logiccal:


If I remember correctly, Osama was killed in Pakistan,{correct me if I am wrong}.

The US toppled the Talibans because they supported the use of their territory for foreign attacks, the Afghan government was not under the US at any time but to this date Taliban exist and operational in Afghanistan. and none of what US accused the Taliban of has stopped. if that isn't defeat tell me what is?

Taliban itself is not a terrorist sect, the name Taliban has been in existence right after USSR/Russia pulled out of the region in 1990, US went there 2001 (11years later), so how does the Taliban government relate to the US invasion of Afghan?

Again the US did not go there to topple their government, they supported the plot because the then leader of Afghan was a terrorist sympathizer and he got what he deserved.

Osama was killed in Pakistan, but their earlier operation was in Afghan, hence the US went to Afghan, Osama fled to neighboring Pakistan after series of his comrade were killed in night raids.

He was followed their by US intelligence and killed 10years ago. So what part of history don’t you understand?

KaluwisxPRO:

Taliban itself is not a terrorist sect, the name Taliban has been in existence right after USSR/Russia pulled out of the region in 1990

I know what Taliban means. I speak Arabic {intermediate level}.

KaluwisxPRO:

so how does the Taliban government relate to the US invasion of Afghan?

Because many US officials on several occasions mentioned they went into Afghanistan to fight Taliban and to liberate the Afghan people from them.

KaluwisxPRO:

Again the US did not go there to topple their government, they supported the plot because the then leader of Afghan was a terrorist sympathizer and he got what he deserved.

I don't understand this statement. if you could please explain or rephrase, Thank you.

KaluwisxPRO:

Osama was killed in Pakistan, but their earlier operation was in Afghan, hence the US went to Afghan, Osama fled to neighboring Pakistan after series of his comrade were killed in night raids.

He was followed their by US intelligence and killed 10years ago. So what part of history don’t you understand?

Osama was in Pakisatan even before US' first night raid. it was in documentary by the Americans themselves. Osama fled to Pakistan because he had issues with some of the Taliban's leaders..

your history lesson isn't adding up

and What is CNN and BBC

chopnaira:
Another Putin bumbum licking topic from Russia Today RT

Anyway, Erdogan go bow las las. Turkey is USA's stooge.

aribisala0:
The BBC World service is what is relevant here because that is what people out of the UK see.
If we are comparing RT to BBC then we MUST BE TALKING ABOUT THE WORLD SERVICE
That is the only logical comparator
BBC Hausa,Yoruba ,igbo and Pidgin is funded by the British Foreign Office which funds the World Service

It is funded directly by the British Government

Please explain why the British government is giving the BBC money to fight Russian disinformation
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/bbc-gets-emergency-funding-to-fight-russian-disinformation
By definition that means the BBC has to agree with the government view that there is Russian disinformation which means it is not independent
The BBC is Partial , RT is partial they are both propaganda channels serving National Interest

The BBC has minimal reporting on Yemen because it is not in its National interest to do so

Wrong There is a clear difference between RT being the mouthpiece of the Russian government, and the BBC being centred around western values. Just because you hate western values and talk of democracy, doesn't make them a stooge like RT is.

And again, the World Service is a pawn in the bigger picture. If you had any clue of British politics, you would know that the current government hates the BBC and is trying to do away with their license fee (this is the BBC's revenue, followed by their commercial arm). How can the BBC be a government mouthpiece when the same government is trying to scrap their income model. Open your eyes, look at the wider picture.

logiccal:

I know what Taliban means. I speak Arabic {intermediate level}.


Because many US officials on several occasions mentioned they went into Afghanistan to fight Taliban and to liberate the Afghan people from them.


I don't understand this statement. if you could please explain or rephrase, Thank you.



Osama was in Pakisatan even before US' first night raid. it was in documentary by the Americans themselves. Osama fled to Pakistan because he had issues with some of the Taliban's leaders..

your history lesson isn't adding up

Which US official told you that Mr man??

Also here’s a short excerpt of his first return to Afghan to build on Al-Quada

Second image is John Kerry’s report to congress in 2009 where he mentioned their motives for going into Afghan and Pakistan territory. He also mentioned why they toppled the Taliban being their host. This is not me, that is John Kerry, former foreign secretary of the US.


