Russia warns the US of serious consequences

[stevewinn]

Has it been explained yet why Assad whose currently on the side that's winning in Syria would go and use chemical weapons? Which would result in the West having an excuse to get involved? Assad might be a dictator but he's not stupid.

After the whole Gaddafi affair, im sceptical about the whole damn thing. perception management.

 

 

[DarkHunter]

8 minutes ago, stevewinn said:

Has it been explained yet why Assad whose currently on the side that's winning in Syria would go and use chemical weapons? Which would result in the West having an excuse to get involved? Assad might be a dictator but he's not stupid.

After the whole Gaddafi affair, im sceptical about the whole damn thing. perception management.

 

 

Assad is winning but not by a lot, he still controls only a fraction of his country, lost between 40% and 55% of his military, recently repelled an organized assault on the capital which probably scared him some, has had 22% of his country flee the country as refugees with another 40% displaced internally, and peace talks that are going no where with large groups either walking out or boycotting them out right.  

Assad knows as things currently stand he only remains alive for as long as Russia and Iran decide to back him, which with no end in site of the conflict there is no guarantee one or both won't decide to cut their losses at any moment and just leave.

Its not unimaginable that Assad is far more desperate then he lets on and is quickly trying to end the civil war before he either loses support from the only two nation's keeping him alive or before the amount of people that has left Syria becomes far too great from Syria to recover from.

Then one has to be careful with trying to understand the mind of Assad, what may seem irrational to most people very well be rational to Assad.  As a dictator part of how he retains power is by using fear and brutally punishing/crushing any that oppose him.  

Ultimately Assad is winning but his victory is far from certain, which even if he does win at this point it would at best be a pyrrhic victory, so using any means necessary to win the war quickly and punish those who opposed him may very well be a rational decision especially given that past use of chemical weapons only resulted in a relatively shorted lived pr problem.

[stevewinn]

17 hours ago, DarkHunter said:

Assad is winning but not by a lot, he still controls only a fraction of his country, lost between 40% and 55% of his military, recently repelled an organized assault on the capital which probably scared him some, has had 22% of his country flee the country as refugees with another 40% displaced internally, and peace talks that are going no where with large groups either walking out or boycotting them out right.  

Assad knows as things currently stand he only remains alive for as long as Russia and Iran decide to back him, which with no end in site of the conflict there is no guarantee one or both won't decide to cut their losses at any moment and just leave.

Its not unimaginable that Assad is far more desperate then he lets on and is quickly trying to end the civil war before he either loses support from the only two nation's keeping him alive or before the amount of people that has left Syria becomes far too great from Syria to recover from.

Then one has to be careful with trying to understand the mind of Assad, what may seem irrational to most people very well be rational to Assad.  As a dictator part of how he retains power is by using fear and brutally punishing/crushing any that oppose him.  

Ultimately Assad is winning but his victory is far from certain, which even if he does win at this point it would at best be a pyrrhic victory, so using any means necessary to win the war quickly and punish those who opposed him may very well be a rational decision especially given that past use of chemical weapons only resulted in a relatively shorted lived pr problem.

It makes sense what you say and it cannot be argued with, But, its all rather strange, Assad and his use of Chemical weapons would surely jeopardise that vital Russian backing.

The West or US is hell bent on targeting Assad, payback for his fathers 1983 Lebanon bombing, and payback for Bashar Al Assads with his support of the insurgency in Iraq. (2003 -) 

We remove Assad and a power vacuum will exist like we seen in Iraq and especially with Libya and Gaddafi. - the whole Gaddafi affair by the west is unbelievable, made a super villain by the West to further their means, an evil dictator we where told. the damn thing was set up by the west, its so crazy its hard to believe.

currently in Syria ISIS is fighting against, Syria, Russia, Kurds, Iraqis, and special operations by the US, UK. etc... including air campaign. - We take Assad and Russia out of the equation and the poo-storm will be left firmly to America in the main.

Its all rather fishy. im not sure British public oipinon is going along with what the UK government and Media are spinning, something is not right somewhere.

 

 

 

 

Edited April 11, 2017 by stevewinn

[seeder]

On 09/04/2017 at 7:06 PM, RoofGardener said:

Once more, you have posted a news article without any comment, Seeder. Isn't that a breach of copyright ? (because it is no longer considered 'fair useage' ? ). 

