians very much do see this in historical terms, as just another attempt by the West to destroy Russia, the previous one being the Nazis’.

Posted by: Demian | Oct 5 2015 12:27 utc | 10

ConsortiumNews: The Power of False Narrative

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Oct 5 2015 12:37 utc | 11

@7
This really seems to be a crisis for the Washington bubble. They really take this exceptionalist c**p seriously.
It’s as if Russia really hurt their pride as God knows they could not give two hoots for Syria!
Out side here in the real world ( I am in the UK) we would rather our govt shut up and let the Russians pound ISIL and all associated terrorists.
It’s a black and White issue terrorists or Assad
All this media attack on Russia will prove to be nonsense when the Russians clear Syria of these western supported terrorists. Facts will be made on the ground
Then what will the media say to the public?

Posted by: James lake | Oct 5 2015 12:39 utc | 12

I am afraid that the US is looking for any way to get another “let’s you and him fight” scenario going. I can see the US ambassador in Turkey pulling Erdogan’s collar and asking “are you just gonna take that from those Russians??”
The US needs a way to bring down a Russian plane or hit the Russian bases without itself being involved (except as the obvious inciter). Just to show the Russians that there are “costs”. And they’ll do anything to do it I imagine.
@Demian You’re certainly right. When Russia pulled the plug on the USSR the West imagined it could do the same to Russia itself. I’m sure there are some maps in some Pentagon filing cabinet someplace of Russia split into one very poor, populous “Russia” and seven large and oil rich (but sparsely populated) countries waiting to be pounced on by Western oil companies.
@CNH The wonders of modern medicine. I couldn’t agree more.

Posted by: guest77 | Oct 5 2015 12:40 utc | 13

Demian @10: Well said.
I agree that a military response is inevitable, but the West can’t sell a war on Russia with “An Attack on Our Al Qaeda Allies is an Attack on America!” Especially not with the image-obsessed Obama as President. He wants to be a quiet lame duck and just get through the next year and half in peace.
It’s a challenge, but probably post-Obama the U.S. might pull a black op that ties Russia ‘directly and unequivocally’ (in the very loud US media) to a major act of terror. Perhaps in Ukraine, where the US already has a lot of intelligence operatives and Nazis willing to carry out such acts for the right price/cause. The US will then need to quickly (before the truth is exposed) use that incident to justify attacking Russia in Syria. ‘Give them a bloody nose, show them who’s boss, for what they did in Ukraine.’ Lame, but that’s all you need in the present Western media environment if you move fast enough to war.

Posted by: fairleft | Oct 5 2015 12:45 utc | 14

Seems the Russians have put their hands up for this one:

“The Russian embassy in Ankara told the BBC that a Russian plane did violate Turkish airspace on Saturday.”
“Russia said the incident was a “navigational error” and it has “clarified” the matter to Ankara.”

Though this isn’t to say that Turkey isn’t looking for justification to maintain the deployment of the Patriot systems which, b, as you rightly added to the end of your post, are slated for removal this month. It’s a last ditch attempt from the Turks to get the US to show its commitment to their sectarian, neo-Ottoman aspirations in Syria.
But the US has had enough. The Iran nuclear deal seems to have clinched it, and it’s game over for the man-eating Neanderthals. If Syria was always about putting Iran’s nuts in the vice, then with the nuclear agreement it all falls into place.
The plan to train the “moderates” has gone beyond failure and descended into an embarrassment – the show’s been cancelled. The CIA trained groups on the ground have bitten their handlers and run off with their Al-Qaeda lovers. As Andrei Kartapolov from the Russian army’s General Staff put it bluntly

“The Americans told us during discussions, that no one apart from terrorists were in that region,” referring to the area where Russia’s Air Force was active, according to Interfax.

Ignore the ramblings of insane McCain and the hysterical noises in the media which regurgitates and manipulates the desperate screams from terrorists in Syria as cries for help from the defenceless. This is not Government policy. It’s irrelevant guff.
When Putin met with the Saudi defence minister in June, he recognised that only two states remained sure that Assad could be beaten militarily – Saudi Arabia and Turkey. He convinced the Saudis that this was not the case. It was off the back of this meeting that, quite spectacularly, Syrian and Saudi intelligence officials met.
But Turkey still needed convincing. Isolated, facing a Kurdish political revolution and staring at the death of his dreams to be Sultan, Erdogan was informed by Putin that the Russians were going in. Assad would not be defeated militarily. With a tear in his eye, Erdogan accepted this fact and performed a staggering turn around by admitting Assad could be part of the solution.

