Emergency NATO meeting tomorrow, will war be declared on Syria?

Emergency NATO meeting tomorrow, will war be declared on Syria?

www.telegraph.co. uk

Nato said it would hold an emergency meeting on Tuesday following a request from Turkey that invoked Article Four of the alliance's founding treaty, which covers threats to member states' security.

Turkey has already acknowledged that its fighter jet might at some point have entered Syrian airspace. But after an initially cautious response, Ankara toughened its rhetoric on Sunday.

(visit the link for the full news article)

www.telegraph.co.uk...

"The Syrians knew full well that it was a Turkish military plane and the nature of its mission," said Davutoglu.

"Nobody should dare put Turkey's (military) capabilities to the test," he warned.

"We will bring this affair before public opinion and international law in the name of Turkey's honour."

Those are the words of Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu.

But UN Security Council member Britain warned that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad's regime "should not make the mistake of believing that it can act with impunity."

"It will be held to account for its behaviour," Foreign Secretary William Hague said.

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton condemned a "brazen and unacceptable act" and promised US assistance in investigating the incident.

"It is yet another reflection of the Syrian authorities' callous disregard for international norms, human life, and peace and security," Clinton said in a statement.

As expected, both Britain and America are delighted with the news, it is the provocation they have waited for to justify NATO intervention to progress their agenda in the region.

With the emergency NATO meeting tomorrow, there is a very good chance NATO intervention and war against Syria will officially begin.





www.telegraph.co. uk
(visit the link for the full news article)

Like I have said, Syria did not have to shoot down the Fighter Jet, they took the drastic measure of shooting it down without attempting to establish communications with the Jet or the Turkish Air force.

When Fighter Jets are on a mission they don't fly by themselves.

This could get interesting...

Syria is not that weak when it comes to military power, plus with the right aid and sponsorship they may be able to even the odds a little.

With a purchasing power of $107,400,000,000, and about 2,500,000,000 bbl/Day of oil, they can "acquire" some pretty cool stuff from their friends to the east.

I would honestly love to see any arab kicking some western ass just to show us that we just CANT do everything and anything we want outside our own borders like we've been doing the last 30 or so years...

Lets see where all these fun and games takes us...

At least something interesting is finally about to happen - or not - its always all show and no go anyways, but I keep my hopes up that this time will be different.

Click here for more information.

Originally posted by muse7
Like I have said, Syria did not have to shoot down the Fighter Jet, they took the drastic measure of shooting it down without attempting to establish communications with the Jet or the Turkish Air force.

When Fighter Jets are on a mission they don't fly by themselves.

Well if a foreign WARPLANE flew into American airspace it would be shot down without anty attempt of communication I can assure you.

Does Syria not have a right to defend herself?

Syria had every right to shoot this plane down. It wasn't just a plane, it was a fighter jet entering Syrian airspace and every country with the capability would do the same.

reply to post by Wonderer2012


I have to disagree.

I think most countries would at the very least attempt communication most likely scramble a few fighter jets to escort the intruder maybe even force him to land.

Just to shoot a jet down would be considered an act of war by most countries.

I don't know why he was there but I doubt Turkey would send 1 jet to attack Syria.

A strongly worded response and a talking down.
Thats all i think will happen.

the UN and NATO will never back Turkey to strike Syria purely over this.

If you have a legitimate cause for self defence you strike quick.

Talking, reasoning etc will always result in a few stirn words.

The only reasonable approach would be to attack the sites that shot down the plane.. and leave it at that.

Indeed, but as I've stated prior, this is significant, regardless if this is the acting factor, or just a step, the Goal remains, and this is a big step towards that Goal, regardless if a diplomatic response is reached, or an attack, because an attack will happen, when is the question

reply to post by Wonderer2012


As far as I am aware it is normal for say Russian warplanes to fly up to UK or US airspace and try out the defences, but they are met on the way in, warned off and then escorted out of the airspace, I assume Turkish and Syrian warplanes have been playing that same game for a while now.

I find it interesting that Syria grounded her air force the day of the incident, almost as though they where waiting for this situation to arise, however given the defection the day before, again I would assume (I stress this is my assumption) that the defection could have come from Turkish/Syrian pilot chatter during those missions, and if that was the case then that might explain this abnormal response to shoot first.

