Russia begins airstrikes against Syria
- Thread starter Funky Bunch
- Start date
Good. Let him be responsible for the end game.
Putin just drew a line through Obama......"leave boy, it's time for a man to do the job"
Last edited:
It's fun to watch how excited the America hating wing of HROT is over seeing Russia get knee deep in a civil war in the Middle East. The US is 14 years into Afghanistan and in Kunduz 7000 coalition trained Afghani's cannot beat back 500 Taliban. That's the same Afghanistan that the USSR spent a decade in. Yet, somehow we are supposed to sit back and be awed by Vladmir Putin's bold leadership.
I don't know how to respond to this. I think I love America more than a fair bit, which is why I'm excited to see a tard nation like Russia get stuck in the sandbox. Let's get out of Afghanistan too. And Europe, Japan and Korea can afford their own defence.
Last edited:
Putin just drew a line through Obama......"leave boy, it's time for a man to do the job"
Somehow, I have a feeling Russia plays by a different set of rules than the rest of us.
Post more please.Putin just drew a line through Obama......"leave boy, it's time for a man to do the job"
OMG, there are thousands of Obama wimpy/Putin tough guys images available. The World knows Putin is the Alpha and Obama is the ..........pussy.
I just flipped on RT to get the pro-Russia spin on this.
The highlight so far is when they showed a clip from CNN where the "expert analyst" was basically challenging Russia's honesty. She said something like "they claim their fighters and bombers are attacking ISIS, but ISIS doesn't have an air force." Refresh my memory: did we hear that criticism when we used air strikes against ISIS?
Kudos to RT for letting the viewer notice the irony without commenting on it.
The highlight so far is when they showed a clip from CNN where the "expert analyst" was basically challenging Russia's honesty. She said something like "they claim their fighters and bombers are attacking ISIS, but ISIS doesn't have an air force." Refresh my memory: did we hear that criticism when we used air strikes against ISIS?
Kudos to RT for letting the viewer notice the irony without commenting on it.
RT is showing cool pictures of what I assume are Russian fighters. For those who like that sort of thing.
I'm sure there are, but this one isn't showing me the alpha. Post more like the first two. I liked those.OMG, there are thousands of Obama wimpy/Putin tough guys images available. The World knows Putin is the Alpha and Obama is the ..........pussy.
I always thought you were gay, but apparently you're just British or European? Not that there is a ton of difference...but mind blown.
Sorry, what is RT?
Russian Television. Formerly government TV, but now, supposedly independent.
RT (founded as "Russia Today") is a Russian state-funded television network which runs cable and satellite television channels, as well as Internet content directed to audiences outside the Russian Federation. RT International, which is based in Moscow, presents around-the-clock news bulletins, documentaries, talk shows, and debates, as well as sports news and cultural programmes about Russia.[4] RT operates as a multilingual service with channels in three languages: the original English language channel was launched in 2005, followed by the Arabic language channel in 2007 and the Spanish language channel in 2009. RT America (since 2010),[5] and RT UK (since 2014) offer some locally based content for those countries.
RT is a brand of "TV-Novosti", an "autonomous non-profit organization", founded by the Russian news agency RIA Novosti on April 6, 2005.[1][6] During the economic crisis in December 2008, the Russian Government included ANO "TV-Novosti" in the list of core organisations of strategic importance of Russia.[7][8][9]
RT has been called a propaganda outlet for the Russian government[10][11][12] and its foreign policy[10][11][13][14] by former Russian officials[15] and by news reporters,[16] including former RT reporters.[17][18][19] It has also been accused of spreading disinformation.[20][21] The United Kingdom media regulator Ofcom has threatened RT with sanctions because of repeated violations of its rules on impartiality.[22] The network states that it offers a "Russian perspective" on global events.[23]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RT_(TV_network)
RT is a brand of "TV-Novosti", an "autonomous non-profit organization", founded by the Russian news agency RIA Novosti on April 6, 2005.[1][6] During the economic crisis in December 2008, the Russian Government included ANO "TV-Novosti" in the list of core organisations of strategic importance of Russia.[7][8][9]
RT has been called a propaganda outlet for the Russian government[10][11][12] and its foreign policy[10][11][13][14] by former Russian officials[15] and by news reporters,[16] including former RT reporters.[17][18][19] It has also been accused of spreading disinformation.[20][21] The United Kingdom media regulator Ofcom has threatened RT with sanctions because of repeated violations of its rules on impartiality.[22] The network states that it offers a "Russian perspective" on global events.[23]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RT_(TV_network)
If you have cable, it's available as one of the MHz offerings.
If you have a Roku you can stream it. That's what I'm doing.
In one sense it's like Fox and MSNBC. Cable news with a slant. In this case the slant is somewhat leftish, but is less left or right than what I think of as mildly US-skeptical. Like al Jazeera, you get a more international take. And a lot of international news is US-skeptical. BBC, France24 and Deutsche Welle are also much less likely to parrot US talking points. But those are also pro-Nato, whereas RT is not.
Just as I used to watch Fox to learn what conservatives are thinking, I watch al Jaz and RT and some others to learn what the rest of the world is thinking.
If you have a Roku you can stream it. That's what I'm doing.
In one sense it's like Fox and MSNBC. Cable news with a slant. In this case the slant is somewhat leftish, but is less left or right than what I think of as mildly US-skeptical. Like al Jazeera, you get a more international take. And a lot of international news is US-skeptical. BBC, France24 and Deutsche Welle are also much less likely to parrot US talking points. But those are also pro-Nato, whereas RT is not.
Just as I used to watch Fox to learn what conservatives are thinking, I watch al Jaz and RT and some others to learn what the rest of the world is thinking.
I was looking for RT on directv earlier and couldn't find it, bummer. Anyway, I watched CCTV from China, which is also typically "US skeptic," and they showed bits of both sides. It was interesting to hear them say almost exactly the opposite of what I'd seen on CNN just minutes before.
I think what you were catching though, was that the US is questioning Russian honesty because they've moved anti-aircraft guns into Syria, and ISIS has no Air Force, so they wouldn't need anti-aircraft weapons unless they planned to shoot down US, British, or Syrian aircraft, as they're the only ones other than Russia with air presence in Syria.
The Chinese station also mentioned that Russian military advisors are in Baghdad meeting with Iraqi, Syrian, and Iranian leaders about how to counter ISIS as well, no mention of US involvement or how that might impact what the US is doing with Iraq. Personally, I hope we just pull out altogether and let Russia take over the fight.
I look at it this way, if Russia takes care of the issues in Syria, good for us.
If Russia gets stuck in another quagmire there, good for us.
If Russia gets stuck in another quagmire there, good for us.
OMG, there are thousands of Obama wimpy/Putin tough guys images available. The World knows Putin is the Alpha and Obama is the ..........pussy.
Type A is great, if you have brains. Obama is not great or a Type A. This action though is brilliant in not only keeping us out of the area, but also baiting Russia into an unwinnable, disaster of a situation.
Putin was able to pull a couple ME countries together to fight ISIS - Obama has only been able\willing to stand at a distance and shoot a nerf gun.
Except for Russia is not fighting ISIS
Defense Secretary Ash Carter said Wednesday that the Russian airstrikes in Syria appear to have targeted areas that do not include Islamic State fighters, a development which Secretary of State John Kerry said would cause "grave concern" for the United States.
Kerry told the United Nations Security Council that the U.S. would not object to Russians hitting Islamic State or al-Qaida targets but airstrikes just to strengthen the hand of Syrian President Bashar Assad would be worrisome.
"It does appear they were in in areas where there probably were not ISIL forces," Carter said of the Russian airstrikes, using an alternative acronym for Islamic State. He would not go into more detail.
The top national security officials spoke as Russia launched its first airstrikes in Syria targeting what it said were Islamic State positions. On Wednesday, some U.S.-backed rebel groups claimed they were hit by Russian airstrikes but those claims could not be confirmed.
Carter said the strikes highlight a contradiction in Russia's approach. He said the Russians should not be supporting the Assad government, and their military moves are "doomed to fail."
Carter also expressed disappointment that the Russians did not use formal channels to provide the U.S. with advance notice of its airstrikes, but instead sent an official to the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad.