Posted by: Pat Bateman | Oct 5 2015 13:03 utc | 15

Like a snake under your foot, the West is writhing at the notion of being challenged in their “superpower” superiority complex. Erdogan is ready for another chauvinistic attempt to regain his footing, and is looking for a pretext, any, to launch into a nationalistic tirade to gather round his lost support. The US knows that and will push him like a dog to the fight. The Russians, however, have already sized-him up and will not play into his ever-growing ego.
Good take on the incident, b, thanks for keeping us ahead of the game.

Posted by: Lone Wolf | Oct 5 2015 13:06 utc | 16

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/10/05/us-mideast-crisis-syria-carter-idUSKCN0RZ0R720151005
Russia escalating Syria war by targeting moderate opposition: U.S.

Posted by: okie farmer | Oct 5 2015 13:06 utc | 17

Yes russia may have flaws in there own back yard and some eu foes. but Finally enough of this bs thats been going on for decades with the usa and the west . invasion then supply to rebuld the economy only to have another resurgence come up and take usas military equipment. then another invasion another so called rebuilding program . the revolving cycle has gone on too long.. . Russias lets wipe them out attitude is quite remarkable .the usa never saw it coming or if they did they were playing pin tail on the donkey.this is a huge global shift.in assurgence and direction.. usa needs to realise that this is what the future holds. china with there massess but a leader whom maturity isnt advanced enough to be realistc in his desires long term.ill be interested indeed to see what china and nth oreas impression of russias actions are in the bigger contex.. i hope england australia new zealand etc. dont try and advocate usas crys for injustice for being bullied out of the top spot.Putin you may be a rough cold man at times but you def know how the cause a rift in this pathetic life consuming game thats being going on for so long

Posted by: gawain | Oct 5 2015 13:22 utc | 18

@guest77 #13:
When Russia pulled the plug on the USSR the West imagined it could do the same to Russia itself.
I actually think that the US government did not initially have plans to finish off Russia after the collapse of the USSR. I read a piece yesterday – unfortunately I can’t find it, because it was an RSS feed – which made a convincing case that James Baker and Helmut Kohl were being honest with Gorbachev when they assured him that NATO would not expand eastward beyond the reunified Germany (which was not really reunified of course, because Versailles Poland still has a lot of territory that was stolen from Germany).
I think that what happened with the end of the Cold War was that the US establishment simply could not adjust to the new reality and come off a war footing. I think there was an honest, if half-hearted, effort to do so on the part of US elites. But it did not work, because: (1) once you have bases all over the world, it seems like a shame to close them down; (2) the Anglosphere simply did not have the cultural resources to understand how to continue its own economic development without dominating and exploiting the rest of the world; (3) the neocons wanted to exploit US power for their Zionist agenda.
@fairleft #14:
probably post-Obama the U.S. might pull a black op
Maybe it’s just me, but I’m not very worried about US/NATO black ops directed at Russia anymore. MH17 was a huge one, but it didn’t achieve its objective – to get Russia into line – and the objective it did achieve, which was more sanctions on Russia, has hurt European countries more than Russia. (You can’t say they hurt the EU, since the EU is just another artificial construct like NATO that the US uses to keep Europe down, and has nothing to do with actual European interests.)
I think we have seen a kind of “phase change” since Russia started bombing after Putin’s speech. Water cools down or heats up gradually without anything really noticeable happening, but suddenly it freezes over or starts boiling. I think the new US/NATO propaganda line – that Russia is still bad, because now it is bombing good terrorists, who are good because they are our terrorists – means that the Western narrative has become “overdetermined”, and so is not going to work anymore. The bombing of the Afghan hospital while denouncing Russia for bombing civilians is just another nail in the coffin of the effectiveness of Western propaganda.

