Armenia-Azerbaijan Conflict: The Great Betrayal

[Heloin]

Either Armenia or Azerbaijan can ask the Russians to leave after five years.

Photo of those in Artsakh leaving - https://s.hdnux.com/photos/01/15/14/13/ ... 20x920.jpg

Like I said before, chances are the majority if not all of those people will not be going back. The UN, yes now they got involved, job will be to help the refugees, Armenian and Azeri, get back home. The Artsakh refugees who stay in Armenia will most likely not benefit from this because most if not all will not be going back.

Found out nothing was agreed to when it comes to Nagorno Karabakh. Supposely, that will be decided later. Still think after the Russians are asked to leave by Azerbaijan in five years it will be annexed.

If you seriously think Russia will be leaving the region peacefully in five years time then I don't know what to say.

[Trollzyn the Infinite]

Either Armenia or Azerbaijan can ask the Russians to leave after five years.

Photo of those in Artsakh leaving - https://s.hdnux.com/photos/01/15/14/13/ ... 20x920.jpg

Like I said before, chances are the majority if not all of those people will not be going back. The UN, yes now they got involved, job will be to help the refugees, Armenian and Azeri, get back home. The Artsakh refugees who stay in Armenia will most likely not benefit from this because most if not all will not be going back.

Found out nothing was agreed to when it comes to Nagorno Karabakh. Supposely, that will be decided later. Still think after the Russians are asked to leave by Azerbaijan in five years it will be annexed.

If you seriously think Russia will be leaving the region peacefully in five years time then I don't know what to say.

^This.

The Russians leave when they want to leave, and no sooner.

[Kargintina the Third]

Protesters in Yerevan have seized the Armenian parliament in protest of the peace deal and Armenian soldiers posted a video online saying they would not stop fighting.

Source?

https://tass.com/world/1221727

[Vapormancer]

The Aims of the Turkish Enemies are once again buried in history, long live a fully independent and just Azerbaijan. According to reports, the occupation forces will be withdrawn from Azerbaijani territory until December 1, 2020. Pashinyan fled to Sochi

(Image)

I don't have a high opinion of anyone who gloats over the victory of ethnic cleansing imperialists. Your complete disregard for the lives of innocent Armenians who simply wanted to live on their own ancestral land in peace just to satisfy your disgusting pan-Turkic ego is morally repugnant. Aliyev is a villain and a butcher. You're backing racist, bloodthirsty warmongers.

Completely sickening.

Why not? They are very useful in region. Being the good guy nets you nothing. They are the Southern flank of NATO. Perhaps you might enjoy being a righteous martyr but some of us prefer to be a rich Attila.

[Heloin]

I don't have a high opinion of anyone who gloats over the victory of ethnic cleansing imperialists. Your complete disregard for the lives of innocent Armenians who simply wanted to live on their own ancestral land in peace just to satisfy your disgusting pan-Turkic ego is morally repugnant. Aliyev is a villain and a butcher. You're backing racist, bloodthirsty warmongers.

Completely sickening.

Why not? They are very useful in region. Being the good guy nets you nothing. They are the Southern flank of NATO. Perhaps you might enjoy being a righteous martyr but some of us prefer to be a rich Attila.

We should ignore and encourage ethnic cleansing because it makes us more money is a stellar argument and I can see why you don't notice any issue in it.

[Vapormancer]

Why not? They are very useful in region. Being the good guy nets you nothing. They are the Southern flank of NATO. Perhaps you might enjoy being a righteous martyr but some of us prefer to be a rich Attila.

We should ignore and encourage ethnic cleansing because it makes us more money is a stellar argument and I can see why you don't notice any issue in it.

No, because it keeps NATO from being overrun. For all your complaints about an irrelevant country in the middle of nowhere getting attacked by a richer more powerful neighbor, it does not remove the strategic calculus and usefulness Turkey serves. Would you rather we have Eastern Europe at risk? Then you'd really have something to complain about with innocents introuble. A minor skirmish between irrelevant countries in the middle of nowhere is not the concern of the United States. Two sides fought it out, one lost and should have fought harder, committing the bulk of its troops to a fictional Republic instead of playing coy. C'est le guerre.

