Thread: US voices concern over Russia military buildup in Syria

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Originally Posted by birding

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Originally Posted by birding

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Well done; in your smugness, you've accidentally nailed it. It's *exactly* the same as Syria. They should have taken out Gaddafi at the start. Instead they took too long, dismantled the whole governmental infrastructure and the shitstorm that's left is a direct result.

Now if you look at Tunisia, where they got shot of the unpopular leader in quick time, they've already settled down and had their first elections.

The rest either crushed their rebellions or bought their people off.

You are full of BS Harry you know as well as I do that Gaddafi was taken out because he was proposing that oil be paid for in gold and that there were several rebel groups who were then and are still fighting for control of the countries riches.

Your country has made a huge cock up of the world causing millions of deaths from Vietnam to the present day.

Not only have you not read up on the history of the Libya but you think I'm a seppo.

You dumb shit.

Do some reading before you start posting more bollocks. Start here.

https://www.redanalysis.org/2015/04/...ics-civil-war/

Had they removed Gadaffi early on, they could have maintained some semblance of stability and order; there was an inclusive government until the Arab Spring arrived.

A losers response, resort to abuse and bad language.

An opinion piece which bears no resemblance to fact.

It is very commendable that you defend your country, unfortunately that defense tends to bias which means you cant look at things objectively.

The truth is that there was no hoards of Syrians fleeing their country before the rebels, backed by the US started the attempt to take over the countries Govt.

Now that exodus is being made worse by the bombing and the giving of weapons to the rebels.

These actions by the US and their so called allies (lapdogs) are only making it easier for IS, for it is taking the pressure of them, on the one hand by putting effort into more than one area of military action and on the other by hampering Assad in fighting IS, which is the real danger to world security.

By increasing the number of so called refugees it is also giving IS an opening to get its people into the host countries by mingling with those being accepted as migrants, leaving the countries who are taking these people open to terrorist action on their own soil.

The US is vilifying Russia for backing the legitimate Govt of Syria and attempting to prevent them getting humanitarian aid to the people while themselves supplying the rebels that are attempting to take over the country, with aid and weapons.

They have also spurned Russia's call for unified action against IS, the cold war mentality is still to the fore.

Here we have a country that goes around preaching democracy, backing and supplying weapons to a group that is attempting to take over the government of a country by force of arms.........Is that democratic ?

Mind you its not the first time is it, and we dont have to look far for more blatant hypocrisy such as the backing of a military coup in Egypt where the military have just sentenced the deposed leader to death in a military court.
Compared with sanctions against a military coup in Thailand where any action against the deposed leader is ongoing in a civilian court with no death sentence possible.

For the second time, I'm not American you idiot.

More abuse.

I understand your from one of the lapdog countries. Did you read how your PM wants to get in there and bomb Syria ?

Oh my looks as if we have another tin foiled nutter on the forum.

Originally Posted by Exit Strategy

Post below was getting to the root of the problem. Strangely some people just seem to hate US and love Putin and Russian Peace Weapons and ignore the facts (hi Birdman), and it is all black and white for them. While it is all gray actually.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Had the Russians not propped up Assad, the majority moderate Sunni would have taken over Syria pretty quickly and probably been amenable to fighting IS.
As it is, Putin's actions in propping up his fellow dictator have created the perfect incubator for extremist Sunni radicals.
Of course the expected Putin cock suckers are here kissing his arse as usual, because they don't have a fucking clue.

Some dont seem to understand that there is a thing between love and hate called objectivity which allows something to be looked at without bias.

In spite of Harrys "Might have beens" we have to look at what is happening now
for instance :

Russia to continue to supply arms to Syria's Assad


Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov has said that Russia would continue to supply weapons to the Syrian government, following warnings from US and NATO over Moscow's increasing involvement in the Syrian conflict.
Lavrov told a news conference on Friday that Russia was conducting military exercises in the Mediterranean Sea, that it had been for some time, and that the exercises were in line with international law.


The minister also called on other world powers to help arm the Syrian military, which he described as the most efficient force against the Islamic State of Iraq and Levant (ISIL) group.


The statement came a day after Lavrov confirmed that the country's "humanitarian" flights to Syria carried military equipment as well as humanitarian aid.


"Russian planes are sending to Syria both military equipment in accordance with current contracts and humanitarian aid," Lavrov told reporters on Thursday.
Kerry and NATO warn Russia over military acts in Syria
Russia's Kommersant daily newspaper said earlier on Thursday that Moscow's advanced BTR-82A armoured personnel carriers were among arms supplied to Damascus.


Moscow has previously insisted in public that its flights to Syria were only for humanitarian purposes.
Al Jazeera's Peter Sharp, reporting from Moscow, said that "nothing much has really changed" as the Russians had been supplying the Syrian government with arms, advisers and other military equipment for about 60 years.


Russian military support
"Between 2009 and 2011 Russia was supplying 71 percent of Syria's military needs - everything from jets to military equipment to air defence systems.