Posted by: Demian | Oct 5 2015 13:25 utc | 19

I heard the beginning of a BBC report on this event in the car as I was parking. I contemplated staying to hear more but realised it wasn’t urgent and continued with the business at hand.
I’ve started a score card to keep track of the current International Russian Roulette Championship Match, and expected the score to have risen from 0 : 0. Events which don’t involve the likelihood of soiled underwear, at least, don’t count. So its still 0 : 0.

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Oct 5 2015 13:36 utc | 20

The response of the representatives of the Russian Defense Ministry is unclear, but apparently, the general sense was that “We can not discriminate between the different shades of ‘crap’. So we will hammer everyone who shoots at the soldiers of the legitimate government of Syria, at whose request we are here”.
And the Americans had to accept it. Pentagon spokesman Peter Cook said that the U.S. government will not use U.S. air power to protect the “moderate rebels”.
http://fortruss.blogspot.com.au/2015/10/russia-does-not-discriminate-between.html

Posted by: brian | Oct 5 2015 13:52 utc | 21

@7 “And why no out-cry from the citizens?”
Because most people have been subjected to a barrage of misinformation. They aren’t stupid…just numb, and wary of seeming unpatriotic.

Posted by: dh | Oct 5 2015 13:53 utc | 22

ANALYSIS: Drone deals heighten military ties between Israel and Russia
http://www.middleeasteye.net/news/analysis-drone-deals-highlight-military-ties-between-israel-and-russia-24061368

Posted by: Louis Proyect | Oct 5 2015 13:57 utc | 23

@Louis Proyect #23:
I never thought I’d say this, but it appears that criticism of Israel can after all be a sign of antisemitism. Why shouldn’t Russia and Israel act on their mutual interests? The only reason I can think of why they shouldn’t is that Israel is not a legitimate country. And why would Israel not be legitimate? Again, the only reason I can think of is the belief that Jews shouldn’t have their own country.

Posted by: Demian | Oct 5 2015 14:11 utc | 24

Sounds like that the US “Security State” wants more war in Syria and are trying to do everything to shift public opinion into more support for escalating the war in Syria.

Posted by: Willy2 | Oct 5 2015 14:35 utc | 25

Demian @19: The ‘Assad has chemical weapons’ black op failed in part because Obama got cold feet, but something similar (just as lame) under the next President would be good enough to set off a hot war. The US military-industrial complex is restless, as it hasn’t had a ‘feel good’ hot war since 2003. The only limited, ‘winnable’ one that would be seen as directed at Russia would be in Syria, and taking out Assad and creating chaos is what Israel wants too. Look at this “Sponsored by Raytheon” US Senator and tell me he wouldn’t make a fine, ‘do whatever it takes’ Secretary of Defense for Hillary, Jeb, Marco Rubio or whoever? Follow the military contractor money ….

Posted by: fairleft | Oct 5 2015 14:39 utc | 26

Jackrabbit @ 11: Thanks for the CN article. Bush 43 had one relevant comment, ” you have to catapult the propaganda”. To counteract that fact, we have read, and reread, obvious truths, like the CN article from time to time. Thanks.

Posted by: ben | Oct 5 2015 14:54 utc | 27

If you always assume that whatever the US government says is agitprop and disinformation you will always be nearly 100% right.
The US government, Wall Street, Academia, Hollywood, the MSM, are all liars, manipulators, and sociopaths.
Their hands drip rivers of blood.

Posted by: AriusArmenian | Oct 5 2015 15:02 utc | 28

The ‘Arc of extremism’ as Bush and Blair called it, has suddenly grown much bigger, after his meeting with Putin in Moscow President El-Sisi called for a coalition to combat terrorism in the middle east, that means the ‘Arc’ now consists of Iran,Syria,Iraq,the Kurds,Hezbollah and now Egypt.
Plus of course Russia, with the backing of China. Something tells me the West is on the wrong side of history. Maybe Samantha Power will call for R2P when the Saudi perverts are cornered.

Posted by: harry law | Oct 5 2015 15:04 utc | 29

Omaigoard! Its Turkish airspace now pregnant?

Posted by: Ali Karim | Oct 5 2015 15:09 utc | 30

Another comment from Russia’s foreign minister exposing the propaganda farce on the existence of Free Syrian army, moderate and radical rebel forces fighting Assad.
http://tass.ru/en/politics/826244
IMO Turkey’s claim of airspace violation sets the pretext for entry of Turkey, and hence NATO, to escalate the situation. See link below of Russian fighter jet shot down
http://en.trend.az/world/arab/2440434.html

Posted by: curious | Oct 5 2015 15:11 utc | 31

dh @ 22:
I used to think that Americans weren’t stupid, just numb. I also believed that alternative information could change their blind patriotism. But then I began to realize that the way things are, even the most venal, are precisely what Americans want. It has been so since the first european colonists … the only difference is that then it ‘was only the native americans’ but now, it is anybody else who is not US. We, as a society, want it all, everywhere. We, as exceptional and indispensable, are destined to rule the world because the world belongs to us … our god says so … the same god who says that only jews are worthy to worship him/her/it.
For what it may be worth, I do appreciate the Putin – Lavrov approach: if it looks like a terrorist, walks like a terrorist, and acts like a terrorist – then it is a terrorist. Therefore if you want to rid a place of terrorists you have to take them all out … no matter who trained them, funds them, or arms them.
It is sad, really, that we can’t get along … but so long as we want what they have there will be war, wars, and more wars.
Smedley Butler had it right … and C Wright Mills has been regurgitated because he hit the nail on the thumb. Since we didn’t care to listen because we ultimately aspired to MacMansions and lots of stuff, even if it was shoddy crap, is reality.

Posted by: Rg an LG | Oct 5 2015 15:16 utc | 32

I had a dream that America had a responsible free press that critiqued our leaders mishaps as they should,instead of a Zionist foreign interest media of criminals intent on destabilizing and destroying the world for Zion.
Hey,when the Zionists attacked Mavi Marmara,did the US cry out for Turkish sovereignty?And TPP,another trade steal is foisted on the world by a bunch of crooks tone deaf to their constituents wishes,like everything else we touch,it turns to sh*t.
And the Palestinian situation goes bonkers again,but the MSM will never expose the real monsters to actual investigation,another sign of the terrible media,and its members,all tribal wackos.

Posted by: dahoit | Oct 5 2015 15:18 utc | 33

One day a false flag is going to become a smoking gun that implicates its sponsor as a war criminal. If a false flag is all the US has left in its arsenal, and the US is bold enough to try it under Russia satellite and radar, then this may be the time that the ancient tactic of false flag finally goes to its grave. One prefers no action at all from the US, but if there be some, let it be increased failure, visible to the world. Please.

Posted by: Grieved | Oct 5 2015 16:01 utc | 34

@fairleft #26:
The US military-industrial complex is restless, as it hasn’t had a ‘feel good’ hot war since 2003. The only limited, ‘winnable’ one that would be seen as directed at Russia would be in Syria, and taking out Assad … Follow the military contractor money
I don’t think military contractors itch from time to time to have hot wars. All they’re interested in is making lots of money. Hyping up threats helps them do that, whereas getting into a shooting war with a superpower (I can now drop the qualifier “nuclear”!) would be counterproductive.
I really don’t see how the US can take out Assad any more. Whenever the US does regime change (or just regime/state destruction) through military means (Iraq, Libya) (as opposed to when it can get by with a color revolution, as in Ukraine), it has control of the airspace. But Russia now controls Syrian airspace, not the US. The US can’t establish a no-fly zone over Syria any more, because the Russian air force is now in Syria. Since Russia is in Syria by invitation but the US isn’t, the US can’t just start shooting down Russian jets, because even in Washington (as opposed to Warsaw) no one is so crazy as to be willing to be responsible for starting a nuclear war which wipes out Western civilization. (The Poles would be happy to do it, just so long as they could say that Poland still exists on paper.)

Posted by: Demian | Oct 5 2015 16:42 utc | 35

http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/10/02/a-useful-prep-sheet-on-syria-for-media-propagandists/“>A Useful Prep Sheet on Syria for Media Propagandists

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Oct 5 2015 16:42 utc | 36

Demian @35: What you write is actually pretty reassuring. But, you don’t think like a neocon, and they increasingly ‘understand’ Russia as an existential threat to the US world empire. (They likely also think that attacking out at the Syrian periphery is unlikely to lead to a nuclear exchange.) Anyway, weapons sales in the NATO countries are set to decline this year despite the relentless anti-Russia fearmongering, in part because the public discounts media fearmongering when it sees no threatening acts.
So, says Raytheon, something has to be done! We’ll see; I hope you’re right.