 

Once more?

No it isnt a breach of copyright. Most articles on this site, especially those posted by UMBOT....  the sites webmaster.... or any mod who wants to make a post for the benefit of the forum..... DO NOT carry any comments other than the article itself....then there are plenty more who post links/articles for discussion without any personal input. Its not a breach of copyright, it doesnt break any fair usage rules whatsover.... so you made quite an ignorant and an accusatory comment there.

Ive posted over 18 thousand  articles.... NEVER, NOT ONCE..... have I been accused of posting an article without comment...guess why? Because it doesnt breach copyright and is totally acceptable here on UM. If youre not sure about that then I can only suggest youve been reading this site without paying much attention, and if you still think youre right, contact a mod who will no doubt confirm what I have said

Breach of copyright, or plagiarism,  is.... (in this case) when any source is quoted without giving credit to that source. ie:  A LINK!   Again,never have I done that

Of course the other reason youd make such an accusation is that you have a personal issue with me. Or were just trying to be a smarty pants. And clearly, youre no good at that either. You made a snipe comment at me and also made false accusations. But its YOU who were in fact proven wrong.....

So Id suggest you apologise for that.  But I know that wont be easy. You tried to shoot down a long term well respected member with smartypants comments ....I politely warned Id run circles round you.... and now....for everyone to see....you have been made to look the fool. Certainly not me. Let this be a lesson to you to THINK before you let loose with accusations

and then end up with egg on your face by stating INCORRECT comments about copyright

wanna try again?

Ive got an idea....keep your comments inline with the thread...if you have nothing to say....then say nothing. Do not attack me, as thats against the rules and if it happens again I will invite the mods to remove your posts which will may well end with you getting a reprimand for false accusations

And if you really want to come to big boys grown up discussions....then youd best get your facts right from the start....to save yourself from me.... pulling apart any incorrect post you may make...such as the one that received my answer here, laying bare your ignorance and false accusations!

Got that?  

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited April 11, 2017 by seeder

[seeder]

anyone seen this ?

 

Quote

 

‘Syria will implode if Assad goes', says Peter Ford

Former UK ambassador to Syria, Peter Ford, says Syria would "implode" and that there "would be a bloodbath" if President Assad were to go.

Speaking to BBC Newsnight's Emily Maitlis, Mr Ford said there was no moderate opposition waiting to take over.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-39562082

 

 

 

[seeder]

On 09/04/2017 at 7:06 PM, RoofGardener said:

 

Notwithstanding, could you advice me precisely NOW such noble allies as Russia and Iran could "respond" to any more "red lines" ? 

 

 

No I cant advise you, Im not a mind reader and dont have access to top secret Russian plans, or top secret Iranian plans, or top secret anyones plans. So its just another rather silly question you ask...

Perhaps they will get their bows and arrows out, seeing as some people think Russia has a broken rusty military....

while some of the latest US jets are suffering major problems and their latest aircraft carrier has its own issues

I have no doubt you dont even know that the largest sub in the world was recently deployed either... oh...and yes thats Russian....tho it wasnt necessarily deployed to deal with the US and its current bombing campaign of Syria

But perhaps you do know about the Russian unstoppable hypersonic missiles.... seeing as I already made a thread about that... tho not entirely clear if they are ready to go this year or not

so who knows what will happen. But one things for sure, the media is suggesting that its all gearing up for possible conflict....the pieces are falling into place.... and Russia has already threatened or warned the US....and then to top it off, we have the useful idiot Trump in power...a man whose daughter, its alleged, told her daddy to bomb Syria...and on the advice of his daughter... he did so!

Gotta luv US Presidents!

Quote

Donald Trump bombed Syria ‘because daughter Ivanka told him to’
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/donald-trump-bombed-syria-daughter-ivanka-told-135331733.html

 

 

and to echo Steve winn above..... it all smells fishy......

China has also condemned the US attacks of Syria.....while the US is putting pressure on China about its island building and also....wanting China to deal with Nth Korea..... who are also about to see US war ships appear very close to them

Things are getting quite tense indeed

 

Edited April 11, 2017 by seeder

[MWoo7]

3 hours ago, stevewinn said:

t makes sense what you say and it cannot be argued with, But, its all rather strange, Assad and

What's strange ?  How many times has that ever been said at this site? CEEEEELEBRATION TIME ! COME ON ! YEY !