[New Rogernomics]

Either Armenia or Azerbaijan can ask the Russians to leave after five years.

Photo of those in Artsakh leaving - https://s.hdnux.com/photos/01/15/14/13/ ... 20x920.jpg

Like I said before, chances are the majority if not all of those people will not be going back. The UN, yes now they got involved, job will be to help the refugees, Armenian and Azeri, get back home. The Artsakh refugees who stay in Armenia will most likely not benefit from this because most if not all will not be going back.

Found out nothing was agreed to when it comes to Nagorno Karabakh. Supposely, that will be decided later. Still think after the Russians are asked to leave by Azerbaijan in five years it will be annexed.

The peace deal will leave what remains pretty much indefensible, as the territory will be surrounded easily on all sides and only connected by a small road corridor. Armenians will be encouraged to leave through threats of violence and intimidation and never be allowed to return to their homes, and the UN will be an incompetent guarantee of security for the civilian population, as has been proven in conflict after conflict. For those who remain it will mean living under a dictatorship, so most will just flee rather than live under that. This is the end of Nagorno Karabakh, and I have to feel for the Armenians who have lost everything.

[Heloin]

We should ignore and encourage ethnic cleansing because it makes us more money is a stellar argument and I can see why you don't notice any issue in it.

No, because it keeps NATO from being overrun. For all your complaints about an irrelevant country in the middle of nowhere getting attacked by a richer more powerful neighbor, it does not remove the strategic calculus and usefulness Turkey serves. Would you rather we have Eastern Europe at risk? Then you'd really have something to complain about with innocents introuble. A minor skirmish between irrelevant countries in the middle of nowhere is not the concern of the United States. Two sides fought it out, one lost and should have fought harder, committing the bulk of its troops to a fictional Republic instead of playing coy. C'est le guerre.

Well thanks for telling me by your casual dismissal of death that your not someone worth engaging with I guess.

[Salus Maior]

We should ignore and encourage ethnic cleansing because it makes us more money is a stellar argument and I can see why you don't notice any issue in it.

No, because it keeps NATO from being overrun. For all your complaints about an irrelevant country in the middle of nowhere getting attacked by a richer more powerful neighbor, it does not remove the strategic calculus and usefulness Turkey serves. Would you rather we have Eastern Europe at risk? Then you'd really have something to complain about with innocents introuble. A minor skirmish between irrelevant countries in the middle of nowhere is not the concern of the United States. Two sides fought it out, one lost and should have fought harder, committing the bulk of its troops to a fictional Republic instead of playing coy. C'est le guerre.

Overrun by fucking what?

What’s going to overrun Western Europe and the US?

[Vapormancer]

No, because it keeps NATO from being overrun. For all your complaints about an irrelevant country in the middle of nowhere getting attacked by a richer more powerful neighbor, it does not remove the strategic calculus and usefulness Turkey serves. Would you rather we have Eastern Europe at risk? Then you'd really have something to complain about with innocents introuble. A minor skirmish between irrelevant countries in the middle of nowhere is not the concern of the United States. Two sides fought it out, one lost and should have fought harder, committing the bulk of its troops to a fictional Republic instead of playing coy. C'est le guerre.

Overrun by fucking what?

What’s going to overrun Western Europe and the US?

Ivan and his Panzers. This would not be a necessity were the other allies in NATO not so worthless, pathetic and useless but I digress. One can no more magic working tanks out of thin air than one can force the Germans or the French not to be suicidal and insane in regards to defense matters. The choices of our "enlightened" allies have practical consequences which force hard nosed compromises. It is part of the reason why I'd not lose any sleep over us cutting the lot of dead weight all together.

No, because it keeps NATO from being overrun. For all your complaints about an irrelevant country in the middle of nowhere getting attacked by a richer more powerful neighbor, it does not remove the strategic calculus and usefulness Turkey serves. Would you rather we have Eastern Europe at risk? Then you'd really have something to complain about with innocents introuble. A minor skirmish between irrelevant countries in the middle of nowhere is not the concern of the United States. Two sides fought it out, one lost and should have fought harder, committing the bulk of its troops to a fictional Republic instead of playing coy. C'est le guerre.

