Mr.United_Nations Posted January 12, 2013 #126 Share Posted January 12, 2013 Uhhhh the Russians actually want the FSA to talk, they have never said that they want to remove the FSA. So it seems your leaders are smarter than you 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tutankhaten-pasheri Posted January 12, 2013 #127 Share Posted January 12, 2013 You have a problem with understanding sarcasm?, or is your comment, which shows no sign of any understanding of what I posted, simply some sort of spoiler in order to make it seem I have really said that Yaroslav Mudry is going to crush FSA. You should think before posting, otherwise what you say will be disregarded as troll like garbage Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.United_Nations Posted January 12, 2013 #128 Share Posted January 12, 2013 You have a problem with understanding sarcasm?, or is your comment, which shows no sign of any understanding of what I posted, simply some sort of spoiler in order to make it seem I have really said that Yaroslav Mudry is going to crush FSA. You should think before posting, otherwise what you say will be disregarded as troll like garbage So why did you post it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tutankhaten-pasheri Posted January 12, 2013 #129 Share Posted January 12, 2013 Are you playing with a full deck of cards? or are you simply what I call a "soft" troll? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.United_Nations Posted January 12, 2013 #130 Share Posted January 12, 2013 Are you playing with a full deck of cards? or are you simply what I call a "soft" troll? Keep on topic please Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Helen of Annoy Posted January 12, 2013 #131 Share Posted January 12, 2013 Are you playing with a full deck of cards? or are you simply what I call a "soft" troll? Aten, calm down and talk to people. Don’t be like aunty Helen who sees trolls everywhere she looks Yaroslav needs a coat of fresh paint, pronto. It looks stereotypically Russian rusty in that photo. Yes, I’m teasing you a little, but I am aware the paint doesn’t influence the fire power. I’m also aware Russia would send freighters instead of frigates if the ships were there to evacuate instead of deter someone, probably the West. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tutankhaten-pasheri Posted January 12, 2013 #132 Share Posted January 12, 2013 (edited) @ Nixon fool You are a troll, it is obvious. You have deliberatly misquoted me and tried to twist my post #125. This post was one of the few here that is actually on topic, so now you try the ploy of your ridiculous statement that I should keep on topic. Anybody reading this thread will see you for what you are, and will disregard your deliberate distruptive and time waisting tactics. Not wanting to be banned prevents me from saying what I really want to about you. Go to hell, I respond no more. Edited January 12, 2013 by Atentutankh-pasheri Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.United_Nations Posted January 12, 2013 #133 Share Posted January 12, 2013 @ Nixon fool You are a troll, it is obvious. You have deliberatly misquoted me and tried to twist my post #125. This post was one of the few here that is actually on topic, so now you try the ploy of your ridiculous statement that I should keep on topic. Anybody reading this thread will see you for what you are, and will disregard your deliberate distruptive and time waisting tactics. Not wanting to be banned prevents me from saying what I really want to about you. Go to hell, I respond no more. You need to calm down, i have not misquoted anything. All i said was the Russians want the FSA to talk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+and-then Posted January 12, 2013 #134 Share Posted January 12, 2013 The Russian "fleet" on it's way to crush FSA, start WWIII on any other fantasy garbage vomitted on this thread by know nothings. Here is frigate Yaroslav Mudry at Malta a few days back. While US sends carriers etc all around the world, invades some countries and engages in black ops in others, I will not listen to the selfrighteous garbage here. Russia has every right to protect it's own interests and citizens. The subheading to the thread is "To deter the west", what total fantasy, nothing but see through Russophobe propaganda. So, how many US/Nato ships in the area?, how many US carrier battle groups? yet here there is garbage about one Russian frigate and some landing and supply ships. Yet here not one word here against Saudi and Quatar. Smell of hypocracy very strong from west, as always..... Aten I don't think anyone here really views Russian ships in an ally's port as a threat to the west. The real threat would come from the eventual dissolution of Assad's forces and he resorting to wmd for "survival". If Russia continues to support him no matter what, then it may come to this. And if Russian forces - no matter how small a unit - were to accidentally come under fire when the west responds to a Syrian chem/bio attack then all hell could break loose, don't you agree? It could be construed as the west attacking Russian forces intentionally. And I think Putin might just get his dander up too much over that. With as many nukes as the east and west still have on a short launch window it is well to keep such threats at bay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Space Commander Travis Posted January 12, 2013 #135 Share Posted January 12, 2013 Aten, calm down and talk to people. Don’t be like aunty Helen who sees trolls everywhere she looks Yaroslav needs a coat of fresh paint, pronto. It looks stereotypically Russian rusty in that photo. Yes, I’m teasing you a little, but I am aware the paint doesn’t influence the fire power. I’m also aware Russia would send freighters instead of frigates if the ships were there to evacuate instead of deter someone, probably the West. but that's the only warship they have sent. The others are landing ships, which, unless they're there to put troops on the ground to deter intervention, are exactly what you'd use to evacuate people, and one friggate, which could do with a paint job, is not going to be likely to deter the Armed Might of the U.S. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Helen of Annoy Posted January 12, 2013 #136 Share Posted January 12, 2013 but that's the only warship they have sent. The others are landing ships, which, unless they're there to put troops on the ground to deter intervention, are exactly what you'd use to evacuate people, and one friggate, which could do with a paint job, is not going to be likely to deter the Armed Might of the U.S. ™. While The Armed Might is busy bringing the Democracy elsewhere, Rusty Yaroslav is enough to send the visual message: we can afford to have her sunk if that will cause further trouble. I have no illusions about Russian motives for supporting Assad. They are not there to protect anyone but their interests, from anchoring in Mediterranean to selling insane amount of weapons. I wish they evacuated him by now, even if it takes dragging him by his ears off his throne. (I can so vividly imagine that.) Because he made too much damage, people will not forget their dead. Maybe he had a chance before, to rig elections in less distasteful way (one and only presidential candidate?!), but now it’s too late for anything else but letting people consolidate new government and how Islamic it will be should have been carefully pondered about years ago, while he was only imprisoning and torturing the possible opposition, not yet bombing whole towns. Pressure works, but if there’s no valve to let the accumulated steam out, the pressure cooker explodes. It keeps happening, yet the pressure cookers remain favourite part of political kitchens. Because it’s just vapour, right? Stands no chance against our steel, right? *boom* wrong. I hope FSA is talking with Russians away from media attention and I certainly won’t blame them if they choose to make some arrangement since no one else is willing to touch Russian spot in Middle East. That too is quite understandable. I only have no idea what would Russian top figures say to their, Russian population that keeps hearing about bloodthirsty terrorists that are the same as Chechens and so on and on. “We made a little pact with people who we blackened as terrorists up to yesterday because upon closer look we came to conclusion they are, as from this morning, in fact, freedom fighters.” And to be morbidly honest, they wouldn’t be the first to promote freedom fighter into terrorist and vice versa. I wish it was possible for Syrians to get rid of psycho on their own, I also quite frankly wish they turn to the West, since that’s what I wish for my own part of the world, not to re-elaborate why, but pragmatic people are more likely to survive. And first you have to stay alive in order to change sides later Saturday night live rant over Sorry, folks, this is my pressure cooker valve. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+and-then Posted January 12, 2013 #137 Share Posted January 12, 2013 but that's the only warship they have sent. The others are landing ships, which, unless they're there to put troops on the ground to deter intervention, are exactly what you'd use to evacuate people, and one friggate, which could do with a paint job, is not going to be likely to deter the Armed Might of the U.S. ™. LV we have a lot of faults here in the US but as a rule stupidity isn't high on the list. You don't POKE a BEAR. Especially one who is hypersensitive anyway. Lots of other ways to get what you want/need without intentional provocation. But I agree with your assessment of what the forces are arrayed to accomplish. Not enough to cause too much worry but plenty to do what is needed. It's sort of an analog, though not perfect, to US forces in South Korea. When the north gets agitated and decides to shoot it NEVER shoots where US forces might get even injured, let alone killed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tutankhaten-pasheri Posted January 12, 2013 #138 Share Posted January 12, 2013 (edited) Edited January 12, 2013 by Atentutankh-pasheri Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tutankhaten-pasheri Posted January 12, 2013 #139 Share Posted January 12, 2013 (edited) I’m also aware Russia would send freighters instead of frigates if the ships were there to evacuate instead of deter someone, probably the West. You mean a freighter like the Lena moored alongside Jaroslav Mudry at Valeta. People here lag behind me in this affair..... Edited January 12, 2013 by Atentutankh-pasheri Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+and-then Posted January 13, 2013 #140 Share Posted January 13, 2013 Too funny - I used to know someone named "Lena" from Yaroslavl Classic name for a ship - the "Helen" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Helen of Annoy Posted January 13, 2013 #141 Share Posted January 13, 2013 Helen needs fresh coat of paint too! I still think Yaroslav is there to deter the West and Lena is only there to make him look less rusty. It’s like a girl deliberately going out with the ugliest friend she has, so she looks better in comparison Never mind me, Aten, I’m just entertaining myself here, I’m sure Lena can take both Assad and his supersized ego aboard... maybe that's the problem, maybe Russia should ask one of her oligarchs to send his private yacht so Assad can go away in style. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tutankhaten-pasheri Posted January 13, 2013 #142 Share Posted January 13, 2013 Private yacht 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr.United_Nations Posted January 13, 2013 #143 Share Posted January 13, 2013 Don't forget the Egyptians have an air force, don't know how big but it is sizable, with combined with the Royal Saudi Air force and the Turkish air force. Assad's weapons and tanks would be gone in 5 hours lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Space Commander Travis Posted January 13, 2013 #144 Share Posted January 13, 2013 Don't forget the Egyptians have an air force, don't know how big but it is sizable, with combined with the Royal Saudi Air force and the Turkish air force. Assad's weapons and tanks would be gone in 5 hours lol the Saudis would probably drop their bombs "accidentally" somewhere in the desert on their own side of the border, like they (*allegedly) did once or twice in Gulf War I, to avoid having to face the might of Saddam's air defenses. I daresay you could also rely on Morsi to about the same extent as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tutankhaten-pasheri Posted January 13, 2013 #145 Share Posted January 13, 2013 (edited) Yet it is highly improbable, impossible even, that with Egypt in political turmoil they would launch airstrikes anywhere in the world. Now, the total unreality of this scenario. What airspace do these Saudi and Egyptian planes fly to attack Syria? Why would Egypt attack Syria anyway? it is ridiculous to even think of them wanting to do this. With Saudis I can see them wanting to, but it will never happen. There is also the military and political aspects. Do these airforces have the capability of destroying 5,000 tanks, and it would also need to be other assets, for instance artillery, in a year, let alone 5 hours. They need intelligence for location of all these assets, they need awacs, and most of all they need to first destroy Syria's AA defences. As for Turkey, well, it will be difficult for them and would cause huge civilian co-lateral casualties as we have all seen in the two gulf wars. I do not think Turkey will launch all out war on Syria, and it will need to be all war for this scenario to take place. Edited January 13, 2013 by Atentutankh-pasheri Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+and-then Posted January 13, 2013 #146 Share Posted January 13, 2013 (edited) Yet it is highly improbable, impossible even, that with Egypt in political turmoil they would launch airstrikes anywhere in the world. Now, the total unreality of this scenario. What airspace do these Saudi and Egyptian planes fly to attack Syria? Why would Egypt attack Syria anyway? it is ridiculous to even think of them wanting to do this. With Saudis I can see them wanting to, but it will never happen. There is also the military and political aspects. Do these airforces have the capability of destroying 5,000 tanks, and it would also need to be other assets, for instance artillery, in a year, let alone 5 hours. They need intelligence for location of all these assets, they need awacs, and most of all they need to first destroy Syria's AA defences. As for Turkey, well, it will be difficult for them and would cause huge civilian co-lateral casualties as we have all seen in the two gulf wars. I do not think Turkey will launch all out war on Syria, and it will need to be all war for this scenario to take place. Playing devil's advocate here Aten. If Syria's forces are really that formidable, why are they struggling, mightily it seems, against an insurgency? It's not like they are showing restraint at all except in regard to the chemical weapons - or do I misread? I agree that none of her Arab neighbors has any intention of attacking Syria/Assad. Edited January 13, 2013 by and then Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tutankhaten-pasheri Posted January 13, 2013 #147 Share Posted January 13, 2013 Because Syria's forces are configured to fight Israel. What is happening in Syria is not a civil war in normal sense, there is not two sides that have taken half armed forces each to fight each other with. What is happening is rebellion by lightly armed groups who are fighting urban warfare. Tanks, artillery and planes are not the best weapons to use in such warfare. True they have been used, but there is no scope for mass movements of tank divisions launching attacks, or mass attacks by ground attack aircraft. So when you see on paper that Syria has large armed forces, they are the wrong type for what happens in Syria. An analogy is Northern Ireland. This caused problem for thirty years with comparitively few terrorist groups against entire British Army. Yet British never defeated IRA, even though they had military capability to turn Northern Ireland into a desert. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the-Unexpected-Soul Posted January 13, 2013 #148 Share Posted January 13, 2013 i think before the revolution, we could beat any arab country even if they had more advanced weapons, and that's becouse of many reasons Similar to the way the rebels are winning even they have much less/simple weapons, the moral high ground is just one of many Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yamato Posted January 14, 2013 #149 Share Posted January 14, 2013 A Russian cargo ship would concern me much more than a guided missile frigate, simply because it can carry so much more. It's not the shipboard missiles that matter, it's the materiel they're offloading from the ship. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+and-then Posted January 14, 2013 #150 Share Posted January 14, 2013 A Russian cargo ship would concern me much more than a guided missile frigate, simply because it can carry so much more. It's not the shipboard missiles that matter, it's the materiel they're offloading from the ship. Exactly..... and if supplies from Moscow stopped coming in today Assad would be in serious trouble very quickly. My guess is weeks rather than months. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now