Posted by: fairleft | Oct 5 2015 17:06 utc | 37

thanks b.. insightful post with questions at the end from you. your supposition at the end is most likely correct.
good media observations on the usa being the first to raise this issue and wanting to turn it into a major public relations event in support of nato and the re-stationing of the air defense systems..
regarding the next black op.. i still think folks/countries know who did mh17 in, but they just aren’t sharing it.. perhaps this information can be used when the next black op pops up..
passing example of dis-info video in the news today..

Posted by: james | Oct 5 2015 17:13 utc | 38

Obviously, Russians should announce that they don’t recognize any Turkish or any other “buffer zones” in Syria and keep flying anywhere they want in internationally recognized Syrian airspace, since they have legitimate Syrian government’s consent. Turks will never be allowed by NATO to fire on Russian planes, because by doing so Turks will place Paris, London and New York at risk of nuclear annihilation.
Some communication line where Moscow could inform Ankara about its intentions to fly near Turkish border – something similar to the one it presumably has with Israel – would be helpful, too.

Posted by: MMARR | Oct 5 2015 17:19 utc | 39

Turkey has always been a thorn in Russias side, from Jupiter missiles in 61 to this. Personally i think any nation who claims to be “islamic” yet can sleep with delilah (israel) while she is responsible for all sorts of atrocities, is nothing but a pimped out punk
The reason why most of Europe deteste Muslims is bec lf the ottomans behaviour
Erdogan is finished !!! I hope so anyways

Posted by: Deebo | Oct 5 2015 17:24 utc | 40

@fairleft #37:
you don’t think like a neocon, and they increasingly ‘understand’ Russia as an existential threat to the US world empire.
I think it might be useful here to define “neocon” a bit and to separate out different reasons why US policymakers see Russia as an “existential” threat.
First, I think we should take the “neo” in neocon seriously. The neocons were something before they became neo. What was that? They were Democrats. (According to some accounts, they were Trotskyites.) What is the constant for the people who became the neocons? Concern with Israel above all else. Thus, the way I understand the term “neocon” is that it is “code” for a Jewish Zionist who is intent to use US power for (what he or she sees as) the benefit of Israel. Since Russia and Israel appear to be making efforts to maintain good relations despite events in Ukraine and Syria, I think we can conclude that there is a substantial group of foreign policy makers in Israel who do not see Russia as a threat to Israel.
Thus, it seems to be an obsession of Jewish Zionists in the US that Israel needs US power to survive. It is quite possible that policy makers in Israel do not see things that way. If things go on as they are now going without the security of Israel being noticeably affected, neocons will become increasingly less influential both in the US and in Israel.
A second strand of US thought according to which Russia is an existential threat to the US is based on the continental vs. sea power idea which goes back to Halford Mackinder. But Mackinder was English, and England was a sea power. The US, in contrast, is both a sea and a continental power. Thus what was true for Britain – that Russia was an existential threat to its empire – need not be true for the US (for its status as a great power, anyway, if not for its status as world hegemon). Since Carter, the US has based its policy towards Russia on the ideas that Brzezinski stole from Mackinder without attribution. Since – unlike Brzezinski – most US foreign policy makers are not Polish, one can expect that the US foreign policy establishment as a whole will be able eventually to accept the return of Russia to the role in the world it had at the end of WW II.
The third reason why US elites see Russia as an existential threat is that they are no longer able to imagine how the US could be self-reliant, as opposed to existing economically by exploiting and dominating the rest of the world. But the Americans are a creative and dynamic people, and one can expect that eventually, US policy makers will drop their neoliberalism and neoclassical economic orthodoxy. What we are seeing now is a period of cultural lag, as happens in the case of the decline of all empires.

Posted by: Demian | Oct 5 2015 17:54 utc | 41

@40
Russia and Turkey have a long history of wars, and it actually was Europe that saved Ottomans many times in the past from Russian onslaught. Right now, Russo-Turkish relations are very good, and would be excellent if not for the Syrian issue. Turks can’t afford to completely alienate Russians, because Erdogan already managed to destroy his country’s ties with the rest of the neighborhood.

