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.

 

Russia threatens permanent world war if Saudis add ground troops to U.S. coalition

page: 2
19
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 12 2016 @ 03:17 AM
link   
Concerning the thread title, when I became aware that it may have been wrong, I added the "ETA" part of the original post. I didn't want to rewrite the title when I was quoting The Washington Times. We're talking about the main newspaper of Washington, D.C.

Who am I to change the title of an article from The Washington Times?

If I'm going to do it, I better have a very good reason. I didn't have a good enough reason. I agree with the following quote (restating it from the original post). The writer from the The Washington Times probably just misjudged the quote from Medvedev but it's a subjective call IMHO.


I just read Reuters report on the same interview of Prime Minister Medvedev only their headline read "Russia raised the spector of interminable or "world war" if Syria talks fail" whereas this article has Russia "Threatening permanant world war" There is a big difference between threatening world war and warning of the spector of a world war.

The Washington Times author and reuters both got the quotes right only where one author hears threats the other hears a warning. I re-read PM Medvedev's quotes and at no point did he threaten anything and IMHO he's right if we let this wound fester it's going to infect the region then the world. I don't really know why the American media want to inflame the situation with Russia and Syria but the last world war killed 60 million people and we've gotten WAY better at killing people since then. This time the USA won't be be spared like the the last two....weapons today have a global reach.
www.washingtontimes.com...




posted on Feb, 12 2016 @ 03:21 AM
link   
a reply to: Profusion




The writer from the The Washington Times probably just misjudged the quote from Medvedev but it's a subjective call IMHO.



Well with Russia tossing out threats of using nukes...one never knows.



posted on Feb, 12 2016 @ 03:51 AM
link   
Articles for smart people


They sound that way because they know you are not interested knowing Kardashian popped another one


If you listen to Putins direct speech

You will hear: only insane people wish for nuclear war or Russia attacking NATO

Just visit NATO-RUSSIA cooperation plans for this and coming up years

They continue to unscramble nukes and work together (maybe with a frown but that's it)

But yeah twitch bums
(not sure how else to say it)


edit on 12-2-2016 by serpentines because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 12 2016 @ 05:06 AM
link   
What an interesting thread. I just added up the number of words posted in this thread (using Microsoft Word) and I put them into two categories:

Total words in this thread posted concerning the thread topic: 1,004

Total words in this thread posted concerning the thread TITLE: 883

I can't recall seeing anything like that before.



posted on Feb, 12 2016 @ 05:32 AM
link   
a reply to: Profusion

I felt like saying something but..

Mmmm if I can the title meaning is summed up in the OP .. Next


I like when you come out of "observing" status I like seeing your funny Bot site coming out too

EDIT: and I do hear the concern it's a valid one
edit on 12-2-2016 by serpentines because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 12 2016 @ 12:51 PM
link   
a reply to: serpentines




Just visit NATO-RUSSIA cooperation plans for this and coming up years


I imagine it will be slim to none after this...


Russia’s new military doctrine lists NATO, US as major foreign threats


www.rt.com...



They continue to unscramble nukes and work together (maybe with a frown but that's it)


No they aren't.


Cooperation has been suspended in response to Russia’s military intervention in Ukraine, which the Allies condemn in the strongest terms. Political channels of communication remain open.


www.nato.int...

And that still stands today, but if Putin removes his troops from Ukraine then they may start again...although I don't see Putin doing that anytime soon.



posted on Feb, 12 2016 @ 01:52 PM
link   
a reply to: Profusion

Huh.. how not surprising...