"The Russian foreign minister says this continues to take place but he did make a distinction. There has been additional air traffic coming into Latakia's airbase and he says military equipment and humanitarian aid are being delivered," Sharp said.

"As far as boosting boots on the ground, he said Russian military specialists are working on training Syrians on using Russian weapons and no additional steps have been taken."
The Kremlin declined to comment on Thursday on whether Russian troops were fighting in Syria, after sources in Lebanon told the Reuters news agency that Russian forces had begun participating in military operations there.




Meanwhile the US continues to supply weapons to the rebels attempting to take over the government of Syria through force of arms.


So which is right supplying weapons to the Govt of a country as has been done for many years or supplying a rebel force attempting to take over the country by force ?


What we have here is a country, the USA which has set itself up as the world policeman, judge, jury and executioner all in one.
They will decide who is bad and who is good and if they decide someone is bad they will arrange a force (rebels) to kill that person and if that doesnt work they will go in and do it themselves with bombs...... And it will be done in the name of democracy.


Tell me how many Syrians were there banging on Europe's door before the rebels started there US backed campaign. Around zero, is that correct ?


And as the (humanitarian) bombing started the numbers have increased.


Conclusion; without the rebels attempting to take over the country there would be no exodus of refugees, secondly the bombing is making things worse.

Originally Posted by Exit Strategy

US is what British Empire was before and that has made the world a safer place.

^ That has to be one of the most idiotic things I have ever heard.

What, Putin can't do that, only we can. The American clown show is almost as embarrassing as the EU nations that play along with the charade.


http://www.lucianne.com/images/lucianne/DailyPhoto/2015-09-09.jpg

Putin is in no way the cause of the problems in Syria or Iraq. He is trying to be part of the solution. Can you say the same for your own country?

Originally Posted by pickel

Originally Posted by Exit Strategy

US is what British Empire was before and that has made the world a safer place.

Add to that, industrial revolution, global commerce and free market economy, widespread western style democracy, this world order. End result of all that is you can chat on internet and have your iphone. Suck that or go back to your cave.

Originally Posted by Exit Strategy

Consider world needs "world policeman" for stability. US is what British Empire was before and that has made the world a safer place. Not for kindness, for national security and trade and commerce, but this also keeps world safe. By-product is freedom and democracy and market economy all over.

You're not really buying into this conditioned illusional nonsense, are you?

Both imperial eras were [and are] nothing short of destructive and extended evil for the world.

Originally Posted by sabang

Putin is in no way the cause of the problems in Syria or Iraq.

Does it have something to do with Assad taking all his business to the BRIC economies and dumping the Western link ?
The economic down-turn.

Originally Posted by thaimeme

Both imperial eras were [and are] nothing short of destructive and extended evil for the world.

Would you rather like anarchy? Do you understand what that would mean? Well I like my IPhone and Internet and those are products of this system we live in. Created by extended evil 555. You have to take it all in or live in a cave. Minor detail, but "Imperialists" as the Soviet Union used to call US and UK, saved the world from Hitler and then some. And in the future if there's a problem with russia or caliphate or something, who you gonna call?

Originally Posted by birding

Conclusion; without the rebels attempting to take over the country there would be no exodus of refugees, secondly the bombing is making things worse.

You do realise that the Al Nusra front and IS In Syria both grew out of Assad killing tens of thousands of civilians, don't you?

It is barrel bombs that started driving Syrians into Lebanon and Turkey.

Those same barrel bombs motivated not only moderate rebels but the lunatics you see now.

So yes, you are right that the bombing is making things worse.

Except they are mostly Russian bombs, because Al Nusra and IS don't have much by way of an air force and western-backed ordnance is mostly aimed at IS who - and you clearly don't get this - only control narrow strips of the country.

Originally Posted by Exit Strategy

You have to take it all in or live in a cave.

No you don't. There is nothing wrong with advanced in technology. There is everything wrong with the way that the owners of the world are using them, and more worryingly, planning to use them.

You do realise that 70% of The voting Syrian population backed Assad until the west decided to start bombing the fuk out of it, hence the quick exit from the country.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Originally Posted by birding

Conclusion; without the rebels attempting to take over the country there would be no exodus of refugees, secondly the bombing is making things worse.

You do realise that the Al Nusra front and IS In Syria both grew out of Assad killing tens of thousands of civilians, don't you?

It is barrel bombs that started driving Syrians into Lebanon and Turkey.

Those same barrel bombs motivated not only moderate rebels but the lunatics you see now.

So yes, you are right that the bombing is making things worse.

Except they are mostly Russian bombs, because Al Nusra and IS don't have much by way of an air force and western-backed ordnance is mostly aimed at IS who - and you clearly don't get this - only control narrow strips of the country.

Originally Posted by birding

So which is right supplying weapons to the Govt of a country as has been done for many years or supplying a rebel force attempting to take over the country by force ?

Unfortunately I have to agree with Exit Strategy. It depends on who you support. However, in this particular case, I think Russia is doing the right thing and the US position is counter-productive to defeating IS in Syria.

