Russian boots on the ground in Syria. Another Afghanistan?

cerastes

Shurimgreat wrote: »

The only real solution to this conflict and the refugee crisis is a partitioning of the country into an Alawite west and a Sunni East.

Otherwise the conflict will just go back and forth for years, with massacres of sunni or alawite. And as long as the conflict lasts so will the refugee crisis.

Syria was an artificial construct of colonialism, much like Rwanda, Iraq, and so on. Its pointless to expect Alawites and Sunnis who hate each other to live in the same country.

The Alawites seem a particularly nasty sect intent on staying in power regardless of the cost and like the Hutu militia prepared to commit genocide to do it. Now they have Russian air support they will just go on the offensive again and commit ethnic cleansing in an attempt to carve out an Alawite state and buffer zone.

The weakness of the UN and of the US have exacerbated the issue. A settlement should have been forced on Syria years ago rather than more war as Russia is now doing.

More war isn't the answer you say, so you admit what the west has been doing over the last year and since this conflict has started has been wrong, and yet now you blame Russia for doing what has been acceptable for the west, sounds like hypocrisy to me! Assad may be wrong,maybe should be gone but forming a stable safe country for the people there isn't on the West's agenda, they have form it Libya and Iraq to mention some of the most relevant and recent incidences.

old_aussie

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

It's entirely unfortunate, but these people need to be ruled by an iron fist - we have seen the alternative and it is chaos.

And the democratic based western countries have to realise that, or they will never be able to help to restore peace in Syria and the ME by trying to implement a democratic system.

Russia most likely wants to inforce the iron fist rule of Assad to restore peace in Syria and to get cheap oil.

weisses

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

Thanks for that. I always suspected that NATO was orchestrating the Syrian conflict.

C' mon .. NATO could well be involved but using Turkey in the context posted is not correct .. grasping at straws comes to mind

weisses

clever user name wrote: »

I see Russian aircraft are said to have violated Turkish airspace and the Turks ain't happy.

If this happens again, how likely are Turkey to actually shoot one of these planes down? How would the Russians react to this?

I find it all very interesting, but unfortunately I'm not very well versed on the current situation in Syria...haven't been following the news since the Russians got involved. Seems like a complete mess (even more so than before).

Its a false flag in the making ...

Elmer Blooker

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

Indeed, no poster is as agenda driven.

Where some see civil war, you see Brussels doing.... tragic really.

No sooner had Russian bombs hit the ground in Syria and you're comparing IS to girl scouts! ......... and I'm agenda driven?

The no 1 killer of Syrian civilians was & is Assad.... by a massive margin.
He makes IS look like girl scouts.

BoJack Horseman

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

I'm agenda driven

Yes, any casual reader of these forums can see that.

You only raise your head to throw shade at the evil West.

Seems an odd existence to live only to berate the world that affords you the freedom to berate in the first place.

Lockstep

glued wrote: »

What differentiates ISIS from Al Nusra? They're both sides of the same coin. Al Nusra have no problem executing civilians.

Stop trying to defend Al Nusra. They're a bunch of terrorists.

What differentiates them is ISIS' focus on attacking targets in fhe middle east and a much greater willingness to use brutality. This is exactly why they split from each other.

Highlighting the nuances between different terrorist groups isn't defending them and it's critical to any approach to the Syrian conflict. How do you not know this? Or are you that badly informed?

Would you say the IRA are as bad as ISIS? They're both terrorists but with very different tactics.

gandalf

BTW the Russians do have an awful lot to answer for as well. Their arms and indirect support have propped up a dictator who has used his forces against the general civilian population in Syria.

The question you have to ask is will things stablise with the Russians getting directly involved in Syria. You never know it might obviously keeping a leader in power who is dispised by a large section of the country, it also might have the opposite effect and galvanise the opposition into attacking the foreign invaders (the Russians this time).

Somehow I don't believe the Russians will get involved directly with too many ground based operations. Whilst I despise Putin I do credit him with intelligence and I don't believe he would be stupid enough to send troops in on the ground where there is a high possibility of casualties. Even with the heavily censured media in Russia it is clear that a large proportion of the public were unhappy with the possibility of military casualties in the Ukraine. The Ukraine means something to the general Russian populace, Syria on the other hand doesn't. Seeing Coffins returning from the middle east draped in the Russian Tricolour will be a step too far for the Russian public.

