Meanwhile, In Syria
Discussion
Zod said:
scherzkeks said:
Transmitter Man said:
What a mess Syria has become and Putin thinks he'll make it better.
Phil
Must be hard to walk the line you walk. Can't quite openly express support for ISIL, but can't support action against them either. Phil
Edited by Transmitter Man on Saturday 17th October 09:37
TM, you seem to wish for failure against IS simply because Putin is involved.
That's both callous and childish.
dudleybloke said:
I've often wondered why we are not turning this......
Into this.....
We could do it 25yrs ago and we had less tech then.
and the fact there was only two main routes into Kuwait City it was difficult not to watch what Sadaam was up to.Into this.....
We could do it 25yrs ago and we had less tech then.
http://www.geoatlas.com/medias/maps/countries/kuwa...
+ Kuwait is the size of a postage stamp as compared to Syria.
Phil
Edited by Transmitter Man on Tuesday 20th October 08:50
AreOut said:
Putin somehow hits ISIS facilities that US has somehow been missing for a year of continuous bombing, interesting at least.
What makes you think he has been hitting IS facilities or is it that he calls any opposition to the Assad regime IS for the sake of the media?http://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/624/cpsprodpb/1088C/p...
Phil
Edited by Transmitter Man on Tuesday 20th October 09:01
If they see it in an overall plan then yes.
The idea it seems is to predominantly if not solely go after the regime opposition around their stronghold regions which presently is made up not of IS but other opposition groups.
With them weakened then Assad / Russia can leave it up to the west to go after IS.
Assad keeps his job, Russia keeps it's warm water naval port and so I've read access to offshore drilling rights to oil/gas (in exchange for supplying weapons and propping up the regime.
I'm not sure what Iran will gain other than a continuation of the route through Syria to feed their proxy Hezbollah in Lebanon.
Just my 2p. I could be wrong.
Phil
The idea it seems is to predominantly if not solely go after the regime opposition around their stronghold regions which presently is made up not of IS but other opposition groups.
With them weakened then Assad / Russia can leave it up to the west to go after IS.
Assad keeps his job, Russia keeps it's warm water naval port and so I've read access to offshore drilling rights to oil/gas (in exchange for supplying weapons and propping up the regime.
I'm not sure what Iran will gain other than a continuation of the route through Syria to feed their proxy Hezbollah in Lebanon.
Just my 2p. I could be wrong.
Phil
Someone asked about the vetted groups receiving TOW's a while back.
An interesting article I just came across:
https://hasanmustafas.wordpress.com/2015/05/08/the...
Phil
An interesting article I just came across:
https://hasanmustafas.wordpress.com/2015/05/08/the...
Phil
Pro-Moscow website Russia Insider has released a highly produced drone footage video showing the ongoing Syrian army offensive against a rebel stronghold in the eastern district of Damascus, Jobar.
BTW Quantum, there's no IS operatives within 100km of Jobar but let's call them IS to keep you happy, ok?
Footage of the offensive filmed by Russia Works, a Russian company with ties to the state broadcaster, is vividly clear.
https://youtu.be/M0ELAa02TUY
Phil
BTW Quantum, there's no IS operatives within 100km of Jobar but let's call them IS to keep you happy, ok?
Footage of the offensive filmed by Russia Works, a Russian company with ties to the state broadcaster, is vividly clear.
https://youtu.be/M0ELAa02TUY
Phil
Jesus Christ that's horrific , the whole city is wrecked.
If Assad winning brings this to an end then surely that's a good thing, in fact looking at the amount of rebel groups who would be fighting each other for power if Assad fell then Assad getting this cleared up as quickly as possible with Russian help has to be the best bad option???
If Assad winning brings this to an end then surely that's a good thing, in fact looking at the amount of rebel groups who would be fighting each other for power if Assad fell then Assad getting this cleared up as quickly as possible with Russian help has to be the best bad option???
Transmitter Man said:
What makes you think he has been hitting IS facilities or is it that he calls any opposition to the Assad regime IS for the sake of the media?
http://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/624/cpsprodpb/1088C/p...
Phil
I've never said he hits only ISIS. Other rebel groups are also associated with terrorism(well most of them).http://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/624/cpsprodpb/1088C/p...
Phil
Edited by Transmitter Man on Tuesday 20th October 09:01
Zod said:
how me the evidence that the Russians are actually attacking ISIS.
http://edition.cnn.com/2015/10/12/world/syria-russia-airstrikes/you'll see several strikes in ISIS area, even on CNN site...
Are Out,
I'll keep it simple.
Russia is bombing areas in the main controlled or contested by 'Syrian' opposition groups and not IS.
If Russia is bombing IS targets then they are either just to covers their backsides in the media though I doubt it, are too close to vital military bases or other strategic reasons.
There seems to be no emphasis on clearing IS from the map by the Russian or for that matter what is left of the SAAF.
If you want 100% proof of this that even you will have trouble in brushing aside is the current, as in happening as we speak, huge evacuation of civilians from parts of Aleppo towards the Turkish border. This has, for over two years been a stronghold of 'Syrian' opposition groups and not IS. IS are now there but in very small pockets. With Russian air power the SAA + Iran + Hezbollah are looking to surround this large city. If the air power continues they will probably succeed, eventually however with huge loss of men. Soldiers have of course always been expendable, especially when conscripts.
Phil
I'll keep it simple.
Russia is bombing areas in the main controlled or contested by 'Syrian' opposition groups and not IS.
If Russia is bombing IS targets then they are either just to covers their backsides in the media though I doubt it, are too close to vital military bases or other strategic reasons.
There seems to be no emphasis on clearing IS from the map by the Russian or for that matter what is left of the SAAF.
If you want 100% proof of this that even you will have trouble in brushing aside is the current, as in happening as we speak, huge evacuation of civilians from parts of Aleppo towards the Turkish border. This has, for over two years been a stronghold of 'Syrian' opposition groups and not IS. IS are now there but in very small pockets. With Russian air power the SAA + Iran + Hezbollah are looking to surround this large city. If the air power continues they will probably succeed, eventually however with huge loss of men. Soldiers have of course always been expendable, especially when conscripts.
Phil
Budflicker said:
Jesus Christ that's horrific , the whole city is wrecked.
If Assad winning brings this to an end then surely that's a good thing, in fact looking at the amount of rebel groups who would be fighting each other for power if Assad fell then Assad getting this cleared up as quickly as possible with Russian help has to be the best bad option???
It is the best option for ensuring a stable Syria. It is not the best option for ensuring US access to future pipelines. If Assad winning brings this to an end then surely that's a good thing, in fact looking at the amount of rebel groups who would be fighting each other for power if Assad fell then Assad getting this cleared up as quickly as possible with Russian help has to be the best bad option???
This is funny, like I mean seriously funny.
The old peanut farmer had one over the Kremlin: http://www.rferl.org/content/the-kremlin-doesnt-ge...
Phil
The old peanut farmer had one over the Kremlin: http://www.rferl.org/content/the-kremlin-doesnt-ge...
Phil
Transmitter Man said:
I guess you're trying to make a point, but not sure what it is.....?
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff