« Turkey Shoots Down Russian Fighter | Main | Keep Calm and Kill the Bastards - TTG »

25 November 2015


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


If we can judge public sentiment by the top-rated comments in the New York Times, they're almost uniformly skeptical about Erdogan and Turkey.

NYT has an editorial:

The top rated comment has "The premise of Turkey's right to defend itself is false. Sure Turkey has a right to defend itself if it is being attacked. It would be a long stretch of imagination to believe that Russia was attacking the State of Turkey. "

The next one has "Turkey has its own political end-game in Syria that contradicts American and NATO interests. Turkey should not be allowed to play NATO to the detriment of NATO."

The third one: "Turkey is allowing every wanna be jihadi to land in Istanbul, Ankara or Izmir and leisurely transit Turkey on their way to the killing fields of Syria and Iraq....With "allies" like Turkey who needs enemies?"

The original news-item of the plane shoot-down has 1925 comments and counting:

The top comment with 1441 recommends is:

"Turkey should be expelled from NATO post haste. As an enabler and sympathizer of ISIL, and oppressor of our Kurdish friends and allies, it is turning into a pariah state. Don't let it drag the West into war with Russia. (And don't forget: it still won't acknowledge the Armenian Genocide.)"

The second top-rated comment notes pretty much the same, and concludes: "What is the process for kicking someone out of NATO?"

The third top-rated comment begins: "Excuse me NYT - but Turkey is not 'The West'.

It is a country that aligns itself with Wahabism-oriented nations that support and finance terrorism (ie Saudi Arabia).

Lets keep things clear: We cannot fight ISIS by allying ourselves with countries which support it."

Babak Makkinejad

I think you are wrong about Russia and Iran; I commented on this before in the previous thread - Putin went directly from airport to meet with Khamenei. I did not sense any discord.

On the commercial front, I think we are observing a lot of obfuscation, dissimulation, and noise. But it seems to me that Iranians are interested in acquiring technology and Russians are willing to oblige them at a price.

And both states oppose US and EU and Gulfie Arab strategies in the Persian Gulf and the Levant.

I am not saying that there will not be commercial deals with EU or Korea or Japan, but I also expect fairly steady increase in the volume of Russian-Iran trade.

Russia needs the Seljuk Muslims - the Shia Crescent and some day Turkey - to serve as a buffer zone between her and the decaying post-Soviet state structures of Central Asia.

Just look at the map.


Only three years ago, this is what Erdogan thought about a straying jet (Turkish) being shot down.
"Erdogan criticized Syria harshly on Tuesday for shooting down the Turkish fighter jet, saying: "Even if the plane was in their airspace for a few seconds, that is no excuse to attack."

"It was clear that this plane was not an aggressive plane. Still it was shot down," he said.

He said Syrian choppers have strayed into Turkish airspace five times in 2012. But, the Turks say, the government never escalated the situation despite the border violations. That could change under the new policy.""



Was on Russian TV

Ghost ship

The US, British, and French Armies took five months to build ups their forces and prepare for the attack before Desert Storm back in 1991. To prepare to invade Russia will probably take longer not that most European countries have enough kit. Does anybody seriously believe that during that period Russia will do nothing?


Because Obama wants to feather his nest like the Clintons, whereby he benefits from lucrative speeches and such. Foundations funded by the Gulfies and other billionaires cannot far behind. Communities of the dusky downtrodden will be but memories of the struggles he overcame to achieve greatness in his delusional mind. The guy has got the hots for himself; a disease that is presently metastasizing unhindered in this here republic, as we here look on aghast. When it comes to post-presidential endeavors, no Jimmuh Carter he.

Ghost ship

Unfortunately it is most likely to be Brits operating out of bases in Cyprus doing any interceptions- they tend to keep their mouths closed but everything will be fed to Washington so it might eventual come out. There is also a large British radar station on top of the Troodos mountains in Cyprus that probably monitored the entire event and that information will also be supplied to Washington.


If there is a conspiracy, it more likely entails moves hatched in Washington to block the formation of an anti-ISIL/anti-al-Nusra & Assoc alliance which includes Russia as a full partner (as proposed by Hollande). There are powerful forces within the administration, led by Joe Biden, who seek to undercut Putin's strategy for re-establishing Russia as a serious player on the world stage - and, thereby, derail their ambition to shape the world according to an American design with the US as its overseer. After all, this has been the foundation stone of American strategy since 1991. The American instigated Ukraine coup was such a move.
ISIL along with Putin's move into Syria has largely neutralized that attempt to isolate a maverick Russia. Hence, the need for another device to create an unbridgeable gap between Russia and the West. The Turkish action nicely serves that purpose. Obama, and through him NATO, seemed quite prepared with an immediate response when the news broke.