Gatling

Here's an interesting piece I came across earlier regarding Russian boots on the ground in East Ukraine /syria

 "head of Russia's parliamentary committee on defence, Vladimir Komoedov, said Monday that he was sure pro-Moscow volunteers from eastern Ukraine would eventually end up fighting with Assad's forces"

"A unit of Russian volunteers, participants of combat operations, will most likely appear in the ranks of the Syrian army," Komoedov told the Interfax news agency on Monday.

gandalf

Where did you see that Gatling?

Gatling

gandalf wrote: »

Where did you see that Gatling?

Crap forgot to add the link

http://news.yahoo.com/next-stop-syria-ukraine-rebels-weigh-options-fighting-044631730.html

IrishTrajan

old_aussie wrote: »

And the democratic based western countries have to realise that, or they will never be able to help to restore peace in Syria and the ME by trying to implement a democratic system.

Russia most likely wants to inforce the iron fist rule of Assad to restore peace in Syria and to get cheap oil.

Why the hell would Russia want cheap oil? You know their entire economy relies upon exporting oil at a high price, right?

BoJack Horseman

Gatling wrote: »

http://news.yahoo.com/next-stop-syria-ukraine-rebels-weigh-options-fighting-044631730.html

rebels without a cause....

Wouldnt be surprised if the Russian invasion in Donbass will peter out until after the 2018 World Cup... What with Sepp no longer in charge at FIFA, Vladi wouldn't want to risk his showpiece of reckless expenditure be taken away.

Shurimgreat

cerastes wrote: »

More war isn't the answer you say, so you admit what the west has been doing over the last year and since this conflict has started has been wrong, and yet now you blame Russia for doing what has been acceptable for the west, sounds like hypocrisy to me! Assad may be wrong,maybe should be gone but forming a stable safe country for the people there isn't on the West's agenda, they have form it Libya and Iraq to mention some of the most relevant and recent incidences.

Anyone who doesn't think isis need to be defeated isn't worth taking seriously. The only ones hoping isis arent defeated are assad and his many fans around the world. The longer isis is around the more reason for a mass murdering strong man to remain in office.

gandalf

IrishTrajan wrote: »

Why the hell would Russia want cheap oil? You know their entire economy relies upon exporting oil at a high price, right?

That's what I though. They are protecting their strategic interests in the region and also one of their best customers for arms sales. If Assad goes then they won't get payment for all the arms they have supplied the current Syrian regime with.

glued

Not exactly surprised by that. It allows Russia to gain more intelligence from the ground and then Russia can pretend that they have no control over whatever these guys do. It'll be interesting to see where they are deployed. I doubt NATO will co-operate in anyway with Putin now. I think it'll prove to be a foolish move for Putin.

Interestingly I was trying to find out more about the Syrian Observatory of Human Rights. They're basically a complete sham of an organisation and it's director is a sympathiser to the Kurds and Rebels who hasn't stepped foot in Syria for 15 years. In fact, the director, Rami Abdulrahman, illegally took control of the SOHR and is a member of the Kurdistan Workers Party. It would largely explain the huge over-reporting of civilians deaths in comparison to the likes of the CDV. If Assad's army kills a rebel who is not ex-military the SOHR reports this as a civilian causality. It's quite worrying that the likes of the BBC, The Guardian and NYT are citing these guys as sources for their reports. He's completely anti-Assad which explains why his group tends to focus on atrocities by Assad's army. Worst of all most of The Guardian's reporting sources comes directly from Rami Abdulrahman who has been based in the UK for 15 years.

It goes to show you that you cannot rely on a lot of the data in the written press.

IrishTrajan

https://news.vice.com/article/a-leaked-budget-may-finally-show-how-the-islamic-state-makes-its-money

According to the ledger, between December 2014 and January 2015 IS brought in more than $8 million in revenue in Deir Ezzor, an oil-rich province in eastern Syria that's been under IS control since early 2014. But nearly 45 percent of those funds originated from what IS calls "confiscation," dwarfing all other sources of income like trade, taxes, and oil sales.

