Turkey has shot down a Russian jet

[Pantone363]

Apparently it violated their air space and ignored repeated warnings.

'If Turkey are buying ISIL oil, and this could be proven, apart from a bollocking what can NATO do?'

I doubt there would even be a bollocking, because it won't just be Turkey buying it. The Turks say the Kurds are buying it and who knows who else is making money from the operation of rows of tankers shipping out the Isis oil stolen from the Syrian people?

He knows that the game is to try and force him and trick him into a war. He held back in Ukraine

Sure, because the US and NATO really want to trick Russia into a war. Why?!

It seems more likely to me that Putin is pushing it as much as he can to assert Russia's political and military, and economic, dominance, again.
There is a reason Russia's fighter jets have been circling Europe dangerously close to NATO airspace, and I wouldn't be surprised if they went over Turkey on purpose.
I think it's more likely that he wants to mess up relationships with the West and keep the West (including Turkey) out of Syria.

Strangely you are all making me feel calmer. Thanks for that. I'm hoping that this will force more unity. I do think that Arab nations need to back NATO (please excuse me if I'm way off here I have limited knowledge) to form some sort of new alliance. I find the atmosphere tense at the moment. The past two weeks seem to be crazy.

'Sure, because the US and NATO really want to trick Russia into a war. Why?!'

It is not all of the US and Nato, it is the tiny elite factions. Not Hollande, MErkel, Obama, Corbyn, DoNald Trump, the military and the politicians.

'Why?

Because they are stronger and can win. The elites who control policy, not the puppet politicians, use wars to maintain power as economies collapse. The Second Wold War ended the Great Depression. Wars are a way of stealing other's resources and wiping out the winner's debts and putting the losers into debt with reparation payments etc. Societies are restructured under war economies, there is rationing etc and power is maintained for the elites.

'It seems more likely to me that Putin is pushing it as much as he can to assert Russia's political and military, and economic, dominance, again. '

That is what the corporate media says, but Russia is weak compared to America. America spends ten times more on its military than Russia, America has bases all over the world, Russia has a base in Syria. America is the richest, strongest country in the world despite being the most endebted. No one can challenge America.

Russia and China and Germany etc want to do business, create trade and growth and so does Donald Trump. But some elites stand to lose power as China rises and they want to maintain power.

'I think it's more likely that he wants to mess up relationships with the West and keep the West (including Turkey) out of Syria.'

Yes, Russia and Iran have drawn a red line in Syria. They let Libya go, they let Iraq go, but they won't let Syria go becaue they know that they will be next.

Who are the elite claig?

And you don't think Putin wants to regain the power and dominance that Russia once had?

just a big game of chess to them

Russia's a bit of a mess really...isnt it?

'Who are the elite claig?'

No one knows, but they are super billionairees and trillionaires, not some politician from Oxbridge with a couple of million in the bank. He who pays the piper calls the tume and the elite call the tune and fool the masses.

'And you don't think Putin wants to regain the power and dominance that Russia once had?'

No because that is not realistic. Russia is economically weak and militarily weak compared to the US. Putin is a realist, he doesn't want to start a world war even though he is being tricked into one because he will lose and lots of ordinary people across the planet will lose. But so far, he is not prepared to roll over so it looks like he is preparing for it if it comes.

Obama was right when he said that "Russia is a regional power". That is all it is, it is no threat to the United States, but Russia does have nuclear weapons and Putin has threatened to use them if it comes to that and it is pushed too far in a global war and that is dangerous for the whole world.

Putin is being provoked in the hope that mr machismo will take the bait and end up on his arse?

Someone controls Isis and someone gave an order to bomb the Russian passenger jet and the order to attack Paris the day before the G20 meeting and someone gave the order to kill the Chinese hostage. Someone wants war and wants all the big countries sucked in. The media says it is Isis who wants that, but as our generals said, they could wipe Isis out in 14 days if troops and tanks were sent in against them.

Someone is using Isis, funding them and arming them, to try and create a global war.

But I don't understand why they'd want to "trick" Russia into a war. Once one starts it surely would be over for everyone. I know you say they'd go underground Claig but all the billionaires wouldn't have a worthwhile world to enjoy. Doesn't nuclear fallout affect the whole world for years?