Russia needs to get its act together before putin unseats stalin.



posted on Feb, 12 2016 @ 02:35 PM
link   
a reply to: tsurfer2000h

Topic is not Ukraine Russia NATO but for the sake of a conversation ok re:

(1. NATO is Europian first .. American solders second and forever will be)

(2. Soviet Union is deeply embedded in the hearts of majority of European people.. If you would be from Europe then you would know the motto: you must be crazy to want Soviet Union to rise again you would have no heart if you wanted to ever forget it)

I don't know how to say this to not offend you or look like I don't want to seek positive discussion with you
But : you never will be the voice of Europe neither do I understand why are you trying to be

‘Russians made peace possible’: Ex-NATO military committee chief praises Syria op

Suspension definition : delay or interruption not termination




Russia was the first to do the groundwork for peace in Syria by launching its anti-IS operation, while both Washington and Brussels lacked any kind of strategy, the ex-chairman of NATO’s Military Committee has said. Trends Russian anti-terror op in Syria Lieutenant General Harald Kujat, who was chief of staff of the Bundeswehr (German armed forces) from 2000-2002 and served as NATO’s Military Committee chairman from 2002-2005, made the comments on the Syrian crisis in an interview with Passauer Neue Presse newspaper.

“The Russians have made the peace process [in Syria] possible,” he told the newspaper on Friday.

The West was at standstill until September 2015, Kujat stressed: “Neither the Americans nor the Europeans had any strategy for a peaceful Syria. Both weren’t prepared to be really involved. The Russians did it and opened a window for political solution.”

The Russian operation was crucial for the Syrian Army on the ground to survive Islamic State’s (IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL) offensive and prevent the entire country from being seized by Islamist militants, he said.

“I gave them several weeks [to last before being defeated]. Then Syria would have collapsed, with IS capturing the country. The next target would be Lebanon, then Israel. It could result in far-reaching consequences for all of us.”

According to Kujat, Russian air support for the Syrian Army’s operation to re-take Aleppo was essential from a military perspective.


UNited States and Russia: NPT Nuclear Weapons State disarment




5. Disarmament and Commitments to Reduce Arsenal Size Legal obligation to pursue global disarmament under Article VI of the NPT. [18] Under the New START treaty that entered into force on February 5, 2011, the United States and Russia agreed to reduce their deployed strategic warheads by 2018 to no more than 1,550 each; to deploy no more than 700 ICBMs, SLBMs and heavy bombers; and to limit ICBM launchers, SLBM launchers and heavy bombers to no more than 800 (whether deployed or not). [19] U.S.-Soviet INF Treaty eliminated all ground-launched intermediate and short-range ballistic missiles and their launchers. [20] Reduced arsenal to less than 6,000 warheads and 1,600 delivery vehicles under START I. [21] Reduced strategic nuclear warheads to between 1,700 and 2,200 (counted according to treaty guidelines) under SORT by 2012. [22] The number of nonstrategic weapons is currently less than 25% of the 1991 amount. [23] As of 1 January 2010, Russia had eliminated about 1,600 ICBM and SLBM launchers, 3,100 ICBMs and SLBMs, 47 nuclear submarines, and 67 heavy bombers. [24] In May 2015, at the 2015 NPT Review Conference, the Russian Federation announced that it had reduced the number of deployed warheads to 1,582 and the number of deployed delivery vehicles to 515. [25]


Unlike the discussion here
Both sides deal diplomaticly without conceal



edit on 12-2-2016 by serpentines because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 12 2016 @ 02:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: tsurfer2000h
a reply to: bjarneorn




Well, I'll just say "go for it, Russia" ... whose going to miss the Saudi's? or Turks?


Really, you have no problem with a world war, and are pushing Russia to go for it...totally amazing.


We may as well get it over with already. It's going to happen anyways so long as the petrodollar reigns. We are already in a world war, this isn't the early 20th century anymore.



posted on Feb, 12 2016 @ 04:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: serpentines
a reply to: tsurfer2000h

Topic is not Ukraine Russia NATO but for the sake of a conversation ok re:

(1. NATO is Europian first .. American solders second and forever will be)

(2. Soviet Union is deeply embedded in the hearts of majority of European people.. If you would be from Europe then you would know the motto: you must be crazy to want Soviet Union to rise again you would have no heart if you wanted to ever forget it)

I don't know how to say this to not offend you or look like I don't want to seek positive discussion with you
But : you never will be the voice of Europe neither do I understand why are you trying to be

‘Russians made peace possible’: Ex-NATO military committee chief praises Syria op

Suspension definition : delay or interruption not termination




Russia was the first to do the groundwork for peace in Syria by launching its anti-IS operation, while both Washington and Brussels lacked any kind of strategy, the ex-chairman of NATO’s Military Committee has said. Trends Russian anti-terror op in Syria Lieutenant General Harald Kujat, who was chief of staff of the Bundeswehr (German armed forces) from 2000-2002 and served as NATO’s Military Committee chairman from 2002-2005, made the comments on the Syrian crisis in an interview with Passauer Neue Presse newspaper.

“The Russians have made the peace process [in Syria] possible,” he told the newspaper on Friday.

The West was at standstill until September 2015, Kujat stressed: “Neither the Americans nor the Europeans had any strategy for a peaceful Syria. Both weren’t prepared to be really involved. The Russians did it and opened a window for political solution.”

The Russian operation was crucial for the Syrian Army on the ground to survive Islamic State’s (IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL) offensive and prevent the entire country from being seized by Islamist militants, he said.

“I gave them several weeks [to last before being defeated]. Then Syria would have collapsed, with IS capturing the country. The next target would be Lebanon, then Israel. It could result in far-reaching consequences for all of us.”

According to Kujat, Russian air support for the Syrian Army’s operation to re-take Aleppo was essential from a military perspective.


UNited States and Russia: NPT Nuclear Weapons State disarment




5. Disarmament and Commitments to Reduce Arsenal Size Legal obligation to pursue global disarmament under Article VI of the NPT. [18] Under the New START treaty that entered into force on February 5, 2011, the United States and Russia agreed to reduce their deployed strategic warheads by 2018 to no more than 1,550 each; to deploy no more than 700 ICBMs, SLBMs and heavy bombers; and to limit ICBM launchers, SLBM launchers and heavy bombers to no more than 800 (whether deployed or not). [19] U.S.-Soviet INF Treaty eliminated all ground-launched intermediate and short-range ballistic missiles and their launchers. [20] Reduced arsenal to less than 6,000 warheads and 1,600 delivery vehicles under START I. [21] Reduced strategic nuclear warheads to between 1,700 and 2,200 (counted according to treaty guidelines) under SORT by 2012. [22] The number of nonstrategic weapons is currently less than 25% of the 1991 amount. [23] As of 1 January 2010, Russia had eliminated about 1,600 ICBM and SLBM launchers, 3,100 ICBMs and SLBMs, 47 nuclear submarines, and 67 heavy bombers. [24] In May 2015, at the 2015 NPT Review Conference, the Russian Federation announced that it had reduced the number of deployed warheads to 1,582 and the number of deployed delivery vehicles to 515. [25]


Unlike the discussion here
Both sides deal diplomaticly without conceal




It may be important to note under the Bush Jr. presidency, he halted disarmament of the US side raising US Russian tension as it was part of a major accord between the two countries... if he had more time he was planning and suggesting to leave the UN entirely and setting up an assault on Iran with hopes of Romney picking up the charge... instead Obama won, and not too long ago picked up the task of disarmament again as we were lagging behind Russia in terms of out destruction of nukes on our side, this was about the time that ISIS was threatening Russia not long after the Boston marathon attack... as ISIS had spread into sleeper cells from the disbanded Soviet Union, seeing how close the threat was on their own door step... they started making moves to try to secure less secure countries posing a threat of a Syria conflict right near their own backyard in the Ukraine.. all of these events happened around the same time, bare in mind the order I layout the above is not the order in which they took place.. Russia's move towards the Ukraine was in interest of their own national security to keep ISIS at a distance further than arms reach and to prevent ISIS creep into these less secure neighboring countries.. as ISIS was heavily recruiting for those areas.