"If you miss prayers three times consecutively, then you are going to get your shop confiscated," Tamimi explained. "If you transport banned goods like cigarettes, they are going to take the money you are carrying." The vast majority of these confiscations took place on the borders of the province, where IS fighters appeared to be stripping travelers of their valuables to pay for safe passage.

[..]

But the documents leaked from Deir Ezzor reflect a state-building project on the rocks. About 63 percent of IS expenditures — nearly $5 million — go to supporting its military in the form of salaries and "base expenditures." It spends another 10 percent on a police force. That leaves only about $2 million to fund the IS bureaucracy, its healthcare system, and the social services.

[...]

Deir Ezzor holds the most productive oil fields under IS control in Syria, and it's ledger shows a much weaker oil extracting capacity than previously thought.

"If IS had capital, manpower, and know-how, these oil fields could be quite profitable," said David Butter, a leading expert on Middle East energy, economics, and business at Chatham House in the UK. "But that's a big if."

Butter says that oil fields in Deir Ezzor peaked in the 1990s, and that exploiting them now would require major investment and serious technical know-how — beyond what IS possesses. He estimates that IS now operates the fields at less than half of their capacity, which indicates a much weaker IS energy sector than previously thought. The documents show that IS draws in just $66,433 a day from oil and gas revenues in Deir Ezzor.
[...]
"It's going to be hard to maintain this budget and maintain a measure of support from the populations they are trying to control," Mecham said. "This doesn't have a positive trajectory — eventually they are going to run out of things to seize."

Shurimgreat

glued wrote: »

Not exactly surprised by that. It allows Russia to gain more intelligence from the ground and then Russia can pretend that they have no control over whatever these guys do. It'll be interesting to see where they are deployed. I doubt NATO will co-operate in anyway with Putin now. I think it'll prove to be a foolish move for Putin.

Interestingly I was trying to find out more about the Syrian Observatory of Human Rights. They're basically a complete sham of an organisation and it's director is a sympathiser to the Kurds and Rebels who hasn't stepped foot in Syria for 15 years. In fact, the director, Rami Abdulrahman, illegally took control of the SOHR and is a member of the Kurdistan Workers Party. It would largely explain the huge over-reporting of civilians deaths in comparison to the likes of the CDV. If Assad's army kills a rebel who is not ex-military the SOHR reports this as a civilian causality. It's quite worrying that the likes of the BBC, The Guardian and NYT are citing these guys as sources for their reports. He's completely anti-Assad which explains why his group tends to focus on atrocities by Assad's army. Worst of all most of The Guardian's reporting sources comes directly from Rami Abdulrahman who has been based in the UK for 15 years.

It goes to show you that you cannot rely on a lot of the data in the written press.

He uses countless sources from inside syria. I'd certainly trust him more than most. Theres a lot of people in syria keeping track of deaths etc. I'm sure he has sources among frontline doctors, rebels and possibly from government side.

He seems to be about the only one counting war dead. The UN gave up trying two years ago. If it wasnt for him we wouldnt have a clue how many died.

But his figures dont include the tens of thousands who disappeared into assads prisons, only verified deaths.

Elmer Blooker

IrishTrajan wrote: »

https://news.vice.com/article/a-leaked-budget-may-finally-show-how-the-islamic-state-makes-its-money

The question of where the Islamic State [IS] acquires its funding has been a subject of much discussion. Though ideological partisans often see a private Gulf Arab funding hand behind IS, the general consensus now seems to accept that IS is not dependent on foreign donors in any meaningful way

This is an insult to one's intelligence! Even my dog knows who funding these head choppers!

youtube!

I have read in some non mainstream sources over the past few days that China are sending in special forces to help the Russian effort, anyone reckon this could be the case and if so what has to be gained from a Chinese POV?

glued

Shurimgreat wrote: »

He uses countless sources from inside syria. I'd certainly trust him more than most. Theres a lot of people in syria keeping track of deaths etc. I'm sure he has sources among frontline doctors, rebels and possibly from government side.

He seems to be about the only one counting war dead. The UN gave up trying two years ago. If it wasnt for him we wouldnt have a clue how many died.

But his figures dont include the tens of thousands who disappeared into assads prisons, only verified deaths.

