Georgia and Ukraine are independent countries that have nothing to do with NATO. They are on good terms with the WEST but they are likely to get limited support in difficult times. By limited support, I assume consultancy, limited Intel sharing and option to purchase some weapons.
... in my opinion russia can not afford a war right now..
Wrong. There can be -- and do have -- different responses for the same action.
Because by moving war materiel across the territory of a neutral power is a tacit admission that 'I have an ally in X country'. One or two violations, and they can be excused by other belligerents and observers. But repeated violations ? No.
Aircrafts and ships in transit thru a neutral power's territory can -- and will -- be construed as 'silent participation' by other belligerents and observers. To them, how can they know that Turkey did not provide refueling services to Russian aircrafts ? Even allowing the pilots to take toilet breaks on Turkish soil could be interpreted as alliance under (violation) Article 2.
The answer will be 'That is different'.
Wrong. There can be -- and do have -- different responses for the same action.
What you do not seems to understand -- despite that supposedly 'high Chinese IQ' -- is that repeated violations of a neutral power's territory by an engaged belligerent can -- and will -- be construed by other engaged belligerents and observers that said neutral power is not so neutral after all.
The Avalon Project - Laws of War : Rights and Duties of Neutral Powers and Persons in Case of War on Land (Hague V); October 18, 1907
Because by moving war materiel across the territory of a neutral power is a tacit admission that 'I have an ally in X country'. One or two violations, and they can be excused by other belligerents and observers. But repeated violations ? No.
Aircrafts and ships in transit thru a neutral power's territory can -- and will -- be construed as 'silent participation' by other belligerents and observers. To them, how can they know that Turkey did not provide refueling services to Russian aircrafts ? Even allowing the pilots to take toilet breaks on Turkish soil could be interpreted as alliance under (violation) Article 2.
If Turkey do not pursue the Russian aircraft, Turkey WILL be seen as compliant to Russia's will.
Again...Would you like me to prove you wrong about this issue by using a real world real war situation ?
The answer will be 'That is different'.
Of course it will be different. That would be Chinese territory and accepted international understanding do not apply, or are applicable as China allows it.
These ya-hoos do not seems to understand that in peacetime, countries already demands obedience to their airspace via the 'identification zones'. It is only because the interlopers are civilian aircrafts with known schedules that no military responses are sent. But since this is a combat zone, there would be no schedules with predictable flight behaviors and the only known flights, or as much as can be ascertained, will be military flights loaded with weapons. The only countries that will allow transit will be alliance countries, not supposedly neutral parties.
Did the Soviets have the nut sack to come to Iraq's aid ? Did China ? LOL.
USSR had all the nukes of the world. What happened to it after invading Afghanistan? The Czar had the largest army in WW1. What happened after 3 years? Even during WW2, they won but lost 30m to Hitler, and almost same number to Stalin's oppression. The clue is in Russian novels- the most tragic ones in the world.LOL, you really are brainwashed aren't you little boy, NATO will never have the nut sack to touch Russia in a war for Turkey......ever!
NATO war with Russia will mean use of nuclear weapons, you can wave your little treaties all you want, but when it comes to actually going to all out war with Russia, NATO don't have the guts for an all out confrontation. Russian nuclear arsenal can wipe out the entire Western world multiple times. The West is not suicidal to end everything it built to fight for a rogue Muslim regime because of a treaty.
NATO will never go to war with Russia. That's a one of the 3 certainties in life after death and taxes.
This will be Turkey vs Russia, and Turkey is a lamb being fed to a hyena.
US don't even have the guts to destroy the military constructions in the SCS by China. All the US military could come up with is flying near the islands.
That's it? Whats the point of spending $600 billion every year if you lack the balls to destroy the military facilities?
First grow a pair to destroy the military facilities by China in the SCS before you pipe dream about messing with mother Russia in an all out war that can turn the entire Western civilisation to glass.
NATO fighting Russia for Turkey LOL.....dream on
It had already done it before -in Afghanistan.
