boomerang wrote:Paphitis wrote:boomerang wrote:yes paphitis the difference between your opinion and the opinions from the articles are like chalk and cheese...you actually think that you are in a better position than the chech member of NATO?...lol... i am surprised that you even tried to sneak this one through...now as an exercise I am not going to tell you which article quoted him, and bear in mind for an article to quote him means he spilled the beans after the meeting and outside the NATO offices...My opinion is based on very simplistic facts. Pootin will need to attack our assets in Syria if he has the balls and we all know that is not the case!
you do not have any assets in Syria...you have cannon fodder and they are continuously decimated...no point in posting links coz you ain't going to read them...but let me give you a bit of advice...late 20th and early 21st century GOOGLE tried to be your friend... lol
Oh we have assets in Syria and our crews are no cannon fodder.
We have only lost 1 Jordanian aircraft.
Russia has lost one in a matter of weeks. In addition our pilots are paid a salary, a livable salary.
Pootin has the cannon fodder and that has been the case for the Soviet Union and Russia since WW2 where they use to shoot their own soldiers in the back!
200 yanks and a rag tag army hanging around Syria wouldn't classify as assets but rather cannon fodder...russia has assets in syria..which decimate "your" assets on a daily basis and your NATO stands there watching them...and why is that?...you would think NATO would do something about wouldn't you?...any idea as to why Russia decimates your assets and NATO stands idle watching from the sidelines?...but then again the us sold out your YPG cannon fodder to the turks anyway by allowing to turks to bomb them...here is a situation where the US arms the kurds and the turks bomb them, some assets huh... lol
oh paphitis the only way you come to a gun fight is to bring a gun and not a knife......you really need to let GOOGLE become your friend and set your mind free...
BTW when you say reprisals you do mean inside turkey, because if turkey ventures out of turkey and gets attacked there won't be reprisals...you do know this right...
turkey attacked a bomber with, from memory, no air to air capabilities...like attacking someone with his hands tied behind his back...
anyway you are going off topic...and again no links...what is it with you and no links?... lol
Are you serious?
There are over 500 coalition fighters, most of which are flying into Iraqi and Syrian Airspace daily. You name it from Rafael, F-18, F-16, Tornado, F-15, F22, B1, B2 and F117! Then all the support aircraft that go with that.
Then you have 2 USN Battlegroups, one in the Med and one in the Gulf. On top of that you have a French Battlegroup.
That's not cannon fodder. That's a buildup good enough to fight an extended world war.
You concentrate on what the Russians have because it is insignificant compared to that. What do they have? About 100 aircraft all up?
Mate, we have a sledgehammer in this fight and Pootin knows it. The amount of coalition hardware in the ME at the moment is enough to incinerate the entire place. Our ships also have Cruise Missiles but we don't use them that often because we don't need to since we have the Fighter Bombers that are more effective. We have depth of field and the Russians don't.
Turkey can't do anything so I do t know what you are referring to them for. They should just defend their border as they have done and they can expect NATO support in doing so. However, they want to do anything else, then they better get approval for it.
NATO's Charter is predominately defensive against acts of aggression. There are no objectives which will allow Turkey to set up a buffer zone and have NATO support in doing it. Unless there is a major policy shift, it's just not in the cards.