I'm not sure how you could come to that conclusion. His statistics are clearly flawed and should not be relied upon. Who are these countless sources? A biased report should not be relied upon.

Even Reuters when using SOHR say they cannot independently verify any of their totals and their data is completely unreliable. The UN gave up because of all the false reporting of deaths by all sides in the conflict along with hiding bodies and other means of obscuring data.

Who are these people keeping track of the dead?

Shurimgreat

The Russians have no interest in seeing a stable Syria. The refugee crisis is another bargaining chip with the west and comes from a destabilised syria. I saw one comment from a guy working for a moscow think tank who said Russian intervention would be extremely bloody and cause a lot more refugees going to Europe. I'm fairly sure Putin has taken this into account.

The international community is badly lacking in effective mediators.

Surely it can't be hard to come up with a solution that keeps all sides happy. An alawite state and a sunni state. Although at this stage Isis have grown so big that they probably cannot be defeated, not in the short term.

And before any assad fans say it, no he is not the answer. He's actually the problem which caused all this.

Shurimgreat

glued wrote: »

I'm not sure how you could come to that conclusion. His statistics are clearly flawed and should not be relied upon. Who are these countless sources? A biased report should not be relied upon.

Even Reuters when using SOHR say they cannot independently verify any of their totals and their data is completely unreliable. The UN gave up because of all the false reporting of deaths by all sides in the conflict along with hiding bodies and other means of obscuring data.

Who are these people keeping track of the dead?

Ok you need to look into his methods more carefully. I used to follow his analysis for a while. Naming the dead although not foolproof helps eliminate double counting.

Its impossible to count all the dead but 250,000 is probably a good estimate of verifiable deaths. There really is no motive for rebels for example to overplay their deaths or the government for thst matter. Its clear the syrian army have lost a massive number of dead and its struggling. Its been on the backfoot mostly the last year.

In the otherhand theres been a lot of uncounted dead that arent included in his numbers.

In any case its fairly meaningless. Assad has killed a lot of people, we know that, no one truely disputes that. He's no mother teresa thats for sure and the efforts by his admirers on here and elsewhere to rehabilitate him or make him out to be the good guy or the better guy is pretty shameful. Although some people don't do shame.

We know isis are brutal. We also know assad helped get isis off the ground and isis are a result of him. He has tried to create a false dicotomy, them or me, but most people are intelligent enough to see through it.

glued

Shurimgreat wrote: »

Ok you need to look into his methods more carefully. I used to follow his analysis for a while. Naming the dead although not foolproof helps eliminate double counting.

Its impossible to count all the dead but 250,000 is probably a good estimate of verifiable deaths. There really is no motive for rebels for example to overplay their deaths or the government for thst matter. Its clear the syrian army have lost a massive number of dead and its struggling. Its been on the backfoot mostly the last year.

In the otherhand theres been a lot of uncounted dead that arent included in his numbers.

In any case its fairly meaningless. Assad has killed a lot of people, we know that, no one truely disputes that. He's no mother teresa thats for sure and the efforts by his admirers on here and elsewhere to rehabilitate him or make him out to be the good guy or the better guy is pretty shameful. Although some people don't do shame.

We know isis are brutal. We also know assad helped get isis off the ground and isis are a result of him. He has tried to create a false dicotomy, them or me, but most people are intelligent enough to see through it.

That is nothing but pure bluster. How did Assad help get ISIS off the ground and do you have any evidence to support that claim?

I can't see one admirer of Assad here or anyone defending him so I don't know where you're pulling that from.

Gatling

glued wrote: »

What I do see here is a lot of misinformation from people who clearly haven't an clue about the problem in Syria.

Been that your in the know .

Enlighten us all

Elmer Blooker

Shurimgreat wrote: »

Ok you need to look into his methods more carefully. I used to follow his analysis for a while. Naming the dead although not foolproof helps eliminate double counting.

Its impossible to count all the dead but 250,000 is probably a good estimate of verifiable deaths. There really is no motive for rebels for example to overplay their deaths or the government for thst matter. Its clear the syrian army have lost a massive number of dead and its struggling. Its been on the backfoot mostly the last year.

In the otherhand theres been a lot of uncounted dead that arent included in his numbers.

