Turkish president defiant about turning to Russia for defense needs

1
Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan said in an interview aired Sunday that he has no qualms about buying a Russian defense system despite condemnation from the United States and its other NATO allies.

“I explained everything to President Biden,” Erdoğan said in an interview with host Margaret Brennan that aired on CBS’ “Face the Nation.“

He said that the United States’ refusal to deliver F-35 aircraft that Turkey agreed to purchase and Patriot missiles it wished to acquire gave Turkey no choice but to turn to Russia for its S-400 antiaircraft missile system, a point of contention between Turkey and the NATO alliance during both the Trump and Biden administrations.
“In the future, nobody will be able to interfere in terms of what kind of defense systems we acquire, from which country at what level. Nobody can interfere with that. We are the only ones to make such decisions,” Erdoğan said.

He added: “Are we going to keep on expecting delivery of weapons from other countries that didn't give us those weapons?“

NATO fears that deploying Russia’s S-400 missiles alongside the F-35 would allow the S-400 to collect vital data about the aircraft it otherwise would not have access to, potentially compromising security.

Discussing another point of contention with the United States, Erdoğan said the U.S. must choose between supporting Turkey and offering support to Kurdish groups that wish to carve out a state from an area that includes parts of Turkey. The Kurdish forces had joined the U.S. and Turkey in combating ISIS forces in Syria.

Erdoğan called these Kurdish groups “terrorist organizations.“

“Receiving this kind of support should be stopped once and for all,” he said, adding: “Turkey is [a] NATO member and we are in a position to be obliged to forge a solidarity under the roof of NATO. But so long as the terrorist organizations receive such logistical support that upset us ... we would be vocal about this.”

The Turkish leader said he would like to see the remaining U.S. forces withdrawn from Syria, something that critics have said could give Turkey a free hand in persecuting the Kurds.

Erdoğan was critical of U.S. actions in Afghanistan. “With the American footprints dating back to two decades, the region was not any safer,” he told Brennan.

He also said that Turkey hopes to maintain some sort of relationship with the new Taliban regime in Afghanistan, though it withdrew amid the chaos accompanying the American withdrawal there.

“We have historic relations with the Afghan people,” he said, “and we've always been very supportive of [Afghanistan] in an unprecedented fashion, unlike any other. And in terms of infrastructure, in terms of superstructure, we were involved in major investments, which we will continue for the future. But because of the mistakes made in the field, we had to withdraw our troops and evacuate our civilians. And right now, we are not present in Afghanistan.“
https://www.politico.com/news/2021/09/2 ... les-514303

The politics of the Middle East meets the politics of Western Europe and the US. The enemy of my enemy is my friend sometimes, as long as I get the money.
Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored.-Huxley
"We can have democracy in this country, or we can have great wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can't have both." ~ Louis Brandeis,

Re: Turkish president defiant about turning to Russia for defense needs

3
The US and Western Europe needed Turkey during the Cold War, but with Erdogan's Islamic dictatorship they are not that critical to the West. Turkey has tried to get into the EU but they don't want him, they already have Orban in Hungary. Erdogan and his party are a security risk right now.
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Re: Turkish president defiant about turning to Russia for defense needs

4
highdesert wrote: Sun Sep 26, 2021 3:12 pm The US and Western Europe needed Turkey during the Cold War, but with Erdogan's Islamic dictatorship they are not that critical to the West. Turkey has tried to get into the EU but they don't want him, they already have Orban in Hungary. Erdogan and his party are a security risk right now.
Unfortunately we still need the military bases in Turkey of which we have three main ones. But NATO has many many more. Check out the maps , scroll down.
https://east-usa.com/us-military-bases-in-turkey.html
Redneck Liberal This Is The Way

Re: Turkish president defiant about turning to Russia for defense needs

6
Unfortunately, Erdogan can play this game Because Asia Minor & Constantinople have always been of strategic importance & continue to be so. Geographically where “East meets west” continues to be important since the Time of Xerxes’ Persian Empire… so we let him talk tough, warehouse his F-35s and silently remain an “ally.” He knows how far he can push it …


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Re: Turkish president defiant about turning to Russia for defense needs

7
The Dardanelles and the Bosporus are the entrance to the Black Sea which Russia regards as its own, but Turkey controls access from the Aegean Sea. Periodically the US and NATO send ships there to show it's international waters not a Russian lake. NATO provides a shield for Turkey so the Russian Bear doesn't try taking over more than just Crimea. He's playing both sides but I'm not confident that he knows when to stop.
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts." - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Re: Turkish president defiant about turning to Russia for defense needs

8
I can't much blame Turkey for buying the S400. It's better and cheaper than anything made in the US. The F35 is a dumpster fire thus far, so kinda can't blame them for passing on that one either.

