Joint Defense Agreement: Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan, news & updates

use of tactical nuke is the scariest one. Look like trump is serious on that if he did not get what he wants.
America can use the nukes, there are crazy enough people in US who will disregard lives of innocent people just so they can claim victory, but this will open a very scary pandora box for Russia to use tactical nuke using same logic the Americans will use, or North Korea against the South, and lets not undermine the indo-Pak clashes, its literally a region sitting on TNT while both countries launching fireworks at each other from time to time.
 
A fort cant be built on shaky foundations, the kissing u have mentioned has also been shown by the pakistani side, trying to put our hands in middle east while our security situation gets worse daily is a fool's hope. China first went under the process of building its foundations and doing nothing on the global stage for decades before emerging as a world power, we are trying to do the latter without building a strong foundation and due to this its very difficult this treaty will lead to something positive if not negative.
One shoe doesn't fit all ... apple and orange
 
Amazing. Both China and the US have officially welcomed the Defence Pact.
These are big and powerful nations coming together.. I believe with Egypt in already it would had been too scary for some..So the latter has postponed its entry till things calm down..
 
That really is an excellent perspective on a conflict that many here, myself included, received only snippets of news and editorial opinion on. Pretty much all of this makes perfect sense.

It really is true, now that you mention it, that the Russian fighter jet downing was portrayed as an act of Turkish aggression.

I could break down hundreds of incidents where Turkiye was being screwed by the USA and Europe over the conflict.

The last rebel holdout was idlib, we were on the eve of an iranian, assadist and russian attempt to finish off the rebels and they began their onslaught on idlib. The russians even bombed Turkish troops in idlib killing at least 30.

For Erdogan and Turkiye, if idlib fell they would have lost everything but more importantly for erdogan it would have led to around another 5 million refugees entering Turkiye.

The atmosphere in Turkiye over the refugees had already reached breaking point. We had more refugees then the entire EU combined. If idlib fell and those people fled to Turkiye it probably would have been the end of Erdogans political career. You see many people in Turkiye were against the war in Syria, had he lost it and Turkiye got rewarded with a total of about 10 million syrian refugees, his career was over.

While this was happening Turkiye was being threatened by the USA not to do anything, but it was the EU that threatened economic sanctions against Turkiye if erdogan does anything to stop the assault. Basically another threat warning Turkiye not to enter. The situation was so bad for erdogan that he actually was moving/forcing refugees towards the Turkish EU border and forcing them to cross. Not because he wanted to but because the situation became so dire for his political career and geopolitically what would come in syria could be exceptional dangerous to Turkiye. He was basically telling the eurokunts if your going to threaten me, im not holding onto 10 million refugees, they will become your problem.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-51678462

"Groups of refugees and migrants are heading towards the EU after Turkey said it would not abide by a deal to stop them reaching Europe.

Turkey's communications chief said the country had not received enough support in hosting millions of Syrian refugees.

Its decision followed a deadly attack on Turkish troops by Syrian government forces in northern Syria.

The incident sparked fears of a major escalation involving Turkey and Syria's military ally, Russia."

This was his only way to get europeans/nato allies not to f'k Turkiye for what was about to come.

Anyway Turkiye intervened and saved the last rebel stronghold, not only did Turkiye get no support from the USA, Europe, or NATO they effectively operated against Turkiye.

So the rebels were never meant to survive let alone win, the US and EU were doing everything to stop the one nation from taking action which could help them win and indeed in the long run did help them win.

But the nuance of what was going on in that war especially concerning Turkiye was never ever explained in any serious detail by the western media. It only worked to portray Turkiye as an enemy,

Even when Isis appeared on the scene, effectively crippling and delegitimising the syrian opposition, the media in the west and russian targeted Turkiye and even claimed Iran and Assad are allies of the west in the fight against Isis. Turkiye was painted as the creator and sole backer of isis, despite suffering the 3rd most terrorists attacks from isis after iraq and syria.

The syrian revolution was never meant to succeed and the only nation who could have seen it succeed Turkiye, was the one nation constantly undermined by all actors in the region. From west to east.
 
America can use the nukes, there are crazy enough people in US who will disregard lives of innocent people just so they can claim victory, but this will open a very scary pandora box for Russia to use tactical nuke using same logic the Americans will use, or North Korea against the South, and lets not undermine the indo-Pak clashes, its literally a region sitting on TNT while both countries launching fireworks at each other from time to time.
During Donald Trump's first term, his administration's 2018 Nuclear Posture Review called for developing a low-yield version of an existing submarine-launched ballistic-missile warhead, the W76-2. The first W76-2 warheads were subsequently produced and deployed in 2019–20.

