Paul Valley: Turkey should be removed from NATO

Bombarding Kurds for strengthening Islamic Terrorists, ruled by an Islamist itself, shooting down Russian Air Force over Syrian territory ... the question should be allowed is it is senseful to risk to go into WWIII in favor of Islamic terrorists.

 

Russia should be able to stay out of Turkish airspace........

 

It is definitely something for NATO to consider.

 

Russia is fighting a sloppy battle. They are not using precision bombs and they cannot stay out of other country's air space. No, NATO should not consider removing Turkey.

Poootin will get mad and move his play weapons around and he will eventually get over it.

 

Kicking Turkey out of NATO is an interesting question and it seems to be growing (see HERE and HERE).

But I don't see that happening, especially as it seems likely that Erdogan got a nod and a wink from Washington's neocons for this shoot down. If it eventually comes out that this true and the neocons were part of this, then they must have been desperate, because their long cherished strategy of regime changing both Iran and Syria is crumbling before their eyes.

 

Erdogan is a megalomaniac with a few loose cannons, and his Ottoman ambitions are a threat to the area. He is expecting one hundred new jets shortly, and is building a naval force so I can't see anything more that the neo cons would want than a war between Russia and Turkey. That way they could shoot down two birds with one stone.

 

Erdogan is a criminal and fully supports terrorism. That alone should get him and his country removed from NATO.

He looked for a justifiable excuse to shoot at a Russian plane, and he got one. There must have been standing orders to fire on any Russian plane they could, as the order came within 17 seconds of it crossing some line.

 

so are Putin's Czarist ambitions

 

Only ambitions Putin has is destroying terrorists in Syria and to secure the gas pipeline deal.

 

...and who is not a member of the NATO states.

 

Er, huh?

 

You can't kick a country out of something it doesn't belong to.

Someone brought up Russias actions, but since they are not part of NATO, it's not really relevant to a "remove from NATO" discussion.

 

I'm confused too.

Here is how the conversation happened

What?

 

you get two nut jobs like erdogan and putin close together and there will be problems.

 

Every time I read something like this, it makes me wonder. Neocons? Is that what you consider President Obama to be or Secretary of State John Kerry? They're in charge. Is CIA Director John O. Brennan also a neocon as he was appointed by President Obama? The military, DOD and the JCS are answerable to President Obama and the president appoints those in the JCS. Personally, I can't think of anyone else in authority that would fit your wink and a nod.

So who are your neocons? Or is that just political rhetoric said in the heat of the moment?

 

But you have to keep an open mind about it. Even though necons are not officially in power in the USA they've got a lot of say about U.S foreign policies. No? They've executed the coup in Ukraine. And Obama could do nothing to stop them .Same with the chemical weapon attack in Syria. Neocons representatives and Turks organized it in order to get America involved in the war in Syria. The plan almost succeeded. Putin somehow stopped them, but neocons gave him Ukrainian coup in return. Necons and Brzezinski (the creator of Obama's foreign policy) are almost on the same page. One thing for sure, both pathologically hate Russians.

OK, you tell me, what is your take on CIA Director John O. Brennan? I keep hearing from different sources in the USA, some still active and retired personal that he converted to Wahhabi Islam. If that is true, that would explain a lot.

Growing evidence that CIA’s John Brennan is a Wahhabist convert
- See more at: http://www.intrepidreport.com/archives/15993#sthash.2qUdzXxK.dpuf

 

I haven't delved deep in Brennan. He was Obama's choice and when it comes to presidential appointments I always believed the president should get the ones he wants. If he chooses a bad appointee, the president will suffer.

Now the CIA doesn't go rogue and overthrow head of states on their own. That might make a good movie, but they do the president's bidding. If the CIA had something to do with Ukraine it can be assured they had the president's approval.

When it comes to Syria, I would imagine most of DOD and the CIA are against Assad's removal as they realize either ISIS or Assad will come out on top. I doubt anyone wants a Syria ruled by ISIS which becomes their caliphate. In fact President Obama has pulled his punches against ISIS as he realizes a degraded ISIS only strengthens Assad which for some reason the president wants him gone. This falls into the category of being careful, you might get what you wish for.

Look at Libya, then Secretary of State and the President wanted Qaddafi gone. He is gone and Libya is a hundred times worst off. Libya is now a training ground and safe haven for ISIS, AQ and numerous other terrorist organizations. Libya is now a launching pad for terrorist into Europe and into Mali and the rest of Africa.

 

Huh? Of course they're not part of NATO.

 

With respect Perotista, I think you need to undertake some study to broaden your knowledge base of US politics. The term is widely used and has been clearly defined. Wiki even has a page on it. You might also consider reading up on PNAC. Wiki has a page on that too. Robert Parry discusses them in many of his articles also - his website is Consortium News.