In any case its fairly meaningless. Assad has killed a lot of people, we know that, no one truely disputes that. He's no mother teresa thats for sure and the efforts by his admirers on here and elsewhere to rehabilitate him or make him out to be the good guy or the better guy is pretty shameful. Although some people don't do shame.

We know isis are brutal. We also know assad helped get isis off the ground and isis are a result of him. He has tried to create a false dicotomy, them or me, but most people are intelligent enough to see through it.

Perhaps if you get the time you could copy and paste some quotes from "his admirers on here". I honestly can say I haven't seen anyone praise Assad in this forum.

Gatling

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

Perhaps if you get the time you could copy and paste some quotes from "his admirers on here". I honestly can say I haven't seen anyone praise Assad in this forum.

Would highlighting his humanitarian efforts be considered praise

cerastes

Shurimgreat wrote: »

Ok you need to look into his methods more carefully. I used to follow his analysis for a while. Naming the dead although not foolproof helps eliminate double counting.

Its impossible to count all the dead but 250,000 is probably a good estimate of verifiable deaths. There really is no motive for rebels for example to overplay their deaths or the government for thst matter. Its clear the syrian army have lost a massive number of dead and its struggling. Its been on the backfoot mostly the last year.

In the otherhand theres been a lot of uncounted dead that arent included in his numbers.

In any case its fairly meaningless. Assad has killed a lot of people, we know that, no one truely disputes that. He's no mother teresa thats for sure and the efforts by his admirers on here and elsewhere to rehabilitate him or make him out to be the good guy or the better guy is pretty shameful. Although some people don't do shame.

We know isis are brutal. We also know assad helped get isis off the ground and isis are a result of him. He has tried to create a false dicotomy, them or me, but most people are intelligent enough to see through it.

So its impossible to count the dead but you pull 250000 out of your hat? One second you say this and then you say we know its a lot, the thing is, there seems to be so much misinformation and obvious disinformation that you can't know anything, unless you were out there? Counting?

Shurimgreat

cerastes wrote: »

So its impossible to count the dead but you pull 250000 out of your that? One second you say this and then you say we know its a lot, the thing is, there seems to be so much misinformation and obvious disinformation that you can't know anything, unless you were out there? Counting?

Read what I said again. I said its impossible to count exactly the dead largely because assad forces for one are not exactly known for being transparant in how many people they have massacred, buried in mass graves etc. All anyone can do is estimate based on on the ground sources. The fact you have no sources on the ground probably disqualifies you from estimating a number or even commenting on other peoples estimates.

Shurimgreat

glued wrote: »

The US, UK, Israel, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar and various Salafist supporters are also privately funding the Jihadists. ISIS has essentially become self sufficient over time through controlling various oil and gas reservoirs. Initially the US supported the movement solely as an opposition to Assad.

The US had known about the rise of ISIS and failed to act. In fact the Department of Defence actually predicted the creation of an Islamic State. They were quite happy to stand back and allow it to develop and recently declassified documents prove this.

From various declassified documents (see judicialwatch.org) it would appear that the US hoped that a Salafist state would be created in Eastern Syria as they didn't think Assad could control the whole state and would focus on protecting his strongholds in the West.

Once ISIS expanded further and became a threat to the US then they began to support pockets of moderate Syrian Rebels who have since gone on to become Extremists. It's alarming that with the intelligence the US had they could have wiped ISIS off the map before they got started. Instead tens of thousands of people have been butchered all in the name of weakening Assad.

Obviously the US isn't responsible for this whole mess but they could have prevented a lot of deaths had they not stood back.

It's laughable that the US are whinging about Putin not bombing Assad when they could have prevented them from expanding in the first place. I'd be amazed if some of the intelligence analysts can sleep at night. They have a lot of blood on their hands through their constant failures in the Middle East.

Maybe if you'd clear your mind of your reactionary anti western agenda for one minute you'd see the Americans have been bombing Isis for a year now. Kobane, mt sindar and all across eastern syria. Or have you been asleep for the last year? The russians did nothing in all that time nor assad forces. They even bought their oil!

The americans don't bomb in syria you are outraged. When they do bomb you are even more outraged. Wish you'd make up your mind!