These are low-yield nuclear warheads—smaller explosive yield than many strategic nuclear weapons, but still enormously destructive.

The stated US rationale was to provide a more flexible deterrent option, particularly against the possibility of an adversary using a limited or low-yield nuclear weapon. The Pentagon explicitly described the objective as maintaining credible deterrence and preventing an adversary from believing it could gain an advantage through limited nuclear escalation.

02/02/2018: News Briefing on the 2018 Nuclear Posture Review: US Department of War
 
I could break down hundreds of incidents where Turkiye was being screwed by the USA and Europe over the conflict.

The last rebel holdout was idlib, we were on the eve of an iranian, assadist and russian attempt to finish off the rebels and they began their onslaught on idlib. The russians even bombed Turkish troops in idlib killing at least 30.

For Erdogan and Turkiye, if idlib fell they would have lost everything but more importantly for erdogan it would have led to around another 5 million refugees entering Turkiye.

The atmosphere in Turkiye over the refugees had already reached breaking point. We had more refugees then the entire EU combined. If idlib fell and those people fled to Turkiye it probably would have been the end of Erdogans political career. You see many people in Turkiye were against the war in Syria, had he lost it and Turkiye got rewarded with a total of about 10 million syrian refugees, his career was over.

While this was happening Turkiye was being threatened by the USA not to do anything, but it was the EU that threatened economic sanctions against Turkiye if erdogan does anything to stop the assault. Basically another threat warning Turkiye not to enter. The situation was so bad for erdogan that he actually was moving/forcing refugees towards the Turkish EU border and forcing them to cross. Not because he wanted to but because the situation became so dire for his political career and geopolitically what would come in syria could be exceptional dangerous to Turkiye. He was basically telling the eurokunts if your going to threaten me, im not holding onto 10 million refugees, they will become your problem.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-51678462

"Groups of refugees and migrants are heading towards the EU after Turkey said it would not abide by a deal to stop them reaching Europe.

Turkey's communications chief said the country had not received enough support in hosting millions of Syrian refugees.

Its decision followed a deadly attack on Turkish troops by Syrian government forces in northern Syria.

The incident sparked fears of a major escalation involving Turkey and Syria's military ally, Russia."

This was his only way to get europeans/nato allies not to f'k Turkiye for what was about to come.

Anyway Turkiye intervened and saved the last rebel stronghold, not only did Turkiye get no support from the USA, Europe, or NATO they effectively operated against Turkiye.

So the rebels were never meant to survive let alone win, the US and EU were doing everything to stop the one nation from taking action which could help them win and indeed in the long run did help them win.

But the nuance of what was going on in that war especially concerning Turkiye was never ever explained in any serious detail by the western media. It only worked to portray Turkiye as an enemy,

Even when Isis appeared on the scene, effectively crippling and delegitimising the syrian opposition, the media in the west and russian targeted Turkiye and even claimed Iran and Assad are allies of the west in the fight against Isis. Turkiye was painted as the creator and sole backer of isis, despite suffering the 3rd most terrorists attacks from isis after iraq and syria.

The syrian revolution was never meant to succeed and the only nation who could have seen it succeed Turkiye, was the one nation constantly undermined by all actors in the region. From west to east.
Remarkable. Yes, we all remember the Turkish "refugee push" episode.

As you have gathered no doubt, the wonderfully objective and honest BBC did not explain any of this background context. Of course they wouldn't.

This is why such fora as this one are of massive importance, correcting the colonialist narratives that are pushed onto us by mainstream media.
 
It's VERY doubtful that Pakistan, Iran and Saudi Arabia would go to war against Iran. All 3 will get NOTHING out of it. It doesn't make sense. I believe that the pact is actually aimed indirectly at Israel. The pact allows all 3 nations through different means to aquire the ability to build their own military and defence industries so they can INDEPENDENTLY produce deadly advanced weapons systems to deter aggression from genocidal racist ccolonialists. They can do ALL that without actually having to fight for each other.
True but I would like to add, Israel is becoming strong due to Saudia Qatar Iran Uae Turkey rivalry in the middleeast, which leads to a vacuum and as witnessed with what happened in Yemen and Somalia, some nations are thinking we need to work together on joint projects rather than individual ones. We will see united platform of Saudia Qatar Turkey in Yemen, Somalia, Libya, Sudan and elsewhere, it worked in Syria to topple Bashar so why not extend it to elsewhere. Like you mentioned this will indirectly challenge Israel but be pro Usa, Turkey, GCC and Europe as seen in Syria, Jolani is hugging the western leadership. What these nations want is to stop Israeli expansion or land expansion, but not to isolate Israel, they will want close economic and trade relations with the zionist entity.
 