 

I respectfully disagree. Turkey is a big county, with people of many different stripes.
And it is one of the few Muslim-majority countries with a secular government and military.

Yes, Erdogan is a nutbag, but so is Putin, who suffers from delusions of grandeur.

And Turkey has been a strategic ally all the way since the 1960s - or have been all forgotten October, 1962? The Russkis pulled their nukes out of Cuba in exchange for us removing our presence from: Turkey.

Turkey is an excellent trade partner to: Israel.

Turkey is one of the few places in the are where Israeli tourists can go and not fear for their lives.

Yes, there are islamic-extremists who live in Turkey, but they are a very small minority. Most Turks are good, decent people.

And Turkey is no small country, neither in terms of land-mass or in terms of population.

Turkey is also not stupid: it would have had no reason have shot down a russian plane over Syrian airspace, but it would have been justified in doing so over it's own airspace.

Logic therefore dictates that Turkey most likely shot down this craft over it's own airspace.

 

Oh, Lord, no, not this bullcrap again.

Lordy, lordy...

Of course, these kind of unfounded accusations are just the stuff that haters love to say. And these kind of unfounded denunciations were a favorite of Hitler, Mussolini and Co.

So, congratulations!

Meanwhile, Snopes already debunked this:

http://www.snopes.com/politics/religion/brennan.asp

Better luck next time.

I also have to laugh at Wayne Madsen, who is the author of that crazy-assed article in the nutz blog intrepid report.

In the recent past, Wayne Madsen has claimed that Obama is gay (including the wild claims that our President had some wild mansex with Artur Davis, Deval Patrick and Brill Frist!!), a creation of the CIA, that both Israel and Saudi Arabia - together- planned and executed 911, that AIPAC and Mossad dominate and control CNN, that swine-flu was a results of US-military gene-splicing as a part of the plot to put us all in camps, that the gay prostitution ring in DC that had lots of sex with Spitzer and with Vitter is actually controlled by Mossad, ....

in short, Madsen is a total nutcase.

So, yeah, let's believe him when he claims that Brennan is a secret muslim...

The simple truth is that once Madsen's military career end up in the toilet, he started writing outrageous books in order to make $$$$ off of poor sops who want to lap up this stuff.

Sorry, folks, but that is not a serious way of doing things.

 

NEOCON's were the ones, the conservatives who replaced my type of conservatism, called traditional conservatism. Neocons want government in social issues like abortion, SSM, etc where as a traditional conservative thinks government has no place in those issues and they should be left up to an individual citizen discretion. Neocon has replaced tradition conservatism as Progressivism has replaced Classic Liberalism.

I have also heard the term NEOCON utilized to describe war hawks opposite of peace doves. I find very hard to place Obama, Kerry or most of the Democratic Party into that group. Since McGovern most Democrats adhered to the peace dove philosophy. Although with Obama overthrowing Qaddafi and attempting to overthrow Assad perhaps you are right, in those two instances they could be classified as War Hawks. Although Obama's tepid response to ISIS if one calls it a response would put him back in the peace dove category.

But in overall political beliefs, I wouldn't call this administration made up of neocons. I suppose it all depends on how the term is used. It is just I have a very hard time looking at Obama and thinking neocon. Obama and company may be a lot of things, but neocon just doesn't fit in my book.

 

I'm not sure (for several reasons), but I don't "think" Obama is a Neocon. Not at heart anyway. But he does follow Neocon policiies, which is odd. The facts is that the control levers of government are now largely controlled by neocons as are the most important media outlets. The days when a president independently made foreign policy (I'm only concerned with US foreign policy btw) have long since vanished. If he really presses, as in the case of the Iran deal, he can force his policy through, at least temporarily, anyway - but he has to choose his battles carefully. However, on Iran I'm waiting to see what happens once the next president gets elected.

As Isaid earlier, there are plenty of good studies that have been done on the Neocons, and for a deeper and detailed, Peter Dale Scott has written his book The Road to 9/11: Wealth, Empire and the Future of America. A notable chapter is where he deals with the Continuity of Government and reveals that the Constitution of the US was suspended by COG on 9/11 by Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld (and notably not by President Bush). COG remains in force to this day. The US is no longer a functioning democracy. The Neocons were responsible for this. They'd be planning it for a long time, with Col. Oliver North being one of those involved with this (see HERE).

 

The PKK has conducted terrorist activities in Turkey since 1952.. and Turkey has been overrun with refugees in both Gulf wars and now the Syrian mess.

Maybe you should look at it from the Turkish perspective for a change.

 

The neocon signatories of the PNAC clean Break Strategy promo demanding war on Iraq and the destabilization of Syria are a breed unto themselves.. and now they are going to scoop up Ben Carson and manage him.. Wait and see.