Claig surely you are speaking with your tinfoil hat superglued to your head

your hair will be ruined

'But I don't understand why they'd want to "trick" Russia into a war. '

Then how can you explain a Russian jet being shot down when it poses no threat to NATO or Turkey? Whoever wants war thinks they can win it, just as Hitler thought he could win it.

Isis could easily be wiped out and have only been in existence for a number of years and have been funded over those years. Russia enterd Syria to call everyone's bluff and start bombing Isis oil convoys and the rest of teh Western backed rebels who have been funded for over 4 years to take down a secular sovereign government.

Since then a Russian passenger jet has been shot down, Paris has been attacked in its biggest terrorist attack ever and now a NATO member has shot down a Russian jet. Instead of dealing with Isis, the funded Jihadis, people are talking about the risks of WW3.

'Doesn't nuclear fallout affect the whole world for years?'

I don't know, I am not an expert on it. But aren't people living in Hiroshima today? I don't know exactly what the elites think and what they will do, all I can do is guess by looking at their actions rather than their words.

'Claig surely you are speaking with your tinfoil hat superglued to your head'

I find that is the best way to keep it in place on a windy day.

Isis could hardly be wiped out that easily.

Look at what happened in Afghanistan and Iraq. Civil war, guerrilla war, internal and external terrorism.
Going in with troops would mean many lost lives, including civilians, and many more disgruntled who will only replace ISIS with something equivalent.
Bombing is virtually useless.
It's not that simple. It will take a lot of effort and behind the scenes work.

"Someone is using Isis, funding them and arming them, to try and create a global war."

Or perhaps that 'someone' might be Isis themselves, seeking to hurry Armageddon.

Turkey would not have shot down a Russian jet lightly when Russia is not at war with Turkey. It is a huge event and must have been undertaken knowing full well what the consequences might be and the fact that it could risk war which would drag in NATO.

Things like that don't happen unless someone wants them to happen. There was no need for it which is why Putin said that Russia has been "stabbed in the back".

'Or perhaps that 'someone' might be Isis themselves, seeking to hurry Armageddon.'

Yes, that is what the corporate media say. But do you really believe that these London Jihadi DJs who join Isis believe in the virgins in paradise and Armageddon and are religious Muslims? The terrorists in Paris took drugs and owned a bar at one time.

Yes but Hiroshimo was localised, if it was a nuclear exchange between Russia, UK and the US it would make Hiroshimo seem like a teddy bears picnic. They know this, it's what has kept the peace for 70 years. It's what's giving me some small hope anyway, thinking this.

'Look at what happened in Afghanistan and Iraq'

Yes because that was taking on entire tribes and Afghans who have never been conquered. Isis is a mercenary gang of terrorists from all over the world - Belgium, France, London, Chechnya, Libya etc who have been funded and armed. As Corbyn says, stop their funding and buying oil from them and they will collapse when they meet a real military.

'Going in with troops would mean many lost lives, including civilians, and many more disgruntled who will only replace ISIS with something equivalent.
Bombing is virtually useless.'

I don't believe that the Syrian civilians are joining Isis. They are fleeing to Europe because they don't want to live in a Caliphate where Roman monuments are bombed and where gays are thrown from the tops of buildings. It is a barbaric regime that makes a mockery of religion and God.
Our generals said they could wipe them out in 14 days. I agree bombing is useless, which is what Corbyn says. As our generals say, it needs troops on the ground.

"But do you really believe that these London Jihadi DJs who join Isis believe in the virgins in paradise and Armageddon and are religious Muslims? The terrorists in Paris took drugs and owned a bar at one time."

Yes, no-one would ever suspect people who do that, so excellent cover. Or something like that, because the level of operational planning and security doscipline to carry out such co-ordinated violent attacks is not compatible with a drug addled state.

And as you said, if these actions have a central plan (and they might not - might just be aiming to disrupt the infidel whenever they can get lucky) it's being done from the territory they held in Syria by people with experience/training. Not someone fresh of a plane from Europe (whether DJ of not).