It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Syria warns it will ‘down Turkish planes next time’

page: 1
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 20 2016 @ 11:36 PM
link   

Damascus has reacted harshly to the bombing of Kurdish militias in northern Syria on Thursday morning by Turkey’s air force, vowing to intervene next time Ankara sends its planes over its border.

In a statement, the Syrian Defense Ministry accused Turkey of “flagrant aggression, which targeted innocent citizens,” saying that it considers it “a dangerous development that could escalate the situation.”
SOURCE


Syria is warning that they will attack NATO.

Yes, we could be that close to WW3 going hot (I believe WW3 has started in a sense). Please consider the following. This is not 'fearmongering' or 'sensaltionalism'; this is reality. Everyone's focused on Russia versus the United States. What if WW3 starts because of Syria versus Turkey? How many saw that possibility coming?


Kerry and Lavrov were joined by diplomats from Iran, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Turkey, Egypt, Jordan and Iraq, as well as by the United Nations’ special Syrian crisis envoy. All are involved in or affected by the civil war in Syria, where an estimated 400,000 people have died in more than five years of conflict. The United States leads a coalition of more than 60 nations conducting airstrikes in Syria against the Islamic State. Russia and Iran provide military support to the Syrian government of President Bashar al-Assad. The other countries host Syrian refugees or back the rebels.
Syria talks in Switzerland produce only a decision to keep talking


Iran: We Can Mobilize Nine Million Fighters Against U.S.


China, Russia and Iran have come together in a tripartite alliance supporting the Syrian government in the war against radical fundamentalist insurgents.
China enters fray in Syria on Bashar al-Assad’s side


Syria conflict: West considers new sanctions over Aleppo

Assad: Syria is part of Washington's prime goal for global hegemony

Assad: Israel no different than ISIS, Al-Qaida
edit on 20-10-2016 by Profusion because: (no reason given)




posted on Oct, 20 2016 @ 11:39 PM
link   
It's about damn time. "Can a brother get a little peace, there's war in the streets and war in the middle east"



posted on Oct, 20 2016 @ 11:44 PM
link   
a reply to: Profusion

It gets poo pooh'd a lot around here but I do believe you may be right. And it could be a wide number of or configuration of Nations involved in military ops in the area who have a very divided line between diplomacy wise. It truly is getting pretty biblical in the mid east as far as prophecy goes.



posted on Oct, 20 2016 @ 11:47 PM
link   
Turkey can effectively off. I'm done with the idea they are our friends.



posted on Oct, 21 2016 @ 12:11 AM
link   
a reply to: Profusion

Syria would not be attacking NATO when defending its airspace.

edit on 21-10-2016 by all2human because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 21 2016 @ 01:02 AM
link   
a reply to: Profusion



Syria is warning that they will attack NATO.

No they aren't. NATO is a defensive alliance. Turkey conducting airstrikes in Syria is an offensive measure. Turkey couldn't invoke article 5 if they were attacked while being the aggressor.



posted on Oct, 21 2016 @ 01:17 AM
link   
a reply to: Vector99

a reply to: all2human

It depends on how Turkey interprets that. If Turkey sees the situation as Hillary Clinton does (that Syria has no right to any airspace) then I believe I'm right about my claim that "Syria is warning that they will attack NATO." I was assuming that was the case when I wrote the original post. I may have a made mistake because I'm not sure about Turkey's view of Syria's right to their airspace.

Hillary Clinton Goes All-In On Syria No-Fly Zone

With the situation in Syria being as crazy as it is, who can say how any of the parties involved will interpret anything from here on out?
edit on 21-10-2016 by Profusion because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 21 2016 @ 01:24 AM
link   
Turkey before Christmas?

I'm absolutely sure TPTB want Turkey to be the sacrificial goat. Then, it's on. A lot of itchy trigger fingers out there.