As for thosands of dead, yes they killed a lot of Isis but saved a lot of kurds and yasidis. Please dont tell me you have an issue with that?

Looking forward to another reactionary anti american rant!

cerastes

Shurimgreat wrote: »

Read what I said again. I said its impossible to count exactly the dead largely because assad forces for one are not exactly known for being transparant in how many people they have massacred, buried in mass graves etc. All anyone can do is estimate based on on the ground sources. The fact you have no sources on the ground probably disqualifies you from estimating a number or even commenting on other peoples estimates.

More hyperbole, I did read what you said and its a few posts back for all to see, you said,
"Its impossible to count all the dead but 250,000 is probably a good estimate of verifiable deaths."

I'm no more disqualified from estimating than you, It'd just be a guess like you're doing too anyway, as you don't have a source either its just your opinion, it all seems to be opinion, the fact is I'm saying you should provide a source, and that's reasonable, I provided no guess of the numbers.
Without a reliable source all you are doing is speculating, we could pull some numbers out of the air and attribute them to nursa, Isis, assad,.
It's like the accusations against Assad, like chemical weapons use, first its an undisputed fact, then its that it's clear he must be doing it and then it turns out it was some other friendly local terrorist group.
are you equally at home making statements against people in ireland and not for them to be verifiable, im sure thats called defamation here, lucky for you assad isnt here to take a case against you. Have you been sued for defamation much yet, If not Id say the only reason is because most people would try avoid that kind of thing and it would end up being more hassle and cost relative to the potential outcome.

Maybe you could back up your own estimates with reliable sources that show your opinions to be true.

Shurimgreat

cerastes wrote: »

More hyperbole, I did read what you said and its a few posts back for all to see, you said,
"Its impossible to count all the dead but 250,000 is probably a good estimate of verifiable deaths."

I'm no more disqualified from estimating than you, It'd just be a guess like you're doing too anyway, as you don't have a source either its just your opinion, it all seems to be opinion, the fact is I'm saying you should provide a source, and that's reasonable, I provided no guess of the numbers.
Without a reliable source all you are doing is speculating, we could pull some numbers out of the air and attribute them to nursa, Isis, assad,.
It's like the accusations against Assad, like chemical weapons use, first its an undisputed fact, then its that it's clear he must be doing it and then it turns out it was some other friendly local terrorist group.
are you equally at home making statements against people in ireland and not for them to be verifiable, im sure thats called defamation here, lucky for you assad isnt here to take a case against you. Have you been sued for defamation much yet, If not Id say the only reason is because most people would try avoid that kind of thing and it would end up being more hassle and cost relative to the potential outcome.

Maybe you could back up your own estimates with reliable sources that show your opinions to be true.

Ah right so assad didnt use the chemical weapons in the attack on doura i think it was. Yep assad a really nice all round bloke as opposed to all those unarmed protesters he massacred. I'm pretty sure you lamented the death of gadaffi too. And if anythibg happens to other murderous dictators around the world you will be in floods of tears! ☺

Gatling

Breaking news .

Multiple cruise missles fire by russia into Syria have missed and hit IRAN

So much for the supposed accuracy of Russian cruise missles been on par with American Tomahawk.
Comedy gold.

From the NY times
BRUSSELS — Cruise missiles fired by Russia from warships in the Caspian Sea at targets in Syria crashed in a rural area of Iran, senior United States officials said on Thursday.

It was unclear exactly where in Iran the missiles had landed, or whether there were any casualties. The officials said the flight path of the Russian cruise missiles would have taken them across northern sections of Iran and Iraq on the way to Syria. But not all of them made it there, one official said.

The officials spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss military intelligence.

http://mobile.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSKCN0S22EG20151008

cerastes

Shurimgreat wrote: »

Ah right so assad didnt use the chemical weapons in the attack on doura i think it was. Yep assad a really nice all round bloke as opposed to all those unarmed protesters he massacred. I'm pretty sure you lamented the death of gadaffi too. And if anythibg happens to other murderous dictators around the world you will be in floods of tears! ☺

Why are you going off on some separate rant? Why can't you just answer what I mentioned?
About providing reliable sources for your speculative guesses instead of throwing a figure out and just make it seem like it is a verifiable fact.
Nothing you mention above is relevant to my post.