But shooting first is not a normal response..

Example of what normally happens: news.sky.com...

reply to post by Wonderer2012


basically it's chose your poison in this world right now. hardly matters what they do to syria, korea, japan, iran, turkey, india, pakistan, china, russia, lybia, egypt, israel............................we are all just a stones throw away from one war after another culminating in ww3 and ending with the annihilation of all we know. everyone needs to smoke a big fat doobie and love one another.



sincerely,

spiritual33

Syria has Russia Helios on the way and if war should happen may also have Russian Military as a back up and Turkey will have US military backup according to Clinton.

This won't be a war between Syria vs. Turkey anymore, it will be a war between Russia vs. US now.

And after Russia's mock drill on US soil and everything, something says they were already prepared for this day to come. Wasn't too long ago anyway.

Now, this will get interesting

Russia vs US and start of Nuclear War or WWIII

and so it BEGINS....

Like who didn't see this coming?

Lets pretend they invoke Article Five, would that force Russia to abide by the Article? would they be forced into joining with the NATO response? or could they elect out?

After research, each is required to offer services they desire, so Russia would not be forced to offer military service, though some other aid would be required,

Again, just speculating


i don't believe they will Invoke Article Five, yet

reply to post by Manhater


I don't think they'll invoke Nato/US involvement as yet, as that will only provoke Syria to do the same with her treaties with Russia etc...

If anything happens I assume Turkey will turn to her less significant allies for support, like (for example only) requesting Britain supply her with data gleemed at the British GCHQ spy facilities on Cyrpus. (Britain has a separate to Nato defence treaty with Turkey)

I assume we are still at the stage where they don't want Russia to get directly involved in the conflict, and if Russia does get involved I assume they'll want to be able to spin it that Russia not the US or Nato is the interfering party.

Just my thoughts on how we get to the points you are making.. I am sure we will, but think we have a way to go to get there..

Nope, at least not untill the US elections are over. NATO will not and can not do much.....

reply to post by Manhater


Don't be so ridiculous. Firstly those Russian helo's (all 3 of them...oooh...that's a game changer) are on their way back to Russia after being turned around.

Secondly, Russia didn't have some kind of mock invasion on US soil. It was a small contingent of SF doing an annual exercise with their US counterparts.

Thirdly, Russia and China can do bugger all apart from frustrate the West at the UN. They know this, but if NATO decided to act anyway, they could't and wouldn't get involved..All their doing is trying to make it as difficult as possible to act, but Syria seems to be trying hard to undo their work!

Fourthly, this is not normal peacetime ROE. They should have tried to establish comms with the Jet, not blast it out the sky with no warning. The UK gets buzzed by Russian bombers almost monthly yet only sends a couple of Typhoons up, flash some porn and wave at the Russians, then both sides go home. This was also a training flight by the Turks, not even an actual attempt to breach the Syrian defences.

reply to post by Wonderer2012


No no no, if a foriegn aircraft entered US airspace they would attempt contact to establish intent well before it got anywhere that makes a difference. If no contact is established then yes..spash one zero.

They would definatly escort the aircraft either way. Its called an intercept and the Air Force in Alaska still does this with errant Russian bombers flying too close to US airspace. We do it all the time...we do not just shoot em down unless no contact has been established.

"Under article 4, any ally can request consultations whenever, in the opinion of any of them, their territorial integrity, political independence or security is threatened,"

So far, it's only talk if they should upgrade it to Article 5. Nothing more and nothing less at this time. So everyone fear mongering about NATO going into Syria should hold their tongue till it has been discussed.

What Syria did is a not done. NO country shoots without asking questions first.. A little thing called lawsuits and legally justified actions are not to be taken lightly. Even in wartime everything is double checked to avoid legal issues.

reply to post by Darth_Prime


Almost right, but not completely. Yes Article 5 stats that the NATO members can fill in the blank part of the "AID" any way they want. Be it political, medical, military, etc support.

But the part about Russia is not correct, they have a partnership for peace. That means they have certain rules (Memorium of understanding) set on paper for example who has juristiction during a military excercise in their country and such.. (basically a way to create trust between each other).

They do not follow the NATO articles like all other member countries.

reply to post by MoonandStar


A president can be reselected by just having a war did you know that?