Posted by: MMARR | Oct 5 2015 17:56 utc | 42

hMOSCOW, Oct. 5 (Xinhua) — Russian air force stationed in Syria has conducted 25 new missions in the last 24 hours hitting nine facilities of Islamic State (IS) terrorist group, the Russian Defense ministry said Monday.
One command center was destroyed in Syria’s central province of Hama and another near Syria’s main coastal city of Latakia, according to an online ministry statement accompanied by a video footage.
Also two ammunition depots and a communications center were blown up in the central province of Homs, as well as a terrorist training camp in the northwestern province of Idlib.
Three artillery pieces, around 30 automobiles and armored vehicles including T-55 tanks earlier seized by the IS from the Syrian Army, were demolished in the operation, the statement said.
ttp://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2015-10/05/c_134685819.htm

Posted by: okie farmer | Oct 5 2015 18:30 utc | 43

I think Obama is secretly happy to see the Russians coming in. Because of the USA’s intimate relation with Sunni countries like Saudi Arabia and Qatar, he can’t drastically cleanup Syria from ALL Islamists militias that are funded and supported by these countries such as ISIS, Al Nusra, Ahrar al Sham and all the small ‘moderates’ rebels groups gravitating around these groups and benefiting of the largesse of the GCC.
Iran would have been a powerful proxy to do so but Iran does not want to get involved militarily. Enough that it is supporting Hezbollah who have protected Lebanon’s borders.
As for Turkey, after it broke its relation with Israel, and after its blunt interference in Egypt through its alliance with the Moslem Brotherhood, Erdogan is looked upon with suspicion and anyway he is not ready to get involved militarily.
Therefore Russia is the only left and willing convenient proxy to act decisively on all the Islamist militias infesting Syria.
To hide his satisfaction, Obama is making a lot of noise, throwing dire predictions, promising weapons to the rebels but making no threats. All this is intended for the Sunni audience to show off that the USA is on their side while the USA’s secret intention is to weaken the Sunnis to force them to accept a deal with Iran. That’s also the purpose of the Yemen war that is paralyzing Saudi Arabia.
We will hear lots of analysis demonizing Russia but at the end of the day, the region will be cleaned up and the Sunni terrorists fleeing Syria may end up in… Turkey and Jordan!

Posted by: Virgile | Oct 5 2015 18:50 utc | 44

Turkey will not, REPEAT: WILL.NOT. “attack” Russian anything, especially when so many nasty Russian weapons are so near. This is pathetic, emasculate American chest thumping.

Posted by: psakiwacky | Oct 5 2015 18:57 utc | 45

Demian @41: Just on your first point, it’s a combination of close and corrupting “sponsored by Raytheon” ties to the arms industry PLUS the ‘whatever Israel wants it gets’ obsession. So the bipartisan policy of supporting an uncompromising and paranoid ‘Greater Israel’ (and the chaos and blowback that generates) becomes leverage for the fearmongering that for bigger arms expenditures, in Israel, the US, and to some extent in Britain and France. This is a very stupid policy on almost every level except that it puts lots of money in the pockets of arms company execs and investors.

Posted by: fairleft | Oct 5 2015 19:00 utc | 46

@Virgile #
Iran would have been a powerful proxy to do so but Iran does not want to get involved militarily. Enough that it is supporting Hezbollah who have protected Lebanon …
Russia is the only left and willing convenient proxy
Russia as Obama’s proxy? That’s pretty insulting.
Russia does not intend to send ground troops in. But you can’t wipe out an insurgency with air power alone. You need to recapture territory. The Syrian army probably can’t do that alone. Iranian soldiers have been fighting both in Iraq and in Syria already, haven’t they? Why shouldn’t Iran increase its level of deployments in Syria? It’s not as if it would be acting as anyone’s “proxy”. It would be acting in its own interests.
Turkey’s foreign policy seems to be in a shambles at this point. Erdogan or no Erdogan.
@fairleft #46:
I guess that what you describe is certainly a major part of what’s going on, but I don’t follow that side of things. (I oversimplify by seeing everything through the US/Russia geopolitical struggle these days.)