ISIS is about to be ground into oblivion with many returning to Syria. and on the other hand you have President Nutbag of Syria needing a bullet desperately. Thihs could just be the golden ticket we've .....ahem, they've been waiting for.



posted on Oct, 21 2016 @ 01:37 AM
link   
a reply to: Profusion

It doesn't matter how Turkey interprets it, NATO has strict rules regarding that exact situation. Turkey would be on their own in terms of NATO assistance.



posted on Oct, 21 2016 @ 02:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: Profusion
What if WW3 starts because of Syria versus Turkey? How many saw that possibility coming?

Everyone who read the Bible (Isaiah 17:1) saw it coming because it mentions that Damascus is reduced to rubble (ruinous heap).

Secondly, Russia, Turkey, Iran, Ethiopia etc all gang up on Israel for the final battle. Turkey switched sides and joined with Russia just like it is meant to be in the Bible.

Either way, the Luciferian elitists want the Book of Revelation to become reality and very little can stop them. The handlers of Hillary Clinton want an all out war so expect things to get a lot worse soon.



posted on Oct, 21 2016 @ 04:55 AM
link   
a reply to: Profusion

Nothing in the RT article says anything about Syria attacking NATO. I assume that was your creative license to somehow make this something its not?

Secondly if Syria attacked a Turkish jet it still would not be covered under article V.
edit on 21-10-2016 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 21 2016 @ 05:33 AM
link   
if Turkey planes violates Syrian airspace ...yes they may broughd douwn...!
remember the turkey's attack on an russian fighter....
P/S... was the Turkey attack on the koerds under NATO mandatore ????
than NATO has violated Syrian airspace....
a reply to: Profusion


edit on 21-10-2016 by ressiv because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 21 2016 @ 06:04 AM
link   
US & UK & Turks will make a deal with Russia ; Europeans lose .



posted on Oct, 21 2016 @ 06:57 AM
link   
a reply to: ressiv

NATO doesn't issue mandates for starters...

The UN Charter is the governing document for your statement.

Article V of NATO is specific so you should educate yourself on it before trying to comment on it.



posted on Oct, 21 2016 @ 07:05 AM
link   
a reply to: Vector99

a reply to: Xcathdra

I'm basing my analysis on Hillary Clinton's stance that Syria has no right to any airspace. In such a scenario, what do the previously written rules of NATO mean? I believe they would mean nothing in Syria. Consequently, in that case, I believe Syria attacking Turkey as is described in the first article linked in the original post would be an attack on NATO. That's not based on the rules of NATO. It's based on the reality of the insane situation in Syria.

My interpretation is wild and unfounded. I admit it.



posted on Oct, 21 2016 @ 07:13 AM
link   
a reply to: Profusion

Clintons plan calls for a no fly zone over northern Syria / Aleppo and not the entire country.

Secondly NATO is NOT involved in Syria and constantly saying NATO does not make it so.

edit on 21-10-2016 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 21 2016 @ 07:18 AM
link   
deleted
edit on 21-10-2016 by belkide because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 21 2016 @ 07:26 AM
link   
a reply to: Profusion

I don't know if your aware of this but Kurdish rebels are supported by the US. Russia wouldn't care if Turkey bombs them and the US does. If they continue there war against thr Kurds expect thr state dept to get involved aND support for turkey disapears.



posted on Oct, 21 2016 @ 07:31 AM
link   

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: Profusion

Clintons plan calls for a no fly zone over northern Syria / Aleppo and not the entire country.

Secondly NATO is NOT involved in Syria and constantly saying NATO does not make it so.


I think I already addressed your second point. As to the first point, I was probably confused by the following video. I believe that it's implied that the no fly zone discussed would be over all of Syria. People have been equating the video below with Clinton's stance, and I believed that was the case without looking at the details carefully. You're definitely right that Clinton's plan only applies to part of Syria. That's an irrelevant point because we'd be doomed either way in my opinion.



www.youtube.com...



posted on Oct, 21 2016 @ 07:50 AM
link   
Any no fly zone would most likely result in confrontation with syria / russia. Cintons no fly was geared at northern syria / aleppo area. I cant stand clinton but in this case her comments are being somewhat distorted.



new topics




 
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join