Link to the full report.
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CPRT-111SPRT53709/html/CPRT-111SPRT53709.htm

NOETHNICITY:
A very simple question; do you know why Turkey bought the S400? Instead of you to provide answer to the question you started commenting as if ur country is a member of NATO!
But why is Turkish membership of NATO paining you so much? For ur information, Turkey is not an ordinary member of NATO, it's membership constitutes NATO's military strike force unlike many others that joined to enjoy the security umbrella of NATO. Turkey is one of the biggest military power of NATO. If Turkey leaves NATO the bloc becomes weaker.
I repeat my question again, do you know why Turkey bought the S400?

1- I am commenting as if my country is a member of NATO, you said.,.......

You are talking as if you know me and where I am from.

Some of you guys just assume that every body on Nairaland is a total Nigerian with a phone somewhere in Naija commenting on Nairaland.

Are there not Nigerians with Dual citizenship ?

So nobody outside Nigeria comments on Nairaland ?

For your information, I am currently not in Naija.

2 - Turkeys NATO membership is paining me so much, you said........

No comment on this one because it is ludicrous.

3 - If Turkey leaves, the bloc will become weaker, you said ...

Hmmmm...... Tell me what I don't know.

How many Nuclear Weapons do they have ?....... Zero.... Nil..... 0

So their exit is not a game changer.

Even France and the United kingdom with Nuclear Weapons can decide to make Yanger and Threaten to leave NATO but guess what, the alliance would still stand strong.

I will tell you how shortly.....

When Trump said he would pull the United States from NATO, did you see any European countries beg him not to do it ?

No nation is indispensable.... Including the United States.

If this 3 Nuclear Weapons States leave the NATO alliance for the Non Nuclear Weapons States, then the 27 States would resort to Nuclear Proliferation Just to better Protect themselves and nobody then would stop them.

Not even the P5 of the United Nations security council can stop them because they are vulnerable.

So it is in the best interest of all NATO members to stay put and settle whatever difference they have.

For your information, I have nothing against Turkey's membership of NATO.

But I strongly believe that if you are in an alliance, you should stick with the principles of the alliance. Not that you are in bed today with Russia and in bed tomorrow with NATO.

Turkey na Ashawo Nation that is sleeping with everyone ?

Which brings me to your initial question....

4- Why did Turkey Buy the S-400 ?

I will give you several reasons.......

A - - Turkey said purchasing the S-400 was a necessity as it was unable to procure air defence systems from any NATO ally on satisfactory terms.

In 2013 and 2017, the United States offered the Raytheon's Patriot missile system to Turkey but they turned down the offer because they were not given the systems sensitive missile technology.

The United States even repeatedly offered Defensive military equipments to help meet their Operational needs that was a better answer in terms of the NATO interoperability of the Turkish Defense Forces.

But Turkey turned down those offers too.

Probably because they believed Russian claims that the S-400 is superior to its French or US-made rivals.

But in 2017, Turkey stated it would buy Russia's S-400 missile defense system because the United States had dragged its feet in selling an American alternative.

B - - Price was another factor.

The S-400 was more affordable. The S-400 was at least twice as cheap as the US system Patriot-2 .

C - - A Purely political decision.

Turkey wanted to signal to the US and other allies about her Sovereign approach to defense. It was also an assertion by Turkey of its independence as a major regional power.

President Erdogan, already in power for more than 10 years, wanted to fashion Turkey as an independent and influential power in the region, no longer beholden to the United States and no longer in need of the American nuclear umbrella that protected it for decades.

D - - Turkey wanted to make parts for S-400.

There are next generation systems coming up and Turkey expects to gain access to some of Russian technology.

Several S-400 components are supposedly to be produced on Turkish soil. Nuts and Bolts and Batteries would be produced on Turkish territory according to the terms they got from Russia.

E - - Military Advantage.

The S-400 provides the Turkish armed forces with an advanced weapon capable of covering most of Syria and their old adversary Greece.

The purchase of the system was part of a policy to better protect itself from wars raging on it's borders and to make the country's defence industry more self-sufficient.

F - - 2016 Failed Coup Attempt.

President Erdogan had accused the United States of granting refuge to the alleged coup plotter in the 2016 failed Coup Attempt in Turkey. The following year he ordered for the S-400.

G - - America's Alliance with the YPG.

Erdogan was also infuriated by the US alliance with the Kurdish militia in Syria -- the YPG -- in the campaign to defeat ISIS.

