It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

what happens if Putin finds evidence

page: 2
12
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 9 2015 @ 11:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: InnerPeace2012

originally posted by: MrSpad
Well if you know the history of ISIS you know it is not a new group and has been around since the late 1990's when they were known for assassinating a US diplomat in Jordan. Its movements, alliances and name changes are easy to follow. It was created by no outside power and frankly has never needed support from any outside power. That being the case, it scares people in wanting to believe it all has to a be big plot by somebody else because the idea people can over throw governments or build armies seems to much like chaos.


Anybody can come up with an idea about creating an army and creating havoc. But what is an idea without some serious funding and arms supply?


I think Mr. Spad is correct.

They have all the opium they need.

That's how they fund themselves...Drugs




posted on Dec, 9 2015 @ 11:54 PM
link   
a reply to: JHumm

The problem here is how politicians and their respective nations (and their people) define the groups fighting in the region:

From the United States, who insist to believe in the FSA and "moderate rebels", to various EU countries, who now know that the entire Islamic Front in Syria is far from "moderate", to Russia, who define the Islamic Front the same as IS.

The US does indeed support radical islamists within the Islamic Front.
Not the same as supporting IS directly... but with the fluent transitions between IS and the Islamic Front this doesn't matter to Russia, because both groups venture to topple the Syrian Arab Republic to build an Islamic State.



posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 12:09 AM
link   
a reply to: InnerPeace2012

Sorry mate, but you're the one twisting things here.

Posting a photo of Mujahideen visiting the White House in 1983 does not equate to US creating ISIS, or even Al Qaeda.

Here, I'll post a document...



The War between ISIS
and al-Qaeda for Supremacy
of the Global Jihadist Movement


Much better than using your own threat as evidence lol


edit on 10/12/15 by Chadwickus because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 12:13 AM
link   
a reply to: whyamIhere

They make at least somewhere between $100-$500 million estimated on oil sale alone per year from various sources,
that is there main source of income. Who ever buys this oil are indirectly supporting a terrorist group.

How Turkey Exports ISIS Oil To The World: The Scientific Evidence




Israel the Main Buyer of ISIS Oil — Shocking!!!!


‘Time of looking away over’: Germany warns Saudi Arabia to stop funding radical Islamists

So far all the US allies in the Middle East have at least, had a hand in supporting the rise of IS.

And the Russian have so far said: Putin: ISIS financed from 40 countries, including G20 members
edit on 10-12-2015 by InnerPeace2012 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 12:19 AM
link   
a reply to: Chadwickus

Lol, whatever happened to your "logical fallacy" argument that you're now scrambling for sources to support your fragmented argument.

You lost me at page one of your last response. Give me a narrative and don't just post random stuff, it means nothing.




posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 01:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: Chadwickus
a reply to: bjarneorn
Makes about as much sense as what you're saying..


Sorry, you obviously didn't get the memo ... or just didn't read the news.

Ignorance is bliss ... have a good day. :-)



posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 01:52 AM
link   
a reply to: bjarneorn

not sure if this was mentioned but Isn't Al Qaida made up of the remnants of the mujaheddeen? Not saying your wrong, your just missing one step into their formation as a terrorist cell.

edit on 10-12-2015 by NateTheAnimator because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 01:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: InnerPeace2012
a reply to: Chadwickus

Lol, whatever happened to your "logical fallacy" argument that you're now scrambling for sources to support your fragmented argument.

You lost me at page one of your last response. Give me a narrative and don't just post random stuff, it means nothing.



What I find funny is did you even look as to why the Afghan fighters were in the white house? Had nothing to do with supporting them abs everything to do with charging the Soviet a with war crimes in front of the UN. The Reagan administration was pushing hard to get a UN tribunal on Soviet atrocities. They were bombing entire villages in an attempt to destroy afgans. There troops would sit on tanks and wait for afgans to come out in to the open for target practice. Often times tanks would just fire at buildings regardless if there was someone shooting.


This is the reason the us for involved in the first place bur people forget this little fact. No one could stop the Soviet massacres in Afghanistan. However they could make it more difficult for them which in the end worked they withdrew. By the way the war the Soviets created had Muslims from all over the world going there to fight. The reason is they were seeing the destruction of the Afghan people. And there were people who were moderate and extremists. To link us support by the way US was not only country is stupid and just shows a lack if historical context. No relation exists between the two. 100s of thousand fought with the afgans some for a couple of months others years. Many people in the middle east knew someone that went to Afghanistan to help.
edit on 12/10/15 by dragonridr because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 02:01 AM
link   



posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 02:08 AM
link   

originally posted by: whyamIhere
I think Mr. Spad is correct.

They have all the opium they need.

That's how they fund themselves...Drugs


No, he isn't ... ISIS became itself, after Iraq, weather there was some dysfunctional shady group there prior, is irrelevant.

And, are you referring to this opium trade? Never has the opium trade been so blooming in Afghanistan, since the US invasion.

And do you know who the primary victims of this trade are?

Russians.

This alone, is an amble reason for war.

