CIA-backed rebels, civilians reportedly targeted by Russian airstrikes in Syria

For anyone questioning how civillians get caught up and killed in war, this doco below shows it really well.

**DISCLAIMER** The actual premise of the doco - whether Russia has troops there and who the rebel fighters are is pretty weak and I draw no conclusions from it other than it is a good propaganda piece. However, it does show a lot of truth of what it is like to live inside a war zone for everyday people.

The story of poor granny (who the cute cuddly rebels (sarcasm) save) is a great real life story of how people end up caught in the crossfire. Lucky for granny she is saved, but many do die.

a reply to: markosity1973

So long as we're posting videos, why not a relevant one?



Russia is helping people kill Palestinians. Everybody cool with that?

a reply to: DJW001

Hmmm, you post a video on Homs, where the AMERICAN funded terrorists, oops I mean lovable rebels who are trrying to bring joy to Syria by toppling Assad are.

Objective journalism?

I think not.

a reply to: markosity1973

Are you implying the RT video you posted is objective? It doesn't matter who controls what area, innocent people are getting killed, including Palestinians.

a reply to: DJW001

The Palestinians chose to harbour the rebels, whom they support and Assad turned his guns on them and now they are complaining about it.

Not the smartest move on the Palestinians part was it?

Remember, if you are the governor of a nation at war, your objective is to stop the aggression against the establishment.

I don't like it, but at the same time I am not surprised at how things ended up.

a reply to: markosity1973

The Palestinians chose to harbour the rebels, whom they support and Assad turned his guns on them and now they are complaining about it.

Did they choose to harbor the rebels, or did the rebels just move in? It sounds like you have a handy rationalization for targeting civilians.

Its strange to see Fox news so disturbed by whats happening in the middle east, this is all news to me! I didnt know they supported the FSA and other terrorist groups. . . . Go figure!


On 'The Kelly File,' the impact of Russia's second round of air strikes
Watch Charles Krauthammer and Megyn Kelly talk about Conflicts and Syria on The Kelly File.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: FlySolo

Why did it take Putin so long to go into Syria one has to wonder...

I am thinking this has less todo about Assad and more to do with Putin trying to change the channel of public perception of himself at home. It also offers a convenient excuse as to how Russia soldiers are dying in other theaters now that they can just say Syria.

Because they weren't invited. Unlike another nation we know well

a reply to: FlySolo

Syria asked for help fighting ISIS. That excuse, that Russia was not invited, won't fly.

a reply to: FormOfTheLord

The FSA is not a terrorist group. You are singularly ill informed about the situation. Just a couple of hours ago you repeated the Russian lie that there is a Chinese ship headed for Syria, even though the Chinese themselves have denied it:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

a reply to: DJW001
Your source only refutes that there is a Chinese carrier in, or around, Syria.

There is currently between 1 & 2 dozen Chinese military advisers, and a couple pieces of Chinese brass in Syria.

It is believed that they are there in regards to something found that relates to Turkey and the Uyghurs.

Unless Syria convinces them that helping Syria is going to help internal Chinese issues, they will only be around long enough to see whatever it is they came to see.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Yeah, they just asked for help now

a reply to: Xcathdra

US-led strikes are being carried without the approval of Damascus,Congress ,or the UN
The US and partners did not ask for permission before striking Syria..

Please provide a source to your wild claim that Syria asked America to intervene.

www.cbc.ca...

They are in direct violation of the Charter of the United Nations.

Airstrikes in Syria cannot be justified under international law: They lack a lawful basis in consent, self-defense or [U.N.] Security Council authorization.

Obama regime is in direct contravention of (S.J.Res 21) a United States Senate Joint Resolution Bill (section 4) Authorizing only 60 days for the use of military force in Syria.
They are there illegally domestically and internationally, without UN and congressional (see S.J.Res 21) or Syrian approval.
They have been politely asked to leave, i believe the people of Syria would be best served if they did.

LOL The Saudis,The Pentagon and Zato are all like a startled Maltese terrier running around in circles barking and weeing at the same time, at last somebody is making an attempt to save western civilization in their country,may the likes of Soros and Kissenger spend the rest of their days watching their satanic plans go to hell in a handbasket,go Russian airforce get Mc Cains Marauders

a reply to: peck420

There is currently between 1 & 2 dozen Chinese military advisers, and a couple pieces of Chinese brass in Syria.

It is believed that they are there in regards to something found that relates to Turkey and the Uyghurs.

Correct. This is clearly nothing to do with bolstering Assad's regime or forming an alliance with Russia against NATO.

Unless Syria convinces them that helping Syria is going to help internal Chinese issues, they will only be around long enough to see whatever it is they came to see.

Exactly, and the article I linked to makes China's position clear. China respects the internal affairs of other nations and will not interfere. They have their own issues with separatist movements and must view Russia's contradictory and hypocritical actions in Ukraine on the one hand and Syria on the other as telling. Also, Russia's failure to observe the Budapest Memorandum tells them exactly how much to trust any "security agreements" they have made.

a reply to: all2human

They are in direct violation of the Charter of the United Nations.

Airstrikes in Syria cannot be justified under international law: They lack a lawful basis in consent, self-defense or [U.N.] Security Council authorization.

Where was your legal expertise when Russian troops appeared in the streets of Ukraine?

The russian don't HAVE smart munitions as much as we do they really couldn't care less about collateral hits.
It isn't part of their war doctrine to protect innocent lives in warzones JUST their troops.

originally posted by: DJW001
Exactly, and the article I linked to makes China's position clear. China respects the internal affairs of other nations and will not interfere. They have their own issues with separatist movements and must view Russia's contradictory and hypocritical actions in Ukraine on the one hand and Syria on the other as telling. Also, Russia's failure to observe the Budapest Memorandum tells them exactly how much to trust any "security agreements" they have made.

I wouldn't go quite that far.

A lot of Chinese politicians, and a whole lot of PLA generals, love what Russia is doing, and wish that they could do the same. Specifically in regards to the autonomous regions inside and around China.

That all being said, China will back Russia until the west puts China where China believes (and is largely correct about) they deserve to be...at the top of the political food chain.

That is what binds BRICS. Not economics, not military power, but understanding that, regardless of their individual country's economic/social/military standing, they will never be treated as 'equals' at the global tables.

a reply to: peck420

A lot of Chinese politicians, and a whole lot of PLA generals, love what Russia is doing, and wish that they could do the same. Specifically in regards to the autonomous regions inside and around China.

First, it is not clear exactly what Russia intends to do. You are right, there are factions within the PLA that wouldn't think twice about carpet bombing Xianjiang, but, fortunately, most of the political class realize that would only make things worse. They will continue to use "hanification" as their primary strategy. On the other hand, Russia can kill as many Arab civilians as he wants, declare victory, and go home. He doesn't have to worry about governing in Syria when the dust settles.

That all being said, China will back Russia until the west puts China where China believes (and is largely correct about) they deserve to be...at the top of the political food chain.

China will play the United States and Russia off of one another until it becomes clear the the world has become bipolar again and that one of those poles is China.