When Obama undid the Bush halt of disarmament we came to an understanding and ties strengthened between the US and Russia.. this is why Obama appeared weak, and why Putin support Trump, knowing Trump would be happy to bring back some of the Bush plan and interrogation tactics.. to speed things along in taking out the hydras head as fast as they can sprout.. Iran has had nukes for quite awhile if the Bush plan had moved forward then Iran was on the agenda as Bush had major sanctions on Iran at the behest of Saudi Arabia taking Iran out of the petrol profit loop of opec. Diplomacy with Iran occurred instead of Iran displaying their nukes to the world on the battle field as would have happened if the Bush plan continued. After the Iran diplomacy and drop in sanctions Iran signaled their nuke capability by firing a non laden missile often labeled as a test to the world at large as that makes headlines around the world if any country had a doubt to their capacity to wage long range nuke laden missiles.. their ICBM ability is uncertain at least to me, and we know N. Korea has been trying to develop ICBM tech whether the tests fail on purpose or not who is to say as when the test "fails" all blamed for the failure are executed, perhaps to cover the possible leak that the fail was intended to hide their true ICBM capability.

So, we averted a nuclear real world display of Iran's capability but this one would have been armed. Bush was unsure about Iran's capability the same as he was unsure of Iraq's capability as it appeared they were trying to covertly develop the tech, and the less countries with nuclear capability the better as the cold war ended as a result of disarmament talks.. the UN formed after WW2 as an agreement of these countries to never drop nukes again. some countries are not represented in that accord it is seen as the responsibility of those in the accord to make sure those not bound by that accord to not develop nuclear tech starting a middle eastern cold war as most of the world was dependent on foreign oil, foreign oil dependence has been greatly reduced since, if anyone in the middle east was in doubt of decreased dependence Iraqi oil was of the world stage and through sanctions so was Iran. Showing that the dependence wasn't as dependent as could be assumed. At the same time it left those two countries building oil reserves.



posted on Feb, 12 2016 @ 08:13 PM
link   
a reply to: BigBrotherDarkness

Ukraine is a sovereign nation, just as Georgia is. Russian action has resulted in NATO responses, the very responses Russia is bitching about.

When Russia threatens to take 5 NATO capitals the response is an increase in NATO forces in those countries. An action Russia is bitching about. Maybe Putin should put the vodka down, fix his rectal-cranial inversion, and quit making the situation worse.



posted on Feb, 12 2016 @ 08:37 PM
link   
Sorry to say... but i think Russia has opened that door

If its ok for russia to back one side in Syria civil war, why is it not ok for the sunni Muslims to back there friends in this s%#t storm?

We avoided civil war in Tunisia and Egypt by leaders stepping down when mass nationwide anti government protests took place, this IMO was because the US and other Western nation friendly or allied to those countries took steps to avoid a bloody outcome, and advised those leaders to step down in peaceful transitions of power, followed by a new vote

Where Syria went wrong IMO was, well they was allied to Russia, of course the problem with Syria is its diverse, a minority rules over a 90% Sunni Muslim country... and errr welll.... the Sunni Muslims are allied to the West

Of course Putin/Russia and Iran are not going to stand for a Western Allied Syria, certain not Iran who funds Syrian groups to target Israel

hundreds of thousands of people dead later after Assad was advised to shoot the protesters causing a civil war, the sunni Muslims consider sending in ground troops

S#%t just got real

Im predicting Russia is going to tuck tail and run from the mess it has created because of its foreign policy intervention into Syria, Russia is crippled financially, she cannot aford to fight a long war, China is tied up with ALL is neighbors, Iran is tied up in Yemen

If Russia doesn't Run, the country will be divided and broke up



posted on Feb, 12 2016 @ 09:26 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

Well certainly so... but if these countries have no other means than NATO to protect themselves and only after an assault of some sort has been made on it... is it illogical that Russia does not want that so close to home nor evolve into that destabilizing yet another region?



posted on Feb, 12 2016 @ 10:43 PM
link   
a reply to: BigBrotherDarkness

Had those countries not been occupied by the soviet union for 50+ years they might be a little friendlier towards Russia. Since putin views former ssr's as non countries its only logical those former ssr's dont want to be joined at the hip to russia and to avoid that they joined NATO.