The US bases are only needed because we keep going to war in the Middle East. And to protect Turkey from Russia, but that was more of a Cold War thing. Perhaps Turkey is safer just doing business with Russia rather than letting in all of Russia's enemies.
“I think there’s a right-wing conspiracy to promote the idea of a left-wing conspiracy”

Re: Turkish president defiant about turning to Russia for defense needs

9
FrontSight wrote: Mon Sep 27, 2021 5:12 pm I can't much blame Turkey for buying the S400. It's better and cheaper than anything made in the US. The F35 is a dumpster fire thus far, so kinda can't blame them for passing on that one either.

The US bases are only needed because we keep going to war in the Middle East. And to protect Turkey from Russia, but that was more of a Cold War thing. Perhaps Turkey is safer just doing business with Russia rather than letting in all of Russia's enemies.
Yes, yes, google-foo will produce many, many 'informed' sources about what a 'dumpster fire' the F-35 is BUT..I know more than a few in the USN test and fleet community and the F-35, even WITH teething pains(like any military aircraft EVER produced, starting with the Curtis JN-4)is light years ahead of other 4th and even 5th gen aircraft from anybody else..including Russia(Sukhoi Su-57) and China(Chengdu J-20)..those 2, not even fully deployed, are a sliver of the F-22, which was introduced 16 years ago...

The F-35, avionics-wise, is the MOST capable 5th gen fighter there is..might even be considered 6th gen...

Re: Turkish president defiant about turning to Russia for defense needs

10
But we're 1/2 way though the lifecycle of the F-35 project, and how many actual combat ready squadrons of F-35's actually exist? Of those squadrons, how many aircraft are actually combat ready? 20 years into the project and the F35 hasn't replaced ANYTHING. In fact, we're buying more F15's & F18's because the DOD cant' afford the operating costs of the F35, and the maintenance is a nightmare. Now the Air Force has had enough, and has announced a program to replace the F35.

The Air Force has had enough, and are now planning a replacement for the F35
https://www.extremetech.com/extreme/320 ... -a-failure
There have been so many problems with the F-35, it’s difficult even to summarize them. Pilot blackouts, premature part failures, software development disasters, and more have all figured in various documents over the years. Firing the main gun can crack the plane. The Air Force has already moved to buy new F-15EX aircraft. Multiple partner nations that once promised F-35 buys have shifted orders to other planes. The USAF continues to insist it will purchase 1,763 aircraft, but the odds of it doing so are increasingly dubious. The F-15EX costs an estimated $20,000 per hour to fly. The F-35 runs $44,000. Lockheed-Martin has promised to bring that cost down to $25,000, but it’s been promising that for years. Former Air Force pilots have not been kind in their recent evaluations of the aircraft’s performance and capabilities.
“I think there’s a right-wing conspiracy to promote the idea of a left-wing conspiracy”

Re: Turkish president defiant about turning to Russia for defense needs

11
There are lots of program, maintenance and development issues with the the F-35. That much the DoD/JPO acknowledges. It’s a ginormous, sloppy, government program.

But In An air-to-air or air-to-surface fight —-nothing in the world (with the possible exception of the F-22) compares. …But that’s not the way the DoD is looking to fight across the multi domain spectrum of war. One could say any fighter (or “shooter” as termed) is obsolete from the date of manufacture. The way we fight is more important than the sum of one fighter. Why just not hack the enemies OFP, or C2 systems? The F-35 is just one piece of the total package approach.

The DoD is moving away from a platform centric modality of warfare and is looking to bring capabilities that are platform agnostic to the joint networked fight. The F-35 is needed to fight in the high end A2AD space. An F-16V or or an F-15 EX is a dead duck In a non-permissive, electronic warfare, environment. That’swhat Gen. Brown is talking about in the article. It makes sense to burn up the F-16s (Honda accords) than burn your flight hours on your high end fighter F-35 (Ferrari).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Re: Turkish president defiant about turning to Russia for defense needs

12
I agree we need an F35, its just that the F35 isn't getting it done. The Air Force seems to recognize 20 years into the program that its just not happening, and they're making a new plan. And the replacement won't be F15's, it needs to be a 5th gen aircraft. Wish the F35's worked, I really do.
“I think there’s a right-wing conspiracy to promote the idea of a left-wing conspiracy”

Re: Turkish president defiant about turning to Russia for defense needs

13
No, Turkey, no! PLEASE DON'T BUY S400s!!

Collecting ELINT from an almost-certainly-compromised but still-high-end Russian SAM system should be fun.

I've long thought that the complaints about the F-35 fit nicely into a disinformation campaign meant to lull opponents into a sense of security. Anyone remember the Bradley IFV that was going to catch fire and explode the moment it was hit by a .22? I've no doubts it's a terribly compromised platform from an old-school aerodynamics perspective, but it isn't meant to dogfight. It's meant to fight the way the F-4 Phantom II was meant to fight - from beyond visual range.

Of course, the Phantom II was never allowed to fight the way it was designed to. No idea why the Pentagon thinks the F-35 won't be forced into dogfights by rules of engagement that leave it critically vulnerable. It's almost like nobody paid attention in Vietnam.

The Pentagon is always planning the replacement for something before it's even deployed. It's the nature of long procurement cycles in a military industrial complex. Look at aircraft development in WWII if you want a real laugh on that front. We never learn from history. Never.

Re: Turkish president defiant about turning to Russia for defense needs

15
INVICTVS138 wrote: Tue Sep 28, 2021 5:34 pm There are lots of program, maintenance and development issues with the the F-35. That much the DoD/JPO acknowledges. It’s a ginormous, sloppy, government program.

But In An air-to-air or air-to-surface fight —-nothing in the world (with the possible exception of the F-22) compares. …But that’s not the way the DoD is looking to fight across the multi domain spectrum of war. One could say any fighter (or “shooter” as termed) is obsolete from the date of manufacture. The way we fight is more important than the sum of one fighter. Why just not hack the enemies OFP, or C2 systems? The F-35 is just one piece of the total package approach.

The DoD is moving away from a platform centric modality of warfare and is looking to bring capabilities that are platform agnostic to the joint networked fight. The F-35 is needed to fight in the high end A2AD space. An F-16V or or an F-15 EX is a dead duck In a non-permissive, electronic warfare, environment. That’swhat Gen. Brown is talking about in the article. It makes sense to burn up the F-16s (Honda accords) than burn your flight hours on your high end fighter F-35 (Ferrari).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
What he said..The other thing to mention, in the SAM arena, the F-16V or F-15EX, regardless of the 'marketing' is vulnerable.

I was in the USN test squadron doing operational test on the F-18...along with the cracks in the rudders(same for F-16A/C/D)..we gave it a big thumb's down(1988/9) and now you see what it has become. Same for F-15A, Same for first gen F-4, F-8, F-11, P51, etc, etc, etc...

I have a better idea..cancel or at least modify the service that is still training and equipping for that Soviet style, tank heavy, march across the central plains of Europe to the English channel..that was the 'thing' until about 1992..Let the USAF have the space command part, 2 of the 3 legs of the nuke TRIAD, maybe trash haulers but their 'fighter force', that relies on lotsa concrete to launch and recover...that's so '20th century'...

BUT, back to Turkey..wanna hand the Russians and Chinese the 'tech' of the F-35? Sell the F-35 to Turkey...
Last edited by F4FEver on Thu Sep 30, 2021 8:56 am, edited 2 times in total.