Well thanks for telling me by your casual dismissal of death that your not someone worth engaging with I guess.

Bonne Chance!

[Novus America]

We should ignore and encourage ethnic cleansing because it makes us more money is a stellar argument and I can see why you don't notice any issue in it.

No, because it keeps NATO from being overrun. For all your complaints about an irrelevant country in the middle of nowhere getting attacked by a richer more powerful neighbor, it does not remove the strategic calculus and usefulness Turkey serves. Would you rather we have Eastern Europe at risk? Then you'd really have something to complain about with innocents introuble. A minor skirmish between irrelevant countries in the middle of nowhere is not the concern of the United States. Two sides fought it out, one lost and should have fought harder, committing the bulk of its troops to a fictional Republic instead of playing coy. C'est le guerre.

Actually Turkey hardly helps NATO anymore, in fact it undermines it. Turkey now more often sides with Russia.
NATO does not trust Turkey anymore, and Turkey is threatening Greece, also a NATO member.
Turkey is more an enemy than ally to NATO.

Sure NATO has bigger concerns than this, but Turkey is a thorn in NATO’s side.

[Shofercia]

So let me get this straight: Aliyev and Erdogan started an atrocious war, and were rewarded for it. All all five Great UNSC Powers just stood by and watched. Yes, I realize I'm also including Russia here, but this was absolutely sickening. Might won over Right today, and that was wrong. The problem is that now you've encouraged wars of aggression, as long as they're not against a specific region protected by any Great Power. Open season in Africa - go for it. Survivor Somalia, why not?

[New Rogernomics]

No, because it keeps NATO from being overrun. For all your complaints about an irrelevant country in the middle of nowhere getting attacked by a richer more powerful neighbor, it does not remove the strategic calculus and usefulness Turkey serves. Would you rather we have Eastern Europe at risk? Then you'd really have something to complain about with innocents introuble. A minor skirmish between irrelevant countries in the middle of nowhere is not the concern of the United States. Two sides fought it out, one lost and should have fought harder, committing the bulk of its troops to a fictional Republic instead of playing coy. C'est le guerre.

Well thanks for telling me by your casual dismissal of death that your not someone worth engaging with I guess.

It is entertaining to hear the usual 'we need Turkey' line, as Turkey plans to invade two EU members Greece and Cyprus next, and Merkel's response is to keep signing trade deals with Erdogan, while ignoring human rights abuses and the collapse of democracy in Turkey. If Erdogan gets to revive the Ottoman Empire, maybe they can take Vienna this time.

[Vapormancer]

No, because it keeps NATO from being overrun. For all your complaints about an irrelevant country in the middle of nowhere getting attacked by a richer more powerful neighbor, it does not remove the strategic calculus and usefulness Turkey serves. Would you rather we have Eastern Europe at risk? Then you'd really have something to complain about with innocents introuble. A minor skirmish between irrelevant countries in the middle of nowhere is not the concern of the United States. Two sides fought it out, one lost and should have fought harder, committing the bulk of its troops to a fictional Republic instead of playing coy. C'est le guerre.

Actually Turkey hardly helps NATO anymore, in fact it undermines it. Turkey now more often sides with Russia.
NATO does not trust Turkey anymore, and Turkey is threatening Greece, also a NATO member.
Turkey is more an enemy than ally to NATO.

Sure NATO has bigger concerns than this, but Turkey is a thorn in NATO’s side.

NATO is irrelevant with the million men in the Turkish armed forces. Who will replace its 1,000 tanks, its 1,000 planes or its well trained general staff? Greece is an expendable country in this situation. The Turks quite rationally would like energy security. The Turks fought the Ivans in Syria for a slice of clay and just lined up against them in Armenia. Furthermore, NATO is a functionally brain dead and incapable organization without them. Take the Turks away and you see the reality of the strategic bankruptcy that NATO faces regarding the Russians or really any foe. They have with their drones, bailed out the insane and myopic US strategic in Libya, saving Italy's bacon from the Russo-French backed Haftar after we stabbed him (Haftar) in the back thinking Libya capable of "democracy". When are you going to deal with French anti-NATO actions? It smacks of hypocrisy.

Edit for clarity.

[Vapormancer]

So let me get this straight: Aliyev and Erdogan started an atrocious war, and were rewarded for it. All all five Great UNSC Powers just stood by and watched. Yes, I realize I'm also including Russia here, but this was absolutely sickening. Might won over Right today, and that was wrong. The problem is that now you've encouraged wars of aggression, as long as they're not against a specific region protected by any Great Power. Open season in Africa - go for it. Survivor Somalia, why not?

This is the way of the world. MAM-L Missile trumps the so called "international law". Israel backed Azerbaijan to hilt. It is really no surprise the outcome.

[Salus Maior]

Ivan and his Panzers. This would not be a necessity were the other allies in NATO not so worthless, pathetic and useless but I digress. One can no more magic working tanks out of thin air than one can force the Germans or the French not to be suicidal and insane in regards to defense matters. The choices of our "enlightened" allies have practical consequences which force hard nosed compromises. It is part of the reason why I'd not lose any sleep over us cutting the lot of dead weight all together.!

Oh who fucking cares about Russia. They’re not the Soviet Union anymore, and they’re not a serious threat to America.

You’re foaming at the mouth over a complete non-threat and have t taken your brain out of the Cold War. World’s changed, get with the times.

[Shofercia]

Well thanks for telling me by your casual dismissal of death that your not someone worth engaging with I guess.

It is entertaining to hear the usual 'we need Turkey' line, as Turkey plans to invade two EU members Greece and Cyprus next, and Merkel's response is to keep signing trade deals with Erdogan, while ignoring human rights abuses and the collapse of democracy in Turkey. If Erdogan gets to revive the Ottoman Empire, maybe they can take Vienna this time.

That's also coming from the poster who thinks that Russia's attack on Germany and France is going to occur. Why not Spain? Liberate Catalonia! The only country that Russia intervened in, outside of the USSR, was Syria, and that's to keep the current regime in power. With the exception of the two World Wars, Russia didn't invade Germany, and the last time Russia invaded France was in response to Napoleon's Invasion of Russia in 1812. But hey, who needs History when you can bullshit?

[Shofercia]

So let me get this straight: Aliyev and Erdogan started an atrocious war, and were rewarded for it. All all five Great UNSC Powers just stood by and watched. Yes, I realize I'm also including Russia here, but this was absolutely sickening. Might won over Right today, and that was wrong. The problem is that now you've encouraged wars of aggression, as long as they're not against a specific region protected by any Great Power. Open season in Africa - go for it. Survivor Somalia, why not?

This is the way of the world. MAM-L Missile trumps the so called "international law". Israel backed Azerbaijan to hilt. It is really no surprise the outcome.

Israel supplied drones on the open market. Not sure how that qualifies as backing to a hilt, but whatever.

[Vapormancer]

Ivan and his Panzers. This would not be a necessity were the other allies in NATO not so worthless, pathetic and useless but I digress. One can no more magic working tanks out of thin air than one can force the Germans or the French not to be suicidal and insane in regards to defense matters. The choices of our "enlightened" allies have practical consequences which force hard nosed compromises. It is part of the reason why I'd not lose any sleep over us cutting the lot of dead weight all together.!

Oh who fucking cares about Russia. They’re not the Soviet Union anymore, and they’re not a serious threat to America.

You’re foaming at the mouth over a complete non-threat and have t taken your brain out of the Cold War. World’s changed, get with the times.

Then we should cut our alliance and obligations if that is the case. If we are apart of an organization for X goal and we are required to have a strategic interest in containing a particular foe, then we need to take our duties extremely seriously. Coalition warfare is the most difficult of all forms of warfare, we used to be masters but now we can't even move tanks to a port. There can be no strategic ambiguity, this is how conflicts start. If they are not a threat, then we have no need for NATO or its organizational structure, we should withdraw. When we do so, then I would agree that it would be good if a European power brought Turkey to heel but so long as our requirements are as they are, we have a duty to fight to win and that means we make do with unpleasant bedfellows.

[Novus America]

Actually Turkey hardly helps NATO anymore, in fact it undermines it. Turkey now more often sides with Russia.
NATO does not trust Turkey anymore, and Turkey is threatening Greece, also a NATO member.
Turkey is more an enemy than ally to NATO.

Sure NATO has bigger concerns than this, but Turkey is a thorn in NATO’s side.

NATO is irrelevant with the million men in the Turkish armed forces. Who will replace its 1,000 tanks, its 1,000 planes or its well trained general staff? Greece is an expendable country in this situation. The Turks quite rationally would like energy security. The Turks fought the Ivans in Syria for a slice of clay and just lined up against them in Armenia. Furthermore, NATO is a functionally brain dead and incapable organization without them. Take the Turks away and you see the reality of the strategic bankruptcy that NATO faces regarding the Russians or really any foe. They have with their drones, bailed out the insane and myopic US strategic in Libya, saving Italy's bacon from the Russo-French backed Haftar after we stabbed him in the back. When are you going to deal with French anti-NATO actions? It smacks of hypocrisy.

What good are those Turkish tanks when their guns will not be used for you, and more likely against you? If Russia attacked the Baltics Turkey would not fight to help NATO. Probably Turkey would more likely side with Russia against NATO and attack Greece. Turkey has sparred some with Russia on Syria but they have now divided it between them, Russia dominates Syria, and Turkey and Russia are largely in accord there. They clash some on the details, but the big picture they both have de facto agreed partitioning it.

Turkish strategy in Libya has not helped either, as the Tripoli government is no friend of NATO. Actually Haftar would be better.

France despite their past has been a better NATO ally than Turkey in the past decade or so. Check your calendar, your assessment is based on assumptions that existed in the past, but are long gone.

Although this is going a bit off topic, but siding with Turkey because they are our ally, makes no sense as they are now an ally in name only and really more an adversary.

[Vapormancer]

This is the way of the world. MAM-L Missile trumps the so called "international law". Israel backed Azerbaijan to hilt. It is really no surprise the outcome.

Israel supplied drones on the open market. Not sure how that qualifies as backing to a hilt, but whatever.

The advisors they sent? The resupplies of ammunition? The test data for their suicide drones? Ah, just the open market! You are as impressive as ever Shof :^)

[Novus America]

Oh who fucking cares about Russia. They’re not the Soviet Union anymore, and they’re not a serious threat to America.

You’re foaming at the mouth over a complete non-threat and have t taken your brain out of the Cold War. World’s changed, get with the times.

Then we should cut our alliance and obligations if that is the case. If we are apart of an organization for X goal and we are required to have a strategic interest in containing a particular foe, then we need to take our duties extremely seriously. Coalition warfare is the most difficult of all forms of warfare, we used to be masters but now we can't even move tanks to a port. There can be no strategic ambiguity, this is how conflicts start. If they are not a threat, then we have no need for NATO or its organizational structure, we should withdraw. When we do so, then I would agree that it would be good if a European power brought Turkey to heel but so long as our requirements are as they are, we have a duty to fight to win and that means we make do with unpleasant bedfellows.

Again Turkey is more often WITH Russia than against it! Turkey is buying Russian weapons while threatening NATO member Greece! The idea that Turkey is now a reliable ally against Russia is simply false. They were are useful ally against the Soviets but the Soviet Union is dead, and more importantly Turkey is no longer ruled by secular pro western forces, but by an anti western Islamist. Who often sides WITH Russia.

[Vapormancer]

NATO is irrelevant with the million men in the Turkish armed forces. Who will replace its 1,000 tanks, its 1,000 planes or its well trained general staff? Greece is an expendable country in this situation. The Turks quite rationally would like energy security. The Turks fought the Ivans in Syria for a slice of clay and just lined up against them in Armenia. Furthermore, NATO is a functionally brain dead and incapable organization without them. Take the Turks away and you see the reality of the strategic bankruptcy that NATO faces regarding the Russians or really any foe. They have with their drones, bailed out the insane and myopic US strategic in Libya, saving Italy's bacon from the Russo-French backed Haftar after we stabbed him in the back. When are you going to deal with French anti-NATO actions? It smacks of hypocrisy.