Posted by: Demian | Oct 5 2015 19:19 utc | 47

I guess Russia does not have to announce whether it recognizes “no fly zones” or not. Turkey may threaten to be sad, or really, really sad (to parents: that sometimes works with small children, and it is also diplomatic; rather than “I will not play with you/read a book etc. because you were naughty”, you can explain that the misdeeds made you too sad to play, a child can conceptualize it better than an arbitrary penalty). The bottom line is that they can retaliate by running arms and eager jihadists through the border, but this is what they were doing to begin with. Cracking down on weapon traffic must be a core part of strategy, and I do not imagine Putin loosing appetite when Erdogan is driven to distraction.
Another aspect is that it could help a lot if Erdogan is eliminated, i.e. if he stops controlling Turkish government. He does it as the de-facto head of the ruling party, AKP. Part of AKP voters are Islamic militants who may be discouraged by “gutless response”, “betrayal” etc., and every one percent of the Turkish vote in the elections three weaks from now may help kissing AKP-only government good bye. AKP will most probably remain the dominant party, but it will have to choose a coalition partner, with three choices: HDP, Kurdish party, enough said; CHP, a “social-democratic party”, strangely enough, most of their voters are Alevi, which is not the same as Syrian Alawites but very close; MHP, these guys are basically Islamo-Turanian fascists, so in the sense of policies they should agree with AKP now, but in the same time they probably hate Erdogan most (in part because of “good reasons”, in part because of their vision of the world that consists of three parts, “we”, “enemies”, “traitors”).
Erdogan thrives projecting the image of a strong leader. I would guess that Putin does not need a primer how one can build, or undermine such an image. (Obama does not need it either, it would be like violin lessons to a tone deaf.)

Posted by: Piotr Berman | Oct 5 2015 19:24 utc | 48

With the US Empire shrinking in power, and with Russia and China starting to assert themselves, neo-con control of the US Empire will be almost assured going into the future.
Their claim to be leaders of the US will have these neocon sociopaths screaming from the top of their lungs for America to be number one again, and most of the people in the US will be cheering for it.
In terms of a false flag, in let’s say in Syria for example, all the US would have to do is send just one of its jets into fighting a Russian plane in Syria as disposable cannon fodder (just like US leaders sees all of its low ranking military members ), and when the US plane gets shot down, the avalanche of propaganda against Russia will be immense. We will see an intensity of Russia hate propaganda like nothing we’ve ever seen before.
And that one incident and one US pilot death alone, could be the PR used for the economic separation of US puppet European states from Russias economy, and if the US chooses, as the start of a possible hot war.
I can guarantee you that, this has already been thought of by members of the US Empire, and the only thing left is to see is if they use a similar example of their own, or at what point do they decide to use it in the future.
Back in 2012 when Obama wanted to eviscerate Syria, if that had actually gone through, we could see ISIL and Al Qaeda in control of Syria now and then relentlessly Attacking Hezbollah. Do not under-estimate how pissed off and regretful the evil US Empire is that it didn’t happen that way, and that they are determined to not make similar mistakes in the future.
With the US losing the game of military musical chairs in Syria, attacking Syria now with Russia there, is a lot harder now and also a lot riskier.

Posted by: tom | Oct 5 2015 19:32 utc | 49

Why? Because they know where all the supply lines are and they’re cutting them off at the border crossings that facilitate them. I was always amazed that the so called anti-ISIS coalition didn’t do more work on those supply lines.

Posted by: gemini33 | Oct 5 2015 19:48 utc | 50

@Demian@41
(According to some accounts, they were Trotskyites.)
They were Trotskyites, many of them coming from the anti-Stalinist left, and it will be impossible to understand the neocons drive for “regime change,” “color revolutions,” regional “springs,” and the utterly failed PNAC, without an understanding of Trotsky’s “theory of permanent revolution” and its adoption and conversion by neocon theoreticians, who, literally, turned it on its head.
What we are seeing now is a period of cultural lag, as happens in the case of the decline of all empires.
An epistemological crisis is quite possible, understanding crisis as defined by Gramsci, “where the old hasn’t die and the new hasn’t been born.” A main goal of neocon theory was to finish with liberal democracy’s “uncertainty of purpose,” and if what we are witnessing is the crumbling of the neocon-made “world,” a dangerous cultural vacuum can follow. And I mean, dangerous.