Re: Turkish president defiant about turning to Russia for defense needs

16
BUT, back to Turkey..wanna hand the Russians and Chinese the 'tech' of the F-35? Sell the F-35 to Turkey...
They already have all the tech on the F-35, bet they had it before the first one rolled off the assembly line in Fort Worth.
Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored.-Huxley
"We can have democracy in this country, or we can have great wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can't have both." ~ Louis Brandeis,

Re: Turkish president defiant about turning to Russia for defense needs

17
Of course all products have bugs, twenty years is a bit long to iron out bugs. Perhaps we need a F-35, perhaps not this F-35 and then again we need healthcare for all, education, equality and opportunity for all our people. What have we gained, not enough. As for Turkey, they can buy what they want and whatever someone is willing to sell them. If you don’t want others to gain your tech, don’t sell it. As was pointed out, the tech is out there already. Other countries are not incapable of producing it, they choose not to because they have other priorities.
Image
Image

"Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated!" Loquacious of many. Texas Chapter Chief Cat Herder.

Re: Turkish president defiant about turning to Russia for defense needs

18
Turkey has some rather unique security concerns that don't mix well with NATO. Their issues with the Kurds put them at odds with the US & man of their neighbors. Their conflict with Greece puts them at odds with NATO. They realize they need to have some sort of cordial relationship with Russia, and I think Erdogan realizes that Putin is a man after his own heart.

The S400 is a better system than the US systems, and its cheaper. But it goes against the NATO alliance, and that's not cool. Keeping NATO together and strong is very important, and its WAY more important than a missile or aircraft deal. If Trump was smart he would have subsidized the sale of Patriots so the cost was more palatable. And then do whatever you have to do to save the F35 deal...'cause they're not exactly lining up to buy that aircraft.
“I think there’s a right-wing conspiracy to promote the idea of a left-wing conspiracy”

Re: Turkish president defiant about turning to Russia for defense needs

19
wings wrote: Tue Sep 28, 2021 5:53 pm No, Turkey, no! PLEASE DON'T BUY S400s!!

Collecting ELINT from an almost-certainly-compromised but still-high-end Russian SAM system should be fun.

I've long thought that the complaints about the F-35 fit nicely into a disinformation campaign meant to lull opponents into a sense of security. Anyone remember the Bradley IFV that was going to catch fire and explode the moment it was hit by a .22? I've no doubts it's a terribly compromised platform from an old-school aerodynamics perspective, but it isn't meant to dogfight. It's meant to fight the way the F-4 Phantom II was meant to fight - from beyond visual range.

Of course, the Phantom II was never allowed to fight the way it was designed to. No idea why the Pentagon thinks the F-35 won't be forced into dogfights by rules of engagement that leave it critically vulnerable. It's almost like nobody paid attention in Vietnam.

The Pentagon is always planning the replacement for something before it's even deployed. It's the nature of long procurement cycles in a military industrial complex. Look at aircraft development in WWII if you want a real laugh on that front. We never learn from history. Never.
?? I'd pick a F-35 vs any Chinese or Russian aircraft of today in a visual fight. PLUS..many Russian pilots get about half the fight time as their USAF counterparts..even less than USN pilots.
Estimates provided by the IISS show that Russian Air Force combat pilots average 60 to 100 flight hours per year
"A hamburger in any package is still a hamburger"

Re: Turkish president defiant about turning to Russia for defense needs

20
Preparing for war is good for business. What is better for business is to invest in the changeover from oil to renewables. There is more money to be made there. I think it best to mock countries still investing in weapons systems.

There is more profit to be had for more people in the changeover from oil to renewables than from selling weapons systems. Still, capitalism won't be the system to save the world.

https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2021/0 ... m-s27.html

CDFingers
Image
Image
.
Last fair deal in the country. Last fair deal in the town
Put your gold money where your love is baby
Before you let my deal go down

Re: Turkish president defiant about turning to Russia for defense needs

21
CDFingers wrote: Thu Sep 30, 2021 9:51 am Preparing for war is good for business. What is better for business is to invest in the changeover from oil to renewables. There is more money to be made there. I think it best to mock countries still investing in weapons systems.

There is more profit to be had for more people in the changeover from oil to renewables than from selling weapons systems. Still, capitalism won't be the system to save the world.

https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2021/0 ... m-s27.html

CDFingers
Absolutely. We should be ridiculed to the max.
Image
Image

"Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated!" Loquacious of many. Texas Chapter Chief Cat Herder.

