Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Are you sure about Putin being involved in MH17? All that seems to be secured evidence points to a Russian supplied SAM system operated by Separatists.No apology necessary. If your position is that pre-expansion NATO and new NATO abutting against the Russian border have the exact same, presumably zero risk of Russian aggression, then you won't.
But we're entering into new times, where an autocratic and increasingly erratic, paranoid and unpredictable pariah state in Russia cannot be guaranteed to act with the reasonable pragmatism of the Cold War. If for example, Ukraine had been allowed into NATO per its request in 2017 I am not convinced that Putin would have sat back and excepted the situation. No, he wouldn't have marched tanks towards Kyiv, but regime change and attacks from the puppet republics in the Dombas would have likely been on the agenda. If Moscow-backed, Russian-speaking separatists from both Donbas and within post-2014 Ukraine took up arms, would NATO be expected to enter what is essentially a Yugoslavian-like civil war? That's what Putin would have likely have done.
Today's Russia and Putin is clearly a sick, paranoid place, capable of irrational or risky behaviour, gross miscalculations and boneheaded mistakes, like shooting down that Malaysian airliner, launching poison attacks in London, or acting entirely against his plan to weaken and destabilize NATO by invading Ukraine causing BOTH the uniting and expanding of NATO. The past is not always a predictor of the future.
Okay we agree to disagree, since IMO there is no imminent threat or danger of war towards Turkey - who is a NATO member!!!!Turkey was given the right (Article 21) and Erdogan used that right. His actions were not questioned or protested, at least publicly.
For Ukraine, this is a problem, indeed. NATO ships' presence in the Black Sea would be helpful, at least, for better reconnaissance.
I agree, MH17 was shot down by Separatists.... but those chaps are backed and armed by Putin. I believe the shootdown was a mistake, but if you give long range SAMs to incapable fools, there's a great chance they'll use them foolishly. In this way it's another demonstration of Putin's lack of big picture thinking and forethought, the same which led to his total misunderstanding of how the US, NATO and the Western world would react when he invaded Ukraine.Are you sure about Putin being involved in MH17? All that seems to be secured evidence points to a Russian supplied SAM system operated by Separatists.
There are many videos on YouTube with captured Russian soldiers. Of course, I didn't watch each, but I can roughly say that out of 10 prisoners, 9 are citizensAs I had stated before, those doing most of the fighting and taking the brunt of the losses are the DNLR troops - not the Russian army in regards to manpower losses.
If Russia does attack NATO, can Turkey toss the Convention and allow its NATO allies to send dozens of warships into the Black Sea?Okay we agree to disagree, since IMO there is no imminent threat or danger of war towards Turkey - who is a NATO member!!!!
Off course, that is why Putin will not attack Turkey, and therefore there is IMO no threat or imminent war danger for TurkeyIf Russia does attack NATO, can Turkey toss the Convention and allow its NATO allies to send dozens of warships into the Black Sea?
*yawn*I don't know were you derive this from, we had held that discussion already and I will forward the respective articles again.
Article 19.
In time of war, Turkey not being belligerent, warships shall enjoy complete freedom of transit and
navigation through the Straits under the same conditions as those laid down in Article 10 to 18.
Vessels of war belonging to belligerent Powers shall not however, pass through the Straits except in
cases arising out of the application of Article 25 of the present Convention, and in cases of assistance
rendered to a State victim of aggression in virtue of a treaty of mutual assistance binding-Turkey,
concluded within the framework of the Covenant of the League of Nations, and registered and
published in accordance with the provisions of Article 18 of the Covenant.
In the exceptional cases provided for in the preceding paragraph, the limitations laid down in Article 10
to 18 of the present Convention shall not be applicable.
Notwithstanding the prohibition of passage laid down in paragraph 2 above, vessels of war belonging
to belligerent Powers, whether they are Black Sea Powers or not, which have become separated from
their bases, may return thereto.
Vessels of war belonging to belligerent Powers shall not make any capture, exercise the right of visit
and search, or carry out any hostile act in the Straits.
Article 20.
In time of war, Turkey being belligerent, the provisions of Articles 10 to 18 shall not be applicable; the
passage of warships shall be left entirely to the discretion of the Turkish Government.
Article 21.
Should Turkey consider herself to be threatened with imminent danger of war she shall have the right
to apply the provisions of Article 20 of the present Convention.
1.Turkey is not a belligerent
2.Turkey has not been threatened with imminent danger of war, as such they can't invoke Article 20
Article 23 (which you cited) regulates the passage of civilian aircraft - nothing else
So there is absolutely no Article within the Montreux Convention that would sanction or allow for a regulation by Turkey that bars everyone's warships at the present moment.
But Erdogan is the Turkish version of Putin - with the same war-crimes record, NATO partner or not.
What I mean is that Turkey can say that they see the imminent danger, and how to disprove that? It's about the same distance from missile sites in Crimea to Turkey as to Ukraine. They have fishing and merchant ships around the sea, etc.Okay we agree to disagree, since IMO there is no imminent threat or danger of war towards Turkey - who is a NATO member!!!!
Using the same logic, Germany and all others should refuse sending weapons to Ukraine since it would pose an imminent threat or danger of war.
1. There are no detailed statistics on the Russian and separatist losses. Any claim is impossible to verify.As I had stated before, those doing most of the fighting and taking the brunt of the losses are the DNLR troops - not the Russian army in regards to manpower losses.
There were a lot of Russian casualties - in the first 6-7 weeks of the war, especially around Kiev and the Sumy region. And certain Russian units are continuing supporting via ground combat the DNLR units and other militias since Mid April. Most separatists if not all have been given Russian citizenship independent of their Donbass or whatever Republic status.There are many videos on YouTube with captured Russian soldiers. Of course, I didn't watch each, but I can roughly say that out of 10 prisoners, 9 are citizens
Russia. On the Kiev and Chernigov direction, videos with many prisoners appeared from the first days of the war, but there were no immigrants from the Lugansk and Donetsk regions among them. Perhaps for political reasonsfor some reason they are not shown to us, but there were such prisoners in the Sumy region, and have video with people from Donetsk\Luhansk. I thought that this argument could shed some light on your theory about the losses of the Russian Federation/Donetsk\Luhansk. Regards.
Official information presented in Dutch court: SAM was delivered and operated by the Russian military. Separatists provided escort and other assistance.Are you sure about Putin being involved in MH17? All that seems to be secured evidence points to a Russian supplied SAM system operated by Separatists.
As for the rest of your post I fully agree - Putin is extremely unpredictable since a western analytic approach is non-suitable to evaluate that kind of Eastern-European mindset.
Official information presented in Dutch court: SAM was delivered and operated by the Russian military. Separatists provided escort and other assistance.
By June or especially July the Ukrainians will be well armed and prepared for that. Putin had better strike with all he's got now before all the artillery, counter-battery systems and other heavy weapons start arriving at the front in large numbers.Let's see what happens after June-July when Putin might be forced to really send in the Russian army....
And I think that is exactly as to what will push his decision to really bring in the RF or not.By June or especially July the Ukrainians will be well armed and prepared for that. Putin had better strike with all he's got now before all the artillery, counter-battery systems and other heavy weapons start arriving at the front in large numbers.
I had just checked two sites regarding the Dutch inquiry towards MH17 - and there is no statement as to Russian military having operated that SAM.Official information presented in Dutch court: SAM was delivered and operated by the Russian military. Separatists provided escort and other assistance.