As for Gaddafi and Assad, as many posters have said, many posters are saying they aren't nice people, but if any transition to a real and peaceful situation in a peaceful way in any of these countries was ever to be effected, it was going to have to include the heads of these states, have them peacefully sidelined, where they will live out in exile their lives, when you offer them one option only, heir heads on a plate, dragged up a dirt road and killed by people no less criminal than themselves, well that looks more like anarchy.
but now you have disparate violent radical groups, which suits the agenda of others outside of these countries.
Divide and conquer, and then pillage and buy off local corrupt religious fanatics that are much worse.

bilston

Gatling wrote: »

Breaking news .

Multiple cruise missles fire by russia into Syria have missed and hit IRAN

So much for the supposed accuracy of Russian cruise missles been on par with American Tomahawk.
Comedy gold.

From the NY times
BRUSSELS — Cruise missiles fired by Russia from warships in the Caspian Sea at targets in Syria crashed in a rural area of Iran, senior United States officials said on Thursday.

It was unclear exactly where in Iran the missiles had landed, or whether there were any casualties. The officials said the flight path of the Russian cruise missiles would have taken them across northern sections of Iran and Iraq on the way to Syria. But not all of them made it there, one official said.

The officials spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss military intelligence.

http://mobile.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSKCN0S22EG20151008

This apparent lack of accuracy is worrying.

glued

That's really embarrassing for Russia if true.

Gatling

glued wrote: »

That's really embarrassing for Russia if true.

Imagine the **** storm if they hit Iraq or turkey been there firing them across several countries

glued

Gatling wrote: »

Imagine the **** storm if they hit Iraq or turkey been there firing them across several countries

The most worrying aspect is that the missles have reportedly missed by 850km from the intended target.

You won't find anything about this on Russia Today

Gatling

glued wrote: »

The most worrying aspect is that the missles have reportedly missed by 850km from the intended target.

You won't find anything about this on Russia Today

Absolutely you won't

Count Dooku

Gatling wrote: »

Breaking news .

Multiple cruise missles fire by russia into Syria have missed and hit IRAN

So much for the supposed accuracy of Russian cruise missles been on par with American Tomahawk.
Comedy gold.

From the NY times
BRUSSELS — Cruise missiles fired by Russia from warships in the Caspian Sea at targets in Syria crashed in a rural area of Iran, senior United States officials said on Thursday.

It was unclear exactly where in Iran the missiles had landed, or whether there were any casualties. The officials said the flight path of the Russian cruise missiles would have taken them across northern sections of Iran and Iraq on the way to Syria. But not all of them made it there, one official said.

The officials spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss military intelligence.

http://mobile.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSKCN0S22EG20151008

Nothing unexpected, smear campaign in order to reduce panic from discovery that Russia has own cruise missiles
Of Course, nobody in Iran haven't seen crashed missiles
URGENT: Iran Rejects Russian Missile Crash
but it was perfected illustration how well controlled Western media by Department of State and Pentagon, practically all of them reported from Reuters to RTE, some of them even started to predict war between Russia and Iran, and none of them will write next day that it was fake based on non-existing Pentagon source

dav32cs

Gatling wrote: »

Breaking news .

Multiple cruise missles fire by russia into Syria have missed and hit IRAN

So much for the supposed accuracy of Russian cruise missles been on par with American Tomahawk.
Comedy gold.

From the NY times
BRUSSELS — Cruise missiles fired by Russia from warships in the Caspian Sea at targets in Syria crashed in a rural area of Iran, senior United States officials said on Thursday.

It was unclear exactly where in Iran the missiles had landed, or whether there were any casualties. The officials said the flight path of the Russian cruise missiles would have taken them across northern sections of Iran and Iraq on the way to Syria. But not all of them made it there, one official said.

The officials spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss military intelligence.

http://mobile.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSKCN0S22EG20151008

Oh yes, of course its true.

Let's believe the anonymous source that doesn't know where they landed, doesn't know what they were and refuses to go on record.