NATO is a defensive alliance only. It's protocols aren't activated until a NATO nation is attacked. NATO went out of its way to not station nato forces in countries that directly bordered Russia. That changed when putin threatened nato nations after they invaded ukraine (and georgia).

The current mess is of putins own making.



posted on Feb, 13 2016 @ 12:14 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

Hey... economics make a lot of decisions disregarding the people it may effect. It is an unfortunate thing, but when you have someone like a dictator in total control repressing the people trying to act like a god while the populous suffers and starves to death and also the very same person calls everyone else an enemy? Well the enemy the leader or leaders call an enemy in such a case is an enemy to them and their power not the people... so it is important in the minds of such to do as much brainwashing and propaganda as possible to retain stability for them-self and fan hate on everyone else.

Now if the people are not complaining and not restricted in speech with threats of murder or imprisonment or other atrocities... then I doubt anyone would have an issue... there are examples of such in the past under monarchy but very very rare... and well a dictator is the one with most power in such a situation and whatever ideology or whatever they want isnt asked it is told... this never lasts as after awhile the people will rise up against them in revolution.

Tradition can be a fine thing as nostalgia as it creates fond memories, but it is an attempt to stop time or relive a time... nothing wrong with that but if it represses culture eventually it will seek to destroy culture... all culture is the art from the current population and it has periods as it evolves redefining culture and older culture becomes heritage which belongs to all of humanity as world heritage sites in monuments etc. so we feel connected and in awe at the accomplishments of the past that inspire us in some way, so that we can embrace it and learn and then through our own knowledge and study offer our own interpretation of it as art.

A great example of this is food... and what is one of the main things new member in a new country from a different one start as a business and share with the new host or home country? Food, what occurs is the other folks from the same country since they are likely a minority of their culture gather with those of the same culture because hey someone else's cooking seems to taste better at times great cooks kinda prefer their own but can greatly appreciate a well constructed meal.

And well, that can form burrows or pockets of culture like China town in San Francisco, Greek town in Detroit, not to mention the many burrows in New York and it is absolutely in my opinion magical to visit these cultural burrows because it isnt the norm to see which invigorates and renews the senses, that is if theres no fear from ignorance holding one back from experiencing these cultures and speaking to the people that express them. On a microcosm they work very well... meaning the same could work on the macrocosm when another large group is not trying to repress them for some reason or other... and it is a shame when it occurs... as we limit ourselves culture itself and the world as a whole.

as Billy Joel once sang: we didnt start the fire...

Thats true of every man woman and child alive today...but we sure as hell can put it out if we do not pick up and start towing lines that only add fuel that will eventually consume us all.



posted on Feb, 13 2016 @ 06:09 AM
link   
The other name of WW3, however denied of mistranslation. Medvedev warned of "another war on Earth". Perhaps another one after Genghis Khan . Today he warned of Cold War level of relations. That means the nukes are already readied. Perhaps the question is how big the next war will be. Only Turkey and Saudi against Russia and Iran, or the West will be included in the next war on Earth. My bet is, for the time being, the West will stay out. Turkey now acts as Middle Eastern local power, not as a member of NATO that coordinates and participates in the collective security of NATO. Let alone the immigrant problem in Europe, that happened thanks to Turkey's border policy.