Opium in Afghanistan



posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 02:22 AM
link   
a reply to: dragonridr

The Taliban was there because the US wanted to create a tribunal in the UN?

You're kidding, right?

Assuming the US "wanted" this, they couldn't ... as, in case you didn't get the memo ... the Soviet union had a veto right, and Russia has one now. As does the US, China, Britain and France.

So, even a guy like you ... knows it is just for show, right.

If I recall correctly, there were majorily two reasons ... the oil/gas pipelines and the opium.



posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 02:31 AM
link   
Putin doesn't want to directly engage America in combat.

It doesn't matter who'd technically win, Wed all die in a nuclear holocaust.



posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 02:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: bjarneorn
a reply to: dragonridr

The Taliban was there because the US wanted to create a tribunal in the UN?

You're kidding, right?

Assuming the US "wanted" this, they couldn't ... as, in case you didn't get the memo ... the Soviet union had a veto right, and Russia has one now. As does the US, China, Britain and France.

So, even a guy like you ... knows it is just for show, right.

If I recall correctly, there were majorily two reasons ... the oil/gas pipelines and the opium.


Taliban didn't exist then history fail. Yes Reagan was even pus I g to have the Soviets removed from the security council. Reagan went after the Soviets during his administration and had major successes doing so such as the Berlin wall when he called for it to come down. He's also a direct cause of the soviets demise. He hit them from all sides.



posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 02:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: JHumm
I would like to know what would happen if Putin found evidence or proof that the US government was in fact supporting IS ? What would the outcome of that be?
I'm not saying that is the case but with our track record I wouldn't be surprised either.


Not as much as there should be, most likely very little at or, nothing, why? The MSM is unlikely to say anything more than a passing remark, at best, which would be designed for the sheeple to not notice.

I suspect the leaders in all countries of the world that matter or count, know damn well whats going on in the world. If the US and that very small but very powerful country in the middle east, are behind ISIS which seems to me to be as readily apparent to everybody, as the nose on our face, they will know.

Why is that?

Well all these countries have diplomats, ambassadors, attaches, envoys etc, etc whose exact job is to attend as many parties and other functions, for the specific purpose of collecting intelligence on the said country. It therefore follows that these people, like everyone else, talk shop among themselves and keep their ears close the ground for the latest hot goss and intel on the latest geo political-militry and economic chess board.

In addition, these countries also have their own secret intelligence agencies whose job is unobtrusively spy on other diplomats and to share intelligence with each other countries intelligence agencies.

All these people talk shop and share information under the table when their having a few drinks or get togethers; to welcome and show hospitality to their international guests.

Take into consideration also that there is always a large population of high level business people, bureaucrats, academics, govt officials etc who have access to high level opposite numbers in these other countries.

In summary, we can see that all the 1st and 2d league governments in the world; all know damn well what the inside story is on a every major event and manifestation that goes on the world not just in the political but also milit-tree and economic fields.



posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 03:08 AM
link   

originally posted by: ErrorErrorError
Just like US found evidence that Russia funded and supported the rebels in Ukraine ? It will lead to nothing. You have tons of material out there about how we have supported "moderate rebels" and dictators all over the ME for decades,nothing has changed.


Partly correct.

Its more like Russia stepped in when they knew that the US were supporting a regime change in Ukraine. The US have been founding a democratic reform since 2005 i think. The Ukraine problem is at the moment a stale mate.... It is set on hold.

The Syrian problem right now is a diffeent confrontation between US interests and Russian interests. This difference of interests is still on going, and could very well leadt to a much bigger problem.



posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 04:58 AM
link   
This vid puts it correct ....



posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 05:17 AM
link   
the central planners in USA (dark government) needed to change the parameters in the M.E. somewhat

so instead of just another faction of armed rebels in the Syrian-Iraqi areas the ISIS was formed and was instructed to declare itself a Caliphate... that is an Islamic State with no actual borders (other than where Its troops are and in control)

this is meant to be a continuation of the process the Western Neo-Cons were creating --- the Balkinization of the whole middle east.... principally making all of Iraq into 3 separate States, then using ISIS as the means to excape the borders of just Iraq and add Syria & Lebanon into the mix (to get Balkinized)


 


Balkanization - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


en.wikipedia.org...

Balkanization, or Balkanisation, is a geopolitical term, originally used to describe the process of fragmentation or division of a region or state into smaller ...
.




Bal·kan·i·za·tion.

[bàwlkəni záysh'n]

NOUN
1.division of an area, region, or group into smaller and often mutually hostile units


 



posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 09:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: Chadwickus
a reply to: bjarneorn

No, Russia created Al Queda didn't you hear?

They invaded Afghanistan and therefore the insurgent group was formed.

Makes about as much sense as what you're saying..


You must have missed Hillary admitting what you deny:





Educate yourself...


edit on 10-12-2015 by real_one because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 10 2015 @ 03:22 PM
link   
a reply to: real_one

You're the one that needs education.

Did you even listen to your own videos?

She is talking about the Mujahideen.



new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 1   >>

log in

join