Re: Turkish president defiant about turning to Russia for defense needs

22
F4FEver wrote: Thu Sep 30, 2021 9:04 am
wings wrote: Tue Sep 28, 2021 5:53 pm Of course, the Phantom II was never allowed to fight the way it was designed to. No idea why the Pentagon thinks the F-35 won't be forced into dogfights by rules of engagement that leave it critically vulnerable. It's almost like nobody paid attention in Vietnam.

The Pentagon is always planning the replacement for something before it's even deployed. It's the nature of long procurement cycles in a military industrial complex. Look at aircraft development in WWII if you want a real laugh on that front. We never learn from history. Never.
?? I'd pick a F-35 vs any Chinese or Russian aircraft of today in a visual fight. PLUS..many Russian pilots get about half the fight time as their USAF counterparts..even less than USN pilots.
Estimates provided by the IISS show that Russian Air Force combat pilots average 60 to 100 flight hours per year
"A hamburger in any package is still a hamburger"
Wait, I remember this line from Top Gun. Even at our worst we still shot down more MiGs than we lost in Vietnam. Against India, however? Last I saw, their pilots got a lot more time than our guys, and they've done surprisingly well against us in some of the joint exercises. Training matters.

Point was, the F-35 is not designed to fight the way we used to fight. But will doctrine allow it to be used the way that it was designed?
CDFingers wrote: Preparing for war is good for business. What is better for business is to invest in the changeover from oil to renewables. There is more money to be made there. I think it best to mock countries still investing in weapons systems.

There is more profit to be had for more people in the changeover from oil to renewables than from selling weapons systems. Still, capitalism won't be the system to save the world.
Well, there's your problem. Those people are not the stockholders for Lockheed-Boeing. The money to be made in renewables is not going to support a military industrial complex, and that's not going to make the complex happy.

Re: Turkish president defiant about turning to Russia for defense needs

23
wings wrote:
F4FEver wrote: Thu Sep 30, 2021 9:04 am
wings wrote: Tue Sep 28, 2021 5:53 pm Of course, the Phantom II was never allowed to fight the way it was designed to. No idea why the Pentagon thinks the F-35 won't be forced into dogfights by rules of engagement that leave it critically vulnerable. It's almost like nobody paid attention in Vietnam.

The Pentagon is always planning the replacement for something before it's even deployed. It's the nature of long procurement cycles in a military industrial complex. Look at aircraft development in WWII if you want a real laugh on that front. We never learn from history. Never.
?? I'd pick a F-35 vs any Chinese or Russian aircraft of today in a visual fight. PLUS..many Russian pilots get about half the fight time as their USAF counterparts..even less than USN pilots.
Estimates provided by the IISS show that Russian Air Force combat pilots average 60 to 100 flight hours per year
"A hamburger in any package is still a hamburger"
Wait, I remember this line from Top Gun. Even at our worst we still shot down more MiGs than we lost in Vietnam. Against India, however? Last I saw, their pilots got a lot more time than our guys, and they've done surprisingly well against us in some of the joint exercises. Training matters.

Point was, the F-35 is not designed to fight the way we used to fight. But will doctrine allow it to be used the way that it was designed?
CDFingers wrote: Preparing for war is good for business. What is better for business is to invest in the changeover from oil to renewables. There is more money to be made there. I think it best to mock countries still investing in weapons systems.

There is more profit to be had for more people in the changeover from oil to renewables than from selling weapons systems. Still, capitalism won't be the system to save the world.
Well, there's your problem. Those people are not the stockholders for Lockheed-Boeing. The money to be made in renewables is not going to support a military industrial complex, and that's not going to make the complex happy.
My brother works in renewables, the only manufacturer solar panels made in the US. They had to get a human rights embargo against China to stop them from flooding the market with slave labor produced solar panels sourced from Xinjiang. The point being, it’s US law that defense articles and services be 50% American sourced (with some national security exemptions.). Good luck getting that anywhere else. Big defense gets the lions share of the budget, and they manufacture right here in the good ‘ole USA with facilities in every Congress critter’s district or state. Renewables don’t have that type of political clout. The progenitors of the F-35 knew it was first and for most a political program & seeded it all across hundreds of congressional districts. That’s one of the reasons major DoD acquisitions are so sloppy. They are first and foremost “jobs programs” and secondarily, state of the weapons platforms …


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: sikacz and 5 guests

cron