Originally Posted by birding

What we have here is a country, the USA which has set itself up as the world policeman, judge, jury and executioner all in one.
They will decide who is bad and who is good and if they decide someone is bad they will arrange a force (rebels) to kill that person and if that doesnt work they will go in and do it themselves with bombs...... And it will be done in the name of democracy.

In my opinion, the USA would prefer a Syrian government made up of US puppets. The US could then sell arms and equipment to the new compliant Syrian government and US companies would get to trade with the new government. If the US supports the winning group of rebels, that wish may come true. However, Russia helping the Syrian government makes that potential rebel victory less likely. That may be why the US is complaining about a Russian presence in Syria.

Originally Posted by birding

Conclusion; without the rebels attempting to take over the country there would be no exodus of refugees,

I don't know about that. I may be wrong, but it seems to me that IS is causing more problems in Syria than the rebels, although clearly more fighting in more places causes misery to more people.

Originally Posted by birding

secondly the bombing is making things worse.

More bombs means more destruction and more deaths, including more "collateral damage", including more innocent deaths.

Never any mention, nor reference, of The Chinese and their positions within these regional [Cold War still] proxy conflicts....

You can always take to the stage Jeff,though doubt it.

Originally Posted by Horatio Hornblower

You can always take to the stage Jeff,though doubt it.

Like most here, you miss a so much.

Same old same hey Jeff.

Originally Posted by Horatio Hornblower

By the way Jeff pseudo has already mentioned the petro dollar than I'm sure comes into the equation much more than anything else.

Well, sure...don't disagree with this position.

Imperialism will shed itself variably.

Originally Posted by Horatio Hornblower

You do realise that 70% of The voting Syrian population backed Assad until the west decided to start bombing the fuk out of it, hence the quick exit from the country.

Fuck me you're even dumber.

You do realise when you're a dictator running elections you can pick the result you want?

Originally Posted by Horatio Hornblower

You do realise that 70% of The voting Syrian population backed Assad until the west decided to start bombing the fuk out of it, hence the quick exit from the country.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Originally Posted by birding

Conclusion; without the rebels attempting to take over the country there would be no exodus of refugees, secondly the bombing is making things worse.

You do realise that the Al Nusra front and IS In Syria both grew out of Assad killing tens of thousands of civilians, don't you?

It is barrel bombs that started driving Syrians into Lebanon and Turkey.

Those same barrel bombs motivated not only moderate rebels but the lunatics you see now.

So yes, you are right that the bombing is making things worse.

Except they are mostly Russian bombs, because Al Nusra and IS don't have much by way of an air force and western-backed ordnance is mostly aimed at IS who - and you clearly don't get this - only control narrow strips of the country.

You really do buy into all the propaganda dont you Harry, no doubt you bought the WMD crap back then and you have shown by your posts that you bought the excuses to take out Gaddafi.

While on Gaddafi let me explain something you apparently misunderstood.
I took note of your little flag waving thing and realised where you were from but took your 'what might have been hindsight fantasy piece' as a defense of your countries involvement in Gaddafis murder and the destruction of Lybia.

Originally Posted by Neverna

Originally Posted by birding

So which is right supplying weapons to the Govt of a country as has been done for many years or supplying a rebel force attempting to take over the country by force ?

Unfortunately I have to agree with Exit Strategy. It depends on who you support. However, in this particular case, I think Russia is doing the right thing and the US position is counter-productive to defeating IS in Syria.

Fortunately I dont have a side in this and therefor dont have to support anyone which means I can look at things objectively and I agree with your second sentence.

Originally Posted by birding

What we have here is a country, the USA which has set itself up as the world policeman, judge, jury and executioner all in one.
They will decide who is bad and who is good and if they decide someone is bad they will arrange a force (rebels) to kill that person and if that doesnt work they will go in and do it themselves with bombs...... And it will be done in the name of democracy.

In my opinion, the USA would prefer a Syrian government made up of US puppets. The US could then sell arms and equipment to the new compliant Syrian government and US companies would get to trade with the new government. If the US supports the winning group of rebels, that wish may come true. However, Russia helping the Syrian government makes that potential rebel victory less likely. That may be why the US is complaining about a Russian presence in Syria.

I suspect as well as the weapons supply thing that there is still a "Cold war" mentality there which sees Russia as the enemy.

Originally Posted by birding

Conclusion; without the rebels attempting to take over the country there would be no exodus of refugees,

I don't know about that. I may be wrong, but it seems to me that IS is causing more problems in Syria than the rebels, although clearly more fighting in more places causes misery to more people.

Just who is fighting who seems to have got a little confusing but it would seem that the rebels are not fighting IS but whether they are aligned with them in any way is not obvious. What is clear is that the Syrian Govt forces are fighting both.
Yes more war more misery and unfortunately more profit for some.

Originally Posted by birding

secondly the bombing is making things worse.

More bombs means more destruction and more deaths, including more "collateral damage", including more innocent deaths.

Exactly, include more refugees.