"By supporting Assad and seemingly taking on everyone who is fighting Assad, you're taking on the whole rest of the country of Syria," Carter said. "That is not our position. At least some parts of the anti-Assad opposition belong in the political transition going forward. That's why the Russian approach is doomed to fail."
White House spokesman Josh Earnest said the new action "calls into question their strategy, because when President Putin and President Obama had the opportunity to meet at the U.N. earlier this week much of their discussion was focused on the need for a political transition inside Syria."
Kerry said Russian operations must not support Assad or interfere with those of the U.S.-led coalition that is already attacking Islamic State targets. He called for an urgent start to military-to-military talks to prevent any kind of conflict between Russia and the coalition, suggesting they begin this week.
"If Russia's recent actions and those now ongoing reflect a genuine commitment to defeat (the Islamic State) then we are prepared to welcome those efforts and to find a way to de-conflict our operations and thereby multiply military pressure on ISIL and affiliated groups," Kerry said. "But we must not and will not be confused in our fight against ISIL with support for Assad."
(Manuel Balce Ceneta / AP)
"Moreover, we have also made clear that we would have grave concerns should Russia strike areas where ISIL and al-Qaida affiliated targets are not operating," he said. "Strikes of that kind would question Russia's real intentions fighting ISIL or protecting the Assad regime."
Kerry also said the U.S.-led coalition would "dramatically accelerate" its efforts.
Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov followed Kerry, saying Russia is ready to "forge standing channels of communication to ensure a maximally effective fight." He listed countries with a key role to play in resolving the chaos in Syria, including Iran, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Egypt, Jordan, Qatar , the U.S. and China.
Russian lawmakers voted unanimously Wednesday to allow Putin to order the airstrikes in Syria, where Russia has deployed fighter jets and other weapons in recent weeks. The Federation Council, the upper chamber of the Russian parliament, discussed Putin's request for the authorization behind closed doors, cutting off its live web broadcast to hold a debate notable for its quickness.
Putin had to request parliamentary approval for any use of Russian troops abroad, according to the constitution. The last time he did so was before Russia annexed Ukraine's Crimean Peninsula in March 2014.
Putin insisted that Russia is not going to send ground troops to Syria and that its role in Syrian army operations will be limited.
"We certainly are not going to plunge head-on into this conflict," he said. "First, we will be supporting the Syrian army purely in its legitimate fight with terrorist groups. Second, this will be air support without any participation in the ground operations."
Putin also said he expects Assad, Russia's longtime ally, to sit down and talk with the Syrian opposition about a political settlement, but added he was referring to what he described as a "healthy" opposition group.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/ct-russia-airstrikes-syria-20150930-story.html
Kerry told the United Nations Security Council that the U.S. would not object to Russians hitting Islamic State or al-Qaida targets but airstrikes just to strengthen the hand of Syrian President Bashar Assad would be worrisome.
"It does appear they were in in areas where there probably were not ISIL forces," Carter said of the Russian airstrikes, using an alternative acronym for Islamic State. He would not go into more detail.
The top national security officials spoke as Russia launched its first airstrikes in Syria targeting what it said were Islamic State positions. On Wednesday, some U.S.-backed rebel groups claimed they were hit by Russian airstrikes but those claims could not be confirmed.
Carter said the strikes highlight a contradiction in Russia's approach. He said the Russians should not be supporting the Assad government, and their military moves are "doomed to fail."
Carter also expressed disappointment that the Russians did not use formal channels to provide the U.S. with advance notice of its airstrikes, but instead sent an official to the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad.
"By supporting Assad and seemingly taking on everyone who is fighting Assad, you're taking on the whole rest of the country of Syria," Carter said. "That is not our position. At least some parts of the anti-Assad opposition belong in the political transition going forward. That's why the Russian approach is doomed to fail."
White House spokesman Josh Earnest said the new action "calls into question their strategy, because when President Putin and President Obama had the opportunity to meet at the U.N. earlier this week much of their discussion was focused on the need for a political transition inside Syria."
Kerry said Russian operations must not support Assad or interfere with those of the U.S.-led coalition that is already attacking Islamic State targets. He called for an urgent start to military-to-military talks to prevent any kind of conflict between Russia and the coalition, suggesting they begin this week.