Turkey regards the YPG as a terrorist group affiliated with the PKK, which has fought the Turkish state for more than three decades.

President Erdogan was not happy when the United States considered training a mainly Kurdish contingent to guard the Turkish border.

H - - The War in Syria.

President Vladimir Putin seduced Turkey into joining the "Astana" process with Russia and Iran on the future of Syria, essentially sidelining the United Nations and the US.

Erdogan needed Russian support to prevent an offensive by the Assad regime against the rebel-held province of Idlib, where Turkey has peacekeeping troops but also backs several rebel factions.

If Turkey wanted to have any sway on the future shape of Syria, it has to engage with Russia. Buying the S-400 helped to cement a necessary if not necessarily warm relationship.

I - - Turkey's Desire for Defense Independence.

Another reason for the purchase is that the Turkish government made it clear that they have long wanted to develop an indigenous defence technology.

Turkey does not want to be dependent on Western-originated weapons in the defence industry. Thus, it wanted to create diversity in defence.

Turkey invested billions of dollars to develop its defence industry and gain independence in domestic arms production. The partnership with Russia was expected to boost Turkey's defence industry and serve the country's goal of diversifying its arms suppliers.

That was why I said whatever it was above (or a combination of Factors) that prompted them to buy the S-400 should also prompt them to buy Russian fighter jets........ And Russia has some good jets.

But NATO is complaining of security risks which Turkey has tried to downplay.

But at the end of the day, it is my sincere belief that Turkey would fall in line with other NATO members so that Finland and Sweden can join NATO.

marvin906:




You, think nato will sacrifice turkey for Finland and Sweden,.
You have no idea the geographical location of turkey

Thank you very much.

But Trump threatened to pull the United States out of the NATO alliance.

Did you see any one going to beg him not to do it ?

With all the Financial, Military and Leadership capacity of the United States, nobody begged Trump not to abandon NATO.

Emmanuel Macron, Angela Merkel and other European Union leaders were even talking about forming their own military alliance then.

Because according to them, they don't find a reliable partner in the United States. But how things have changed with the emergence of Joe Biden as President.

My point is......

Nobody is indispensable in the NATO alliance.

Lewisjohnson:

Keep deceiving urself, u think American came 2 distablize Afghanistan lik Russia is doin in Ukraine,
De just came 2 put something right in Afghanistan, while de Russia came 2 declare whole War 4 Ukraine

Hahahaha...ameeica told you they came to put something right?
Hahahahahaha. U don't have the right to put anything right.
What America did in Afghanistan, Russia is doing less.

KaluwisxPRO:


Which US official told you that Mr man??

Also here’s a short excerpt of his first return to Afghan to build on Al-Quada

Second image is John Kerry’s report to congress in 2009 where he mentioned their motives for going into Afghan and Pakistan territory. He also mentioned why they toppled the Taliban being their host. This is not me, that is John Kerry, former foreign secretary of the US.


Link to the full report.
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CPRT-111SPRT53709/html/CPRT-111SPRT53709.htm

It's hard to convince someone that has already made up their mind.

It's clear you're among those that follows/support US no matter what.

It's clear you don't mind the killings of Afghans, because it's perpetrated by the US.

Watch this and you'll see the several US officials I mentioned.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mqxgP8WlxJQ

In Africa, we
are consistent with harmonious
considerations and presentations
of individual countries as they
affect others without attempting to
subjugate them notwithstanding what the African Union (AU)
Charter states. Not so, the
barbarians of the Northern
Hemisphere.
https://www.google.com/search?q=https%3A%2F%2F+www.aljazeera.com%2F+news%2F2022%2F5%2F+21%2Ferdogan-+speaks-to-stoltenberg-+over-+finland-sweden-nato-bid&client=ms-opera-mini&channel=new

logiccal:

It's hard to convince someone that has already made up their mind.

It's clear you're among those that follows/support US no matter what.

It's clear you don't mind the killings of Afghans, because it's perpetrated by the US.

Watch this and you'll see the several US officials I mentioned.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mqxgP8WlxJQ

Tell your terrorist sympathizers to stop giving their lands to terrorists as training fields.

Your government has also given the North to Bandits, Boko Haram and ISIS. Even your president pleaded with the US to move US/Africa military base in Germany to Africa to help him flush out his brothers from the Sahel desert.

Is that also propaganda or you just love Terrorists

You islams cannot even hide your hypocrisy anymore