Posted by: Lone Wolf | Oct 5 2015 19:59 utc | 51

Not to be a brown noser or a suck up, but I think it’s also important to express gratitude and admiration often, especially for people who do volunteer work for the common good, which is, I think, what is happening on this site.
So b, I thank you so much for what you do. I would be completely buried in bullshit propaganda and as confused as hell if not for your posts on Syria over the past few years. You’re really an extraordinary fellow. Thanks.

Posted by: gemini33 | Oct 5 2015 20:08 utc | 52

I think may here are confusing the whole ‘NATO Patriot missiles in Turkey’ gambit. This was NEVER really about protecting legitimate Turkish assets, themselves, from Syrian missiles or aircraft. They were never threatened by Syria.
Some of you fossils might recall the Ho Chi Minh Trail running through Laos and Cambodia to supply North Vietnamese troops and equipment to Vietnam. Psychopathic Defense Secretary McNamara at the time was absolutely infuriated that this was happening. At first, he tried to build a barbed-wire and minefield barrier (The McNamara Line, IIRC) inside Vietnam in 1967 to block these supply routes. That was a colossal failure. Next came the covert Operation Commando Hunt starting in 1968 – direct (and quite illegal) attacks and bombing runs all up and down the trail in two countries that were not party to the war. The Ho Chi Minh campaigns lasted for years and only had the most marginal of effects.
Turkey and Jordan have similar rat lines going into Syria since the start of the war of terror. The U.S. and Saudi Arabia feared in 2013 that Syria might intervene directly against the FSA/’Moderate Rebel’/an Nusra supply lines or warehouses IN Turkey with aircraft or missiles. The NATO Patriot batteries were meant purely as a deterrent to keep the Turkish Ho Chi Minh Trails open. No other purpose despite media spew to the opposite. Of course Turkey requested the Patriots – they were making a lot of money on the side trading sanctioned goods, trafficking terrorists and refugees, running CIA arms shipments and buying/selling oil. They didn’t want those cash cows threatened by Syrian air attacks.
The Patriot SAMs became useless as Assad’s air force was degraded and started running out of munitions. They became an absolute danger when the U.S. and it’s so-called coalition started their bombing campaigns in Syria and Russia started beefing up airlifts. Too many chances for inadvertent screw-ups. Today, the U.S. has one battery remaining at Incirlik to protect its operations there.
Turkey and the U.S. still wants the rat lines protected (mostly from Russia) so they keep hoping for some kind of No-Fly zone, but that’s just an old, sad joke to Putin. Once Idlib and Latakia are relatively secure, Putin will concentrate an enormous amount of effort to the Syrian-Turkey border. The refugee ‘Safe Zone’ is exactly where Turkey and the U.S. run most of their rat lines.

Posted by: PavewayIV | Oct 5 2015 20:21 utc | 53

@53 Plus that is the area where barbers will be most busy shaving beards and making jihadis look respectable on their way to Germany.

Posted by: dh | Oct 5 2015 20:44 utc | 54

@41 and @51
I don’t disagree on the neocon history but I don’t think we should limit ourselves to just the neocons when we’re considering the war going on within the US and allies (that’s not a typo, I do think there’s an internal war in addition to the external quagmire).
I think we should expand the term neocon to the “war party” with its different factions. The only factions that are well defined are the neocons and the R2P interventionists.
But I think there are other factions that belong to this war party alliance. For instance, is Petraeus really a neocon or an R2Per? What about the NATO Strangelovians? And those like zbig or other people, often with an Eastern European history? Plus the factions abroad in Europe. And the Israeli, Saudi and other ME states though maybe they don’t really belong in the “war party” definition.
It would be great to see more analysis of this alliance, a sorting out of what the war party is.
I think it’s also worthwhile to consider the 1992 BBC documentary about the post-WW2 NATO stay behinds that used to be called Gladio. There are some people out in indy media who say they’re still operating (especially in Turkey), just morphed into Islamist extremist militias instead of extreme nationalist militias.
http://off-guardian.org/2015/06/25/operation-gladio-bbc-documentary-from-1992/

Posted by: gemini33 | Oct 5 2015 20:56 utc | 55

Back to Main