( Yeah its probably the wrong person's name in the quote, singing to the choir, I ignore it now. )

Edited April 11, 2017 by MWoo7

[Mr.United_Nations]

Are u sure China has  condemend? From what ive been searching Iran does not really trust the Russians, which is interesting and wont allow thier jets in Iran and same for Syria

[seeder]

7 minutes ago, Mr.United_Nations said:

Are u sure China has  condemend? From what ive been searching Iran does not really trust the Russians, which is interesting and wont allow thier jets in Iran and same for Syria

 

yeh Im sure
 

Quote

 

China condemns Syria chemical attack, supports investigation
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_east/china-condemns-syria-chemical-attack-supports-investigation/2017/04/07/2bd13b52-1b71-11e7-8598-9a99da559f9e_story.html?utm_term=.90f8bf71203b

 

 

[seeder]

14 minutes ago, Mr.United_Nations said:

 From what ive been searching Iran does not really trust the Russians, which is interesting and wont allow thier jets in Iran and same for Syria

 

OK post your links so we can all see pls?

 

[+and-then]

6 hours ago, stevewinn said:

the damn thing was set up by the west, its so crazy its hard to believe.

In the sense that U.S. administration officials represent the "West", that's true.  If I remember correctly, even Obama was reluctant on Libya.  Clinton, Rice and Samantha Powers - advocated and refined Tom Axworthy's  "Responsibility to protect" ideology - and convinced Obama to get in line with the E.U. on it.  I'm not sure what the actual goal of the 3 weird sisters was, but the results are plain to see and will be for decades, I suspect.

[A rather obscure Bassoon]

1 hour ago, Mr.United_Nations said:

Are u sure China has  condemend? From what ive been searching Iran does not really trust the Russians, which is interesting and wont allow thier jets in Iran and same for Syria

http://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2017/03/28/515873/Iran-Russia-Syria

You'll find that since 2012 the Iranians and the Russians have grown ever closer and I'd bet my shirt that if the US started show military Interest in Iran then the Ruskies would get the biggest welcome ever.

[+and-then]

2 hours ago, A rather obscure Bassoon said:

http://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2017/03/28/515873/Iran-Russia-Syria

You'll find that since 2012 the Iranians and the Russians have grown ever closer and I'd bet my shirt that if the US started show military Interest in Iran then the Ruskies would get the biggest welcome ever.

True.  This makes what Obama did with the Iran nuke agreement that much more egregious.  To stop them assembling nukes in about 7 years, we'd have to risk war with Russia as well.  Oh well, had to happen eventually.

[Space Commander Travis]

7 hours ago, and then said:

True.  This makes what Obama did with the Iran nuke agreement that much more egregious.  To stop them assembling nukes in about 7 years, we'd have to risk war with Russia as well.  Oh well, had to happen eventually.

yes, of course Obama should've seized the window of opportunity for war on the Mad Mullahs while he had the chance shouldn't he! It wan't as if he had anything else on his hands right then.

[RoofGardener]

On 4/11/2017 at 3:35 PM, seeder said:

Once more?

No it isnt a breach of copyright. Most articles on this site, especially those posted by UMBOT....  the sites webmaster.... or any mod who wants to make a post for the benefit of the forum..... DO NOT carry any comments other than the article itself....then there are plenty more who post links/articles for discussion without any personal input. Its not a breach of copyright, it doesnt break any fair usage rules whatsover.... so you made quite an ignorant and an accusatory comment there.

Ive posted over 18 thousand  articles.... NEVER, NOT ONCE..... have I been accused of posting an article without comment...guess why? Because it doesnt breach copyright and is totally acceptable here on UM. If youre not sure about that then I can only suggest youve been reading this site without paying much attention, and if you still think youre right, contact a mod who will no doubt confirm what I have said

Breach of copyright, or plagiarism,  is.... (in this case) when any source is quoted without giving credit to that source. ie:  A LINK!   Again,never have I done that

Of course the other reason youd make such an accusation is that you have a personal issue with me. Or were just trying to be a smarty pants. And clearly, youre no good at that either. You made a snipe comment at me and also made false accusations. But its YOU who were in fact proven wrong.....