These are big and powerful nations coming together.. I believe with Egypt in already it would had been too scary for some..So the latter has postponed its entry till things calm down..
I'd say that first the 3 countries should make every effort to build credible deterrence and demonstrate the ability to fight as ONE when needed bcuz at the moment they are 3 separate armies, air forces, and navies of their respective countries.

...if they had to fight right now..some enemy together...there will be a lot of challenges.
...once they can demonstrate(after a lot of work) that they can fight as one(NATO style or better)...just these 3 alone will be a sort of world power in their own right. Just with that synced up military..which will also translate to geopolitical influence...they will wield enough soft power to prevent many bad situations before they even escalate to a war.

Only then they should invite others to join.
 
Have you ever heard of Taliban, Al Nusra, Isis, Al Qaeda etc , their ideology and who their backers have been ? Pot calling kettle black.
You missed out on:
Abdullah Azzam Brigades Lebanon, Abu Sayyaf Philippines, Aden-Abyan Islamic Army, Jaish-e-Mohammed, Al-Itihaad al-Islamiya, Al-Mourabitoun (militant group), Ansar al-Sharia in Libya, Ansar al-Sharia (Tunisia), Ansar al-Islam in Kurdistan, Ansar Dine Mali, Ansaru Nigeria, Armed Islamic Group of Algeria, Osbat al-Ansar Lebanon, Boko Haram Nigeria, Caucasus Emirate, Tariq Gidar Group, East Indonesia Mujahideen, Movement for Oneness and Jihad in West Africa, Moroccan Islamic Combatant Group, Libyan Islamic Fighting Group, Katibat al-Tawhid wal-Jihad Syria, Islamic State – Tunisia Province, Jamaah Ansharut Tauhid Indonesia, Ansar Khalifa Philippines, Ansarul Islam Mali Burkino Faso, Harakat al-Shabaab Somalia and the list continues.

But no experts in the world will share with you who funds, trains, protects the extremist, fundamentalists and terrorists, how does their ideology develop, what schools or maddaris they attend, who do they listen to, whos fatwas they follow, what and whos literature brainwashes them.
 
During Donald Trump's first term, his administration's 2018 Nuclear Posture Review called for developing a low-yield version of an existing submarine-launched ballistic-missile warhead, the W76-2. The first W76-2 warheads were subsequently produced and deployed in 2019–20.

These are low-yield nuclear warheads—smaller explosive yield than many strategic nuclear weapons, but still enormously destructive.

The stated US rationale was to provide a more flexible deterrent option, particularly against the possibility of an adversary using a limited or low-yield nuclear weapon. The Pentagon explicitly described the objective as maintaining credible deterrence and preventing an adversary from believing it could gain an advantage through limited nuclear escalation.

02/02/2018: News Briefing on the 2018 Nuclear Posture Review: US Department of War

The only glitch in the matrix is however US will face immediate existential threat... not necessarily from Iran... but every adversary will assume the worst. Russia, that has already changed its nuclear doctrine will implement it's first use perhaps for the first time. North Korea that now has both nukes and delivery systems will use it's first ballistic salvo with nuclear tipped missiles fearing existential crisis... who's response will cascade a chain reaction that will prompt China to do what it has been preparing for for past two decades... where they have built underground silos for just this scenario.
That still leaves Iran who may or may not have a nuke right now... at this point everything is speculation at best and best case possibility. US will therefore usher in the very end of the world that previous postures aimed to forestall. Orange clown is bring a sore loser and just like a teenage delinquent putting a tantrum that any adult in the room should slap out of him!
 
I wonder if Egypt can form an alliance of its own. We and Algeria share a lot of commons , Spain also can join us , I guess we 3 can strangle the moroccan zionist king and co-opearate in the energy field.
I can see Egypt, Jordan, UAE, Algeria defence pact. Just make sure UAE divorces itself from Israel.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Pakistan Defence Latest

Country Watch Latest

Back
Top