I guess we don't actually "know" the nationality of the pilot who fired that missile. But I cannot in a million years imagine that it was an American. That's just not a scenario that is even remotely possible.



People realize that we are in hoc to those alien interests. The explosion is long overdue.
I noticed that RT reporters were attacked the other day by those who don't want the truth exposed.
Too late. People are awake.

David Habakkuk

Medicine Man,

I would certainly not be worried about being repetitive. It seems clear that opinion on a whole range of issues is shifting dramatically, but getting to grips with precisely how and where this may take us really is difficult. So to some extent we have to go on as it were 'going round the houses'.

It seems to me your definition of the disconnect that has been opening up is very much to the point. The feeling that élites inhabit a cut-off bubble is now very strong on the right, but also visible – in a range of different ways – among sections of the left. On some matters, indeed, old left-right distinctions are becoming muddled.

(See for example a piece entitled 'Turkey attacks Russia: a wake up call, or is the western intelligentsia too far gone?', on 'Off-Guardian', a site dedicated to denouncing the – traditionally leftist, but now largely neoconservative – 'Guardian', at http://tinyurl.com/p58aco5 .)

Where I think very many are simply uncertain is how far what is at issue is simply detachment from reality – and how far one is right to suppose that alien influences are at play. A bizarre consequence of the invasion of Iraq has been that the Saudis and the Gulf Arabs, and also the Israelis, alike see themselves as far more threatened by the 'Shia Crescent' than jihadism.

(In addition to the familiar comments of Michael Oren, see the recent piece by Philip Weiss, entitled 'Israel isn't worried about ISIS', at http://mondoweiss.net/2015/11/israel-worried-about .)

How far this is going to make both Saudi and Gulf influence, and that of the Israeli Lobby, a live political issue remains unclear to me.

David Habakkuk


Thanks for those links, which I found most interesting.

I do not think that comments on the 'NYT' represent anything more than the views of that – very influential but quite narrow – segment of American society that read the paper.

But that does not make them any the less fascinating.

What also interested me greatly are the 'NYT Picks'.

And here, there is a fascinating contrast with the 'Financial Times' article to which I linked. That paper has only recently introduced an 'Editor's Picks' selection on comments. The comment selected on the Rachman article was straight down-the-line neoconservative – which was curious, as the article itself marked something of a retreat from orthodox neocon positions.

And the views preferred by the editor of the FT were diametrically opposed to those in the comments most strongly recommended by the paper's readers.

By contrast, the 'NYT Picks' did not seem to be that far removed from the comments the readers liked. Indeed, the top 'pick' came close to being a kind of 'call to order' for the paper:

'Contrary to what the editorial claims, the Islamic State is NOT "the only winner". Those who benefit from its existence are winners as well. And Turkey is most definitely one of those who benefit, as the complicated relationship of the Turkish "deep state" with Daesh demonstrates, and as Turkey's regional interests establish.

'That relationship (between Turkey and Daesh) is both the murkiest and most ambiguous among the extended circle of US and French allies, friends and frenemies, and the most remarkably under-reported of any. It would be wonderful if the NYT aimed its unrivaled investigatory prowess in that direction.'

It may well be that I am attaching excessive importance to the different ways in which the relationship between commenters and newspapers is developing.

However, more years ago than I care to remember, when I was a trainee on the 'Liverpool Echo', I used to write the paper's editorials in the early morning and then spend the rest of the day as a features sub.

So I have a long-standing interest in the complexities of the psychological relationship between newspapers and their readers.

Ironically, my strong suspicion is that those controlling the 'New York Times', like those controlling the 'Daily Mail', really are seriously concerned about the possibility that they are getting a 'thumbs down' from their audience.

Why the editor of the 'FT' does not appear to share this concern is an interesting question.


The Turkish army has suspended flights over Syria. Two can play the "Violated Air Space" game. The Kurds could be in for a break in Turkish bombing raids.



By the way, Colonel, any idea when the Syrian wells go dry? Shell engineers out there told me in '04 it'd all be gone by '08.


Consequences think about you.


Russia could take Turkey to the Security Council but it would be slow and easy to obfuscate.

Faster method: just smash the trucks... pull the string, watch who jerks.

OK, that's done, we know who's involved. Basically Turkey gave themselves away by their actions. Now, just a question of how all parties react to that.

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

February 2021

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
Blog powered by Typepad