What good are those Turkish tanks when their guns will not be used for you, and more likely against you? If Russia attacked the Baltics Turkey would not fight to help NATO. Probably Turkey would more likely side with Russia against NATO and attack Greece. Turkey has sparred some with Russia on Syria but they have now divided it between them, Russia dominates Syria, and Turkey and Russia are largely in accord there.

Turkish strategy in Libya has not helped either, as the Tripoli government is no friend of NATO. Actually Haftar would be better.

France despite their past has been a better NATO ally than Turkey in the past decade or so. Check your calendar, your assessment is based on assumptions that existed in the past, but are long gone.

Although this is going a bit off topic, but siding with Turkey because they are our ally, makes no sense as they are now an ally in name only and really more an adversary.

Who is to say they won't be? The Turks are no friends of the Russians. Their military is friendly to us. Erdogan has S-400 not to protect against us but the majority of his officer corps he dismissed and had to call back hastily to do his bidding. It isn't an unreasonable fear that a Mehmetçik might decide he'll go down with the ship to take Erdogan out. If the Baltics were attacked, even Turkey in place to tie down Russian troops is a win. A force in being is better than not having one. It is certain better than having them definitely arrayed against you when we can't even escort our own ship convoys and our allies can barely piece together a hundred working tanks outside Poland. We are not in a good strategic position. That requires hard choices.

The Tripoli Government is the one we suicidal and insanely backed, the same as the Italians. If you think that is very stupid, perhaps you should consult the room temperature collective IQ of the State Department on that one. I agree with you but it is a bit late to pull the knife out of the back of Haftar, the guy we kept stateside and trained for this very moment. With an incoming Joe Biden administration, insane and retarded foreign policy moves are likely very much back on the menu so we have to make do with what we have.

France can't even keep enough fuel in production to run basic operations lol. They are pathetic dead weight not capable of wiping their own ass without Uncle Sam's help and sabotaging our admittedly insane and retarded foreign policy. But it is ours none the less. Wanting it to fail is another matter entirely. In which case, why do we not change course and we did we elect more insanity?

[Vapormancer]

Then we should cut our alliance and obligations if that is the case. If we are apart of an organization for X goal and we are required to have a strategic interest in containing a particular foe, then we need to take our duties extremely seriously. Coalition warfare is the most difficult of all forms of warfare, we used to be masters but now we can't even move tanks to a port. There can be no strategic ambiguity, this is how conflicts start. If they are not a threat, then we have no need for NATO or its organizational structure, we should withdraw. When we do so, then I would agree that it would be good if a European power brought Turkey to heel but so long as our requirements are as they are, we have a duty to fight to win and that means we make do with unpleasant bedfellows.

Again Turkey is more often WITH Russia than against it! Turkey is buying Russian weapons while threatening NATO member Greece! The idea that Turkey is now a reliable ally against Russia is simply false. They were are useful ally against the Soviets but the Soviet Union is dead, and more importantly Turkey is no longer ruled by secular pr western forces, but by an anti western Islamist. Who often sides WITH Russia.

Greece is not worth fighting over. Its a dead country trying to claw on to some oil fields its not capable of defending. We didn't care when they raided Cyprus, why would we care now? Regarding your opinion, yes you are right as to who is incharge but they have just as often fought and crossed swords with the Russians. It is still far more useful in the tent than against us.

[Shofercia]

Israel supplied drones on the open market. Not sure how that qualifies as backing to a hilt, but whatever.

The advisors they sent? The resupplies of ammunition? The test data for their suicide drones? Ah, just the open market! You are as impressive as ever Shof :^)

Typically when you sell a gun, you also sell the owner's manual, and the ammunition for it. That would mean that yes, Israel also sold ammunition and the test data. Are you unaware of what "backing to a hilt" means? When Belarus had protests, Russia kept outsiders from getting involved, and offered support - that's starting to approach "backing to a hilt" but not there yet. And were these drone sales limited to Azerbaijan, so much so that no other country bought them? Seems like you just want to take a dump on the Jewish state.