"If Russia's recent actions and those now ongoing reflect a genuine commitment to defeat (the Islamic State) then we are prepared to welcome those efforts and to find a way to de-conflict our operations and thereby multiply military pressure on ISIL and affiliated groups," Kerry said. "But we must not and will not be confused in our fight against ISIL with support for Assad."
(Manuel Balce Ceneta / AP)
"Moreover, we have also made clear that we would have grave concerns should Russia strike areas where ISIL and al-Qaida affiliated targets are not operating," he said. "Strikes of that kind would question Russia's real intentions fighting ISIL or protecting the Assad regime."
Kerry also said the U.S.-led coalition would "dramatically accelerate" its efforts.
Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov followed Kerry, saying Russia is ready to "forge standing channels of communication to ensure a maximally effective fight." He listed countries with a key role to play in resolving the chaos in Syria, including Iran, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Egypt, Jordan, Qatar , the U.S. and China.
Russian lawmakers voted unanimously Wednesday to allow Putin to order the airstrikes in Syria, where Russia has deployed fighter jets and other weapons in recent weeks. The Federation Council, the upper chamber of the Russian parliament, discussed Putin's request for the authorization behind closed doors, cutting off its live web broadcast to hold a debate notable for its quickness.
Putin had to request parliamentary approval for any use of Russian troops abroad, according to the constitution. The last time he did so was before Russia annexed Ukraine's Crimean Peninsula in March 2014.
Putin insisted that Russia is not going to send ground troops to Syria and that its role in Syrian army operations will be limited.
"We certainly are not going to plunge head-on into this conflict," he said. "First, we will be supporting the Syrian army purely in its legitimate fight with terrorist groups. Second, this will be air support without any participation in the ground operations."
Putin also said he expects Assad, Russia's longtime ally, to sit down and talk with the Syrian opposition about a political settlement, but added he was referring to what he described as a "healthy" opposition group.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/ct-russia-airstrikes-syria-20150930-story.html
Appears to be targeting Assad's enemies...specifically the "moderates" we're supposed to be supporting. Reports are that a high level moderate was killed in a Russian air strike.
OMG, there are thousands of Obama wimpy/Putin tough guys images available. The World knows Putin is the Alpha and Obama is the ..........pussy.
If Russia goes in and fights to win and end it.......the US is going to look stupid, as we sit mired in Afghanistan, and looking to go back into Iraq because we didn't do things to end them, but to prolong them indefinitely. Obama has been as bad as Bush on this.
Putin is going to do this to embarrass the US as much as possible. Russia is dumping billions into the military right now, and he is going to use this to show the rest of the world that Russia is back as a world power.
Somewhere along the way, the U.S. has lost the mindset of winning wars. We fight just hard enough to keep the upper hand, then we milk it for all it's worth because it makes certain people very wealthy.
That somewhere was between WWII and Korea. Vietnam perfected it.
Russia is not going in to take care of issues. He is going in to take over. Otherwise I agree.
I think I'll get over any embarrassment when we save $6 trillion and thousands of American lives. I'm only too excited to see Russia buy this "win". The entire premise that a nation even can be embarassed in this way is suspect.
Last edited:
Russia is burning through their cash reserves, so he won't be dumping billions into the military forever. He can attempt to jump in and win this thing quick, but he'll create generations of Sunni Muslims who hate Russia. What he will probably wind up doing is try to pull out after propping up Assad, or replacing him. How is Putin going to spin a captured pilot being beheaded? The Russian people don't want this. They don't want the cost, and they don't want the lives lost.
Putin pushed Obama around like a high school kid would to a pre schooler. The Russians just slapped that limp wristed one in the face. The Russians have no intention of leaving now that they have pushed Obama to the ground.
What an embarrassment we have in the White House.
What an embarrassment we have in the White House.
Putin pushed Obama around like a high school kid would to a pre schooler. The Russians just slapped that limp wristed one in the face. The Russians have no intention of leaving now that they have pushed Obama to the ground.
What an embarrassment we have in the White House.
What an embarrassment we have in the White House.
Yeah, that's the impression I got -- although I haven't watched much news, and what I watched, I didn't watch closely.
But I got the impression Russia is bombing the shit out of the people we consider the good guys.
Similar threads
