In international politics in which force is applied economically, militarily, or by threat, and which said force is often is applied through surrogates or proxies, and which often means that our elected officials, as well as those of other countries, often implement strategies and actions that would be [or at least should be] abhorrent to people who believe in the value of individual human lives, not to mention fair play and honesty, and so therefore such things could be politically damaging if honestly understood by the general public everywhere that it is affected, in such a situation is there ever not a conspiracy brewing? 

Hmmm. The Turks and Saudis working together. It sounds like they are ready to get over that whole Ottoman Empire thing.

NATO backs Turkey as PM vents fury at 'heinous' Syria

By Fulya Ozerkan (AFP) – 3 hours ago

ANKARA — Turkey's prime minister vowed on Tuesday to retaliate against Syria for its 'heinous' downing of one of its warplanes, as the head of NATO said such an attack on one of its members was unacceptable.

Amid reports of clashes around elite Republican Guard posts in Damascus, Ankara raised the heat on the Assad regime by accusing it of shooting down the jet last Friday while it was in international airspace, and without warning.

Turkey's Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, once a close ally of President Bashar al-Assad, has become one of the Syrian leader's biggest critics and his reaction to the downing of the jet represented his fiercest outburst to date.

"They acted without warning. This is a hostile act... a heinous attack," Erdogan told a parliamentary meeting of his ruling AKP party.

The premier admitted the Turkish plane had violated Syrian airspace but said it was only for a short time and "by mistake". He insisted it was not in Syrian airspace by the time it came under attack.

"Turkey will exercise its rights, born out of international law, with determination, and take the necessary steps by determining the time, place and method by itself," Erdogan told the lawmakers.

"The rules of engagement of the Turkish Armed Forces have changed given this new development," Erdogan added [......]

Turkey Warns Syrian Forces Not to Approach Border
By PAUL GEITNER and ALAN COWELL, New York Times, June 26, 2012

BRUSSELS — Warning Syria not to test its resolve, Turkey sought support on Tuesday from its partners in the NATO alliance at an emergency meeting of envoys in Brussels called after Syria shot down a Turkish warplane over the Mediterranean Sea.

The crisis between the two neighbors showed no sign of abating as Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan of Turkey threatened a military response against Syrian forces approaching his country's long border with Syria in a threatening way and said Turkey had revized military rules of engagement.

"Every military element that approaches the Turkish border from Syria in a manner that constitutes a security risk or danger would be considered as a threat and would be treated as a military target," he said in a speech to lawmakers and Arab diplomats in Ankara.

"From here onwards, we warn the Syrian regime not to make any mistakes, not to test Turkey’s decisiveness and wisdom," Mr. Erdogan said [......]

LOL looking at Google News just now! Sorry, but I couldn't help it, this story is just getting too over the top absurd:

Sorry, but I can't help asking. This is a serious question, though not serious in the sense that there is any important necessity of it being answered, but serious in the sense that I would like to understand what you mean. It can be embarrassing to not get a joke but, because I like a good laugh too, I hope you will humor me and expand on your comment a bit.
 I wish you would explain what is so funny that you laughed out loud when you read this story. Is it this particular story that is too absurd to consider seriously as legitimate reporting or is it that the story reveals absurdity?
 What is the top that has absurdly been gone over? Is the very idea that Assad actually made the statements as claimed absurd? Is it because if Assad actually made the statements claimed that he has shown himself to be absurd? Is it absurd to even pay attention to, and consider, what Assad's stated view on a potentially explosive incident , which no doubt already included an explosion, is? Is it absurd to report his statement because we already know some other truth ? Is it absurd that we even follow a story that could be one of the early chapters in another chronicle of another front on another war? Does the fact that the Jerusalem Post published this story make giving it any credence absurd? Is it absurd that any attention is still being given to this incident? I mean, what could come of it anyway that makes it newsworthy? Another absurd justification for another absurd war possibly?