So Id suggest you apologise for that.  But I know that wont be easy. You tried to shoot down a long term well respected member with smartypants comments ....I politely warned Id run circles round you.... and now....for everyone to see....you have been made to look the fool. Certainly not me. Let this be a lesson to you to THINK before you let loose with accusations

and then end up with egg on your face by stating INCORRECT comments about copyright

wanna try again?

Ive got an idea....keep your comments inline with the thread...if you have nothing to say....then say nothing. Do not attack me, as thats against the rules and if it happens again I will invite the mods to remove your posts which will may well end with you getting a reprimand for false accusations

And if you really want to come to big boys grown up discussions....then youd best get your facts right from the start....to save yourself from me.... pulling apart any incorrect post you may make...such as the one that received my answer here, laying bare your ignorance and false accusations!

Got that?  

 

 

 

 

 

 

I've "got" that you are defensive, rude, and incapable of debating. Was there anything else I am under your orders to "get", Oh Great Authority ?  

[RoofGardener]

On 4/11/2017 at 4:36 PM, seeder said:

 

No I cant advise you, Im not a mind reader and dont have access to top secret Russian plans, or top secret Iranian plans, or top secret anyones plans. So its just another rather silly question you ask...

.......

 

Well Seeder, it was YOU who posted a quotation containing the comment about "red lines". I kinda assumed that in POSTING the article, you had some basic awareness of the content, and a willingness to discuss it ? Clearly, I was being silly in believing such a thing  

[hetrodoxly]

Interesting video, who's telling the truth.

 

[Farmer77]

@seeder You've done an amazing job in this thread arguing for truth and honesty. Its clear there are ample experts who argue the claims supporting the US's assertion that Assad used the chemical weapons . It also just doesnt make any logical sense for him to do so. This was a wag the dog type scenario the entire way and the corporate owned media shills ate it up . Hell CNN had damn near glowing coverage of trump afterwards. 

I would go even a little further and ask in light of the fact that we (the US)  killed 9 civilians in retaliation for the use of chemical weapons, how the hell are we any better than whomever it is that used the chemical weapons? 

TRUMP'S ATTACK ON SYRIA KILLED FOUR CHILDREN All for an airfield to reopen the next day ....

 

 

Edited April 22, 2017 by Farmer77

[+and-then]

1 hour ago, hetrodoxly said:

Interesting video, who's telling the truth.

 

Home made Sarin?  He lost me on the idea of home made chemical weapons when Sarin was the agent used in the attack.  Also, has anyone in the Syrian or Russian government shown imagery of the "chemical weapons factory" that was hit by bombs?  It seems to me that if such a story was true, they'd have rushed to preserve the evidence.

[RoofGardener]

9 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

@seeder You've done an amazing job in this thread arguing for truth and honesty. Its clear there are ample experts who argue the claims supporting the US's assertion that Assad used the chemical weapons . It also just doesnt make any logical sense for him to do so. This was a wag the dog type scenario the entire way and the corporate owned media shills ate it up . Hell CNN had damn near glowing coverage of trump afterwards. 

I would go even a little further and ask in light of the fact that we (the US)  killed 9 civilians in retaliation for the use of chemical weapons, how the hell are we any better than whomever it is that used the chemical weapons? 

TRUMP'S ATTACK ON SYRIA KILLED FOUR CHILDREN All for an airfield to reopen the next day ....

 

 

A couple or three aircraft may have landed at the airfield Farmer77, but that does NOT mean that the airfield is open for business as a military facility. It is merely a propaganda excercise. Show me the aircraft being re-fueled and re-armed using base facilities, and I'll change my mind

[Farmer77]

Just now, and then said:

Home made Sarin?  He lost me on the idea of home made chemical weapons when Sarin was the agent used in the attack.  Also, has anyone in the Syrian or Russian government shown imagery of the "chemical weapons factory" that was hit by bombs?  It seems to me that if such a story was true, they'd have rushed to preserve the evidence.

Home made Sarin's been used before : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tokyo_subway_sarin_attack 

[Farmer77]

Just now, RoofGardener said:

A couple or three aircraft may have landed at the airfield Farmer77, but that does NOT mean that the airfield is open for business as a military facility. It is merely a propaganda excercise. Show me the aircraft being re-fueled and re-armed using base facilities, and I'll change my mind

Open for business and killing CIA Assets  terrorists in just a few hours. 