SOmething UNTHINKABLE to happen during the so bad Cold War, when everyone knew where he stood and where the red lines were drawn.



posted on Feb, 13 2016 @ 06:14 AM
link   
Not surprising, Puppet Putin will do as he's told, the Russians know all too well that there are two heads to ISIS/ISIL, that being the U.S., namely Langley, and of course the Saudi Royal Family.
edit on 13-2-2016 by leastofthese because: Typo



posted on Feb, 13 2016 @ 06:29 AM
link   
If Saudi and Turkey do invade with ground forces, as they say they will, Iran will be obliged to meet them on the ground. Will that be enough though? Whom Russian bombers will bomb, the peaceful citizens of...Saudi and Turk who came to not fight Daesh but to triumphantly takeover that vast territory? Could Russia afford to stop its intervention, the first after the Cold War outside post-Soviet space? If Russia is a major power, to reshape the world into a New World Order, as Putin talked about, the answer could be only one. No, not possible at this time. Russia cannot back out of Damascus without unpredictable consequences for its own domestic and international policy. I do not exclude that option completely, but at that later stage it would be taken as cowardliness for the better portion of countries who want to see a new world and who hope for that on Russia (and China).

But where goes the road of conflict between Russia and those who attack Assad? It goes thru Bosporus towards a wider confrontation with the rest of NATO at one point. That's why Medvedev warned of another war on Earth to come. It may be Ukraine-Poland or another scenario, if the West gets involved somehow.

Also, do not rule out the scenario in which the 16 year rule of Putin changes nature, from mostly peaceful to something completely different. Whether Mr Putin is the war planner or not, it doesn't matter so much. There is minister Shoigu as powerful right hand of Putin in military matters. Perhaps other generals whose names do not surface in the Western MSM. We may see a very much changed Russian foreign policy compared to the era of Cold Peace that by now seems to enter the history books. Demoniszation of leadership is the last thing the West needs at that moment. Khrushchev was approached and negotiated with, towards a good end. Today's Russian leadership (whoever name you prefer) is much more intelligent than the time of Khrushchev. Is US leadership up to their duties, as that of Kennedy?

Nuclear scenario cannot be ruled out, rather it is very likely. The ground forces of Turkey and Saudi Arabia are too big. But not only that. Perhaps there will be one explosion followed by a very limited retaliation, that will stress the world forever. If we are destined not to have the major nuclear war, that is also a possibility as next to happen.

Whether Daesh (who already has and reportedly used chemical weapons) will throw a nuke on Damascus? Whether Saudi or Iran will do it first against each other and accuse each other? Whether Turkey will rise as the newest secret nuclear state? Those are all possibilities that have chance to happen. The response, be it of Russia or of another power (let not forget that Pakistan, India and Israel are all well armed), will have for a purpose to stop the aggressor's further role, not to destroy a country. (be it Saudi Arabia, Turkey or Iran). After that, the world will likely have weeks of rethinking, ceasefires will be rushed by all politicians and the pope, etc. Whether that last chance peace will last for months, it is hard to predict. North Korea may EMP USA any time. USA may be turned into 18th century country that needs the worldwide help to survive of food, water, baby milk, medications etc.
edit on 13-2-2016 by 2012newstart because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 13 2016 @ 07:00 AM
link   
AlArabia just tweeted

BREAKING: Russian FM Lavrov sees 49 percent chance that ceasefire in #Syria will be successfully in place a week from now

That means in diplomatic language, the ceasefire is already dead.



posted on Feb, 13 2016 @ 07:10 AM
link   
a reply to: serpentines




Topic is not Ukraine Russia NATO but for the sake of a conversation ok re:


I know you won't reply, but...are you serious?

This has to do with all of those, as they are what has led us to this point in time.



(1. NATO is Europian first .. American solders second and forever will be)


And that is because more countries that are members are from Europe...not really a good comparison.



(2. Soviet Union is deeply embedded in the hearts of majority of European people.. If you would be from Europe then you would know the motto: you must be crazy to want Soviet Union to rise again you would have no heart if you wanted to ever forget it)


And they know what they don't want in Europe...Russian rule.



But : you never will be the voice of Europe neither do I understand why are you trying to be



SO Europe can handle their own problems...I think they tried that once before and we had a world war. The US didn't force countries to accept their help they were asked for it.

And the US has never said they are the voice of Europe.



‘Russians made peace possible’: Ex-NATO military committee chief praises Syria op


Where?

Care to show where that is said other than RT?

I didn't think so.



new topics

top topics



 
19
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join