I'd be more interested in the US defence secretarys choice of words today saying 'the Russians will see casualties in the coming days' or the fact Saudi are going to ramp up support for the armed groups once more. The only thing left for them to ramp up to is better anti aircraft missiles

Gatling

Count Dooku wrote: »

Nothing unexpected, smear campaign in order to reduce panic from discovery that Russia has own cruise missiles
Of Course, nobody in Iran haven't seen crashed missiles
URGENT: Iran Rejects Russian Missile Crash
but it was perfected illustration how well controlled Western media by Department of State and Pentagon, practically all of them reported from Reuters to RTE, some of them even started to predict war between Russia and Iran, and none of them will write next day that it was fake based on non-existing Pentagon source

Of course anything Russia is denied but its expected

Count Dooku

Gatling wrote: »

Of course anything Russia is denied but its expected

BTW, denied by Iran, but I presume it is really doesn't matter to you, because you will believe only to Western propaganda

Gatling

Count Dooku wrote: »

BTW, denied by Iran, but I presume it is really doesn't matter to you, because you will believe only to Western propaganda

Of course Russia and Iran bastions of truth

Count Dooku

Gatling wrote: »

Of course Russia and Iran bastions of truth

Unfortunately, not
They both started to lie as much as Western media

dav32cs

Gatling wrote: »

Of course anything Russia is denied but its expected

W
ell I suppose we can trust the American media because of their impeccable track record in truthful reporting and also can compare the incompetent evil Russian military against the infallible and righteous American military who have never made any mistake or suffered any failure ( except when bombing hospitals...or shooting civilian aircraft from the sky...or releasing a nuclear bomb over their own country by accident...etc)

At least if you're going to pretend to be unbiased try to make it appear a bit more believable. If this incident did happen (which is jumping to huge amounts at this stage) so what? Military have failures all the time, no country is immune to technical or operational failures including america and Russia.

cerastes

glued wrote: »

The most worrying aspect is that the missles have reportedly missed by 850km from the intended target.

You won't find anything about this on Russia Today

It doesn't look like its been verified, I'm careful of outright believing anything I read or am told when a side has a vested interest,
Initially I wondered how the missles could miss by so much, looks like they were fired from quite close to Iran from the Caspian sea, the suggestion they are 850km off target? Seems to suggest they were fired from the med.

It may be true or it may not, I've seen a few YouTube clips of firing missles only for them to be ejected into the sea, one being a US ship, a few being anti tank missles not operating correctly. I've no doubt the amount of screw ups by military personnel or failure of equipment goes unreported.
Highly technical and sophisticated equipment can fail, gleeful gloating about it it is ridiculously immature and shows a complete lack of knowledge or real experience of working with anything even like it, military equipment fails all the time, this doesn't even seem certain if its true or not, if it is there will be some proof, surely the US has some sattelite pictures?

weisses

dav32cs wrote: »

W
ell I suppose we can trust the American media because of their impeccable track record in truthful reporting and also can compare the incompetent evil Russian military against the infallible and righteous American military who have never made any mistake or suffered any failure ( except when bombing hospitals...or shooting civilian aircraft from the sky...or releasing a nuclear bomb over their own country by accident...etc)

At least if you're going to pretend to be unbiased try to make it appear a bit more believable. If this incident did happen (which is jumping to huge amounts at this stage) so what? Military have failures all the time, no country is immune to technical or operational failures including america and Russia.

America is as untrustworthy as they come if they can get an advantage out of a situation, but I cannot see what their gain would be in this instance by spreading mis information

Count Dooku

weisses wrote: »

America is as untrustworthy as they come if they can get an advantage out of a situation, but I cannot see what their gain would be in this instance by spreading mis information

a) reduce panic after all world learned that Russia has long range cruise missiles
b) give some hope that good relations between Iran and Russia could be damaged
c) hide fact that since Russia moved to Syria, the only achievements of Pentagon were - one wedding, two excavators, one motorbike and one hospital

weisses

Count Dooku wrote: »

a) reduce panic after all world learned that Russia has long range cruise missiles

Known fact so mute point

Count Dooku wrote: »

b) give some hope that good relations between Iran and Russia could be damaged

Doesn't fly either because it can easily be verified by both countries

Count Dooku wrote: »

c) hide fact that since Russia moved to Syria, the only achievements of Pentagon were - one wedding, two excavators, one motorbike and one hospital

righhttt