Assad Shrugs off Trump’s Strike, Uses Just-Hit Airbase to Bomb Rebels 

Syrian fighter aircraft used the just-struck al-Shayrat airfield on Friday to launch attacks against regime opponents, less than 24 hours after the United States tossed dozens of missiles at the base with the hopes of sending a “message” to the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad about its use of chemical weapons.

 SYRIA IS ALREADY FLYING MISSIONS OUT OF THE AIR BASE TRUMP ATTACKED 

 

Edited April 22, 2017 by Farmer77

[RoofGardener]

Sarin was indeed used in the Tokyo Subway attack, Farmer77. However, the resources poured into its manufacture... including purchase of specialist equipment, and using a purpose-built laboratory in a calm, controlled environment. It cost many millions of dollars to do it, and involved dozens of post-graduate chemical and biological specialists. (all cult members). It required a continuous and reliable supply of electricity, continuous and reliable water pressure, and contracted-in technical assistance from universities and commercial organisations. And with all these resources and infrastructure, it took several years to produce in quantity. 

Hardly the environment you can get in the middle of a civil war in Syria ? 

Now, in regards the video; who is Tom Duggan ? The video claims he is a "British Reporter", but I can't find any of his articles on Google... except for THIS video. In addition, does he actually SOUND British to you ? His accent seems to border almost on Russian to me ? (very faint, but present).

[RoofGardener]

7 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

Open for business and killing CIA Assets  terrorists in just a few hours. 

Assad Shrugs off Trump’s Strike, Uses Just-Hit Airbase to Bomb Rebels 

Syrian fighter aircraft used the just-struck al-Shayrat airfield on Friday to launch attacks against regime opponents, less than 24 hours after the United States tossed dozens of missiles at the base with the hopes of sending a “message” to the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad about its use of chemical weapons.

 SYRIA IS ALREADY FLYING MISSIONS OUT OF THE AIR BASE TRUMP ATTACKED 

 

Both articles suggest that the base was being used for "missions", but when you read them, they merely state that planes (or possibly only one) where seen taking off from the base.Like I said, it's easy to land a plane and take off again. The base is not viable as a military base (other than as an emergency runway) unless it also has fuel pumps, re-arming facilities, repair workshops, crew quarters, electricity, food, etcetera. 

Farmer77, it would be SO easy to fly a few aircraft in, and then take off again for the benefit of the cameras. And gosh... it worked didn't it  ? Nor was it "a few hours"... unless you count 48+ as "a few" ? 

If the airbase was actually in use, we would have heard more and more reports about it. But I don't think we have ? 

[Farmer77]

Just now, RoofGardener said:

Both articles suggest that the base was being used for "missions", but when you read them, they merely state that planes (or possibly only one) where seen taking off from the base.Like I said, it's easy to land a plane and take off again. The base is not viable as a military base (other than as an emergency runway) unless it also has fuel pumps, re-arming facilities, repair workshops, crew quarters, electricity, food, etcetera. 

Farmer77, it would be SO easy to fly a few aircraft in, and then take off again for the benefit of the cameras. And gosh... it worked didn't it  ? Nor was it "a few hours"... unless you count 48+ as "a few" ? 

If the airbase was actually in use, we would have heard more and more reports about it. But I don't think we have ? 

You're working on a ton of assumptions here. 

Why would you assume we would have heard more and more reports about it? The media has been horrific in their coverage of the events over there especially if you're only taking in western media. 

Why would you assume the airfield has no fuel pumps? The US warned Russia the attack was coming plenty in advance for them to have warned Assad and for the Syrians to have moved some fuel resources into bunkers or just a couple miles down the road. 

Ditto for munitions. 

Crew quarters? You mean tents , we are talking about the military afterall. 

 

 

 

Somewhere around half the missiles launched actually hit the base (23 i think). That base has 41 bunkers like this one 

 

That means that even if every one of those missiles that hit the base hit a bunker there are still 18 above ground bunkers that based on simple math could not have been hit by a missile , although i do concede they could have been damaged collaterally. Thats just the above ground ones built to store aircraft and does not include below ground bunkers or other munitions bunkers. 

 

Edited April 22, 2017 by Farmer77