Russian warplanes reportedly bombed US base in Syria

originally posted by: AdmireTheDistance
a reply to: projectvxn

I don't see anything that says any soldiers were killed...

Of course not. Context is everything here.

a reply to: projectvxn

you're making a lot of conjectures.

let more information come down the wire then get worked up.

a reply to: projectvxn

What dead US soldiers? The only deaths according to the article were 4 rebels.

a reply to: Pyle

That we know of.

Very few secret operations publicly announce the deaths of SOF soldiers.

a reply to: odzeandennz

Sorry when it's soldiers potentially on the line I'm a little sensitive about it.

I've lost 9 in the last couple of years.

originally posted by: Agit8dChop
So, our super secret soldiers, that we sent in to cause unrest and murder people in a foreign nation.. were bombed... by a nation allied with that foreign nation.

.. and some how its their fault ?

It's supposed to remain a war of major powers by way of proxy. Nothing direct. This isn't supposed to happen, and when it does you either keep it hush and work out an agreement, or if it's politically useful and you're out of options, make a ruckus and go to war over it.

a reply to: pl3bscheese

It would be nice if we just got the frack out of there and let the Russians have Syria.

I find it hard to believe that removing Assad and creating the chaos of ISIS was a better choice than leaving the situation alone entirely.

originally posted by: projectvxn
a reply to: pl3bscheese

It would be nice if we just got the frack out of there and let the Russians have Syria.

I find it hard to believe that removing Assad and creating the chaos of ISIS was a better choice than leaving the situation alone entirely.

Arab Spring fallout.....

I wonder who was behind that?

You can't "two face" a war, it never works.... the only one's who lose are the brave folks serving...

IMO... CIA in combination with SF troops is a recipe for disaster...

It's also a recipe for plausible deniability... from the folks who pull the strings...

Wasn't Benghazi enough to show the folks that?

a reply to: JacKatMtn

Unlike the military, politicians never learn from their mistakes.

It doesn't cost them anything.

a reply to: projectvxn

Didn't this same scenario happen about 3 mths ago?

According to the Defcon Warning System privately owned website this may be the cause for the DEFCON 3 incident in June of this year. A lot of people say it was just a rumour that was proven false but I'm not so sure about that.

**This is like some guy refuses to tell his friend the identity of his girlfriend; but then gets mad because the friend took the guy's girlfriend in a date, which he never told the friend about in the first place.**

Technically, if one part (Nation A) refuses to disclose the location of a base used by said party soldiers to the other party (Nation B) operating in the near hostile environment, you cannot claim damages or "justice". This is due to the fact that if the location is not reported in good faith, the base technically does not exist. And by not existing and acting in bad faith, the latter party is free to define the base as an enemy location or whatever they choose. Sure, Nation B can "know" the base is American, but they have no inherent obligation to act as if it were. This is because the initial fault is traced back to the failure to disclose information, hence, the latter party can claim ignorance to the base location.

Remember,
1. No official confirmation >>> non existent under the eyes of the law
2. Refusal to disclose location (action 1) >>> Can be construed as bad faith from Nation A and invalidates any legal protection from international law
3. Bad faith from Nation A is precursor >>> Nation B can react in bad faith if they choose (Action 2)
4. Nation B bombs Non existent base in bad faith (Action 2) >>> no way to claim infringement of international laws or claim bad faith due to (Action 1)

I have to say that the Russians played it perfectly; effectively forcing the US to officially disclose the locations of said secret locations.

a reply to: projectvxn

There's no way it was an accident. I read on Fox News that the British pulled out before the attack took place. And that the US and Russia had established an emergency UHF frequency that when US forces called for an end to their run, the Russians ignored and bombed anyway. That's not a mistake... that's on purpose.

a reply to: projectvxn

With secret black sites and bases across that area it was bound to happen.

No doubt we have returned the favour accidently too.

Because there were probably handlers working with opposition forces out of the base.

a reply to: projectvxn

A "secret air base" can consist of a strip of asphalt with a wind sock. Not enough details to draw conclusions.

a reply to: olaru12

Right Wing Fundamentalist Christians

Actually , that would be all Christians . Do I detect a bit of right-wing animosity ? Yep , I sure do.
But Armageddon ? Naw , nothing will come of this one. And it is Fox News. Where are all the posts decrying "Faux" News ? Sleeping on the job , I guess. The "secret base" is probably the officer's latrine.

originally posted by: Gothmog
And it is Fox News.

Russian brinkmanship. Not a bad article, if one gets past the headline and other eye candy. Anyway, I had to laugh at seeing the Fox News article pix. At first glance and then into the subconscious, it looked like Russian planes bombing some big US military base in Syria.... big buildings and what look like some type of missile weaponry/radar pointed skyward. Propaganda. And why is there a chart prominently displayed that has nothing to do with the story? Interesting.

a reply to: projectvxn

secret military base in Syria used by elite American and British forces last month.

I hope this is simply a mistake and that no ill intent was behind it.

whats a secret CIA base doing so close to Russia? Oh that's right you are so special. Well if it is CIA then nothing really happened did it?

But if recent history evades you here's a blast from the Ukraine

www.theguardian.com...

US and European leaders championed the "masked militants" and denounced the elected government for its crackdown, just as they now back the unelected government's use of force against rebels occupying police stations and town halls in cities such as Slavyansk and Donetsk.

"America is with you," Senator John McCain told demonstrators then, standing shoulder to shoulder with the leader of the far-right Svoboda party as the US ambassador haggled with the state department over who would make up the new Ukrainian government. When the Ukrainian president was replaced by a US-selected administration, in an entirely unconstitutional takeover, politicians such as William Hague brazenly misled parliament about the legality of what had taken place: the imposition of a pro-western government on Russia's most neuralgic and politically divided neighbour.

a reply to: projectvxn

The game changes when the Russians bomb our troops

But as the link states they are CIA - not exactly US troops wouldn't you say?