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 withdraws aircraft carriers and some warships from Syria

page: 1
10
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 7 2017 @ 12:39 AM
link   
First thread, don't be too harsh.

Came across this article today. The official narrative is that in accordance with the cease fire, Russia has started to withdraw support from Syria.
www.dailymail.co.uk...

CNN link www.cnn.com...

www.theguardian.com...

I can't help to wonder if the timing of the withdrawal has something to do with all the US and Nato troops being sent to the Russian borders. They say it's for training but the Russians now coming back home is kinda worrisome.
www.rt.com...

www.nytimes.com...

What do y'all think? WW3 inbound.


edit on 7-1-2017 by PlasticWizard because: (no reason given)

edit on 7-1-2017 by PlasticWizard because: (no reason given)

edit on 7-1-2017 by PlasticWizard because: (no reason given)

edit on 7-1-2017 by PlasticWizard because: Links




posted on Jan, 7 2017 @ 12:43 AM
link   
a reply to: PlasticWizard

a s/f for your first thread.

Just a bit of advice though, People will pillage you over your dailyfail link. Be prepared and ignore them.



posted on Jan, 7 2017 @ 12:44 AM
link   
a reply to: LuXTeN

I'll add a CNN one. There's a few articles on it. Thanks for the advice too!



posted on Jan, 7 2017 @ 12:44 AM
link   
a reply to: PlasticWizard

As for a 3rd World War? It won't be world wide, it will be a few select Countries like the last two were.

But, the difference being they want it, it's a power play. Will it happen? Possibly. Soon? I can't say. If it does, it won't last long.
edit on 7-1-2017 by LuXTeN because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 7 2017 @ 12:48 AM
link   
a reply to: PlasticWizard

Those 'forces' are not going to stop anything.

This is just moving pawns around the chess board to keep the headlines coming. Nothing more.

NATO and the US Military are moving things around possibly to 'heat' things up. Trump may very well decide to bring them all home in a few weeks.

Honestly, what are a few thousand troops and a few tanks going to achieve if Russia decided to roll across the borders.

Russia is not stupid and has no desire at all for a war with the West.

It is just more of the usual MSM fear mongering.

In fact, they may well be there for their annual run around the hills with the local troops.

P

edit on 7/1/2017 by pheonix358 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 7 2017 @ 12:50 AM
link   
a reply to: pheonix358

It's not just a few tanks tho...


The US plans to deliverer a total of 87 Abrams M1A1 tanks, 20 Paladin artillery vehicles and 136 Bradley fighting vehicles to Eastern Europe, according to Reuters. 



posted on Jan, 7 2017 @ 12:54 AM
link   
If there were to be hostilities between Russia and NATO, which there won't (in my belief anyway, for various reasons) then that force would be little more than an inconvenient roadbump to whatever forces Russia would go on the offensive with.

This is all routine military exercise stuff, if they were serious the US deployment would be significantly larger.



posted on Jan, 7 2017 @ 12:56 AM
link   
a reply to: PlasticWizard




It's not just a few tanks tho...


Yes it is.

Russia has around 550 T90s, 4500 T80 and over 10,000 T72s.

If you want, we can get the numbers of all Russia's anti tank brigades.

The numbers you are quoting are a drop in the proverbial bucket.

P

edit on 7/1/2017 by pheonix358 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 7 2017 @ 01:06 AM
link   
a reply to: PlasticWizard

The numbers of troops and vehicles wouldn't go through a small town in Russia, let alone put up a serious fight. In Desert Storm, to take on an army a fraction of the size of the Russian military, they took almost a million troops, with over 700,000 US troops, and thousands of vehicles and aircraft.



posted on Jan, 7 2017 @ 01:08 AM
link   
a reply to: pheonix358

Don't forget about the classified amount already stored in the Norwegian ice caves. That measly amount is just what they sent this time. I'm willing to bet we have more there already.
www.cnn.com...



posted on Jan, 7 2017 @ 01:10 AM
link   
a reply to: PlasticWizard

I no longer trust CNN

Here's another. I'm not sure how reliable this is but it's better than some.

www.theglobeandmail.com...



posted on Jan, 7 2017 @ 01:16 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Would today's technology advancement in drones and stealth technology be able to reduce those numbers? You of all people know we have some badass stuff in our arsenal that we didn't have in Desert storm. As far as man power goes, they are training Nato troops to run this equipment. The man power would be coming from several nations.

Edit to add: we went from 1million troops in desert storm to something like 100,000 sent to Afghanistan.

a reply to: LuXTeN

I don't trust them either but here some people demand it or it's not happening.

edit on 7-1-2017 by PlasticWizard because: (no reason given)

edit on 7-1-2017 by PlasticWizard because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 7 2017 @ 01:30 AM
link   
a reply to: PlasticWizard

Afghanistan barely had a standing Army.

Technology can reduce the numbers some, but you're talking about a massive territory, and very large military force. The Russian Army has 2 million troops in reserve, and almost 800,000 active troops. That's not counting vehicles, aircraft, and ships.



posted on Jan, 7 2017 @ 01:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: Ohanka
If there were to be hostilities between Russia and NATO, which there won't (in my belief anyway, for various reasons) then that force would be little more than an inconvenient roadbump to whatever forces Russia would go on the offensive with.

This is all routine military exercise stuff, if they were serious the US deployment would be significantly larger.


I agree.

Though in operation desert storm I think even the US military was surprised at how effective the M1 Abrams was.

It's down to training and I don't think the Russians have the financial backing to train like US forces, now that might seem ignorant but I feel any Russian military leaders know that anyway.

I mean... It's smart to be ready. If I was in a verbal altercation I wouldn't sit on the floor with my hands behind my back, I'd be ready just in case it got physical.

Plus the Eastern European nations have been worried for a while, it's good to reassure them. Nobody wants a European conflict, it's good for nobody.



posted on Jan, 7 2017 @ 01:38 AM
link   
Russian Aircraft carrier,singular,not Aircraft carriers.



posted on Jan, 7 2017 @ 01:56 AM
link   
a reply to: PlasticWizard

US insurgent army is squashed, defensive missile batteries in place, peace agreement signed with Turkey, Russian carrier was primarily a show of force. No longer needed, returning to base.

The Russian airbase at Latakia and sea port at Tartus will remain open...

these things are omitted from the western press as much as possible. We lost.

RT



posted on Jan, 7 2017 @ 01:57 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Damn Russia has a huge army. Thanks for the numbers. one little "uh oh that training missle shouldn't have done that" kinda conflict at the boarder could cause a big problem with the narrative being thrown around now. The current administration has been trying to go to war since Nov. And not being shy about it. As improbable as something happening would be, it's still something going on worldly that needs to have an eye on it. It somehow slipped through the cracks in the media.


a reply to: intrptr

Thank you for that link. Makes sense to me.
edit on 7-1-2017 by PlasticWizard because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 7 2017 @ 02:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: PlasticWizard
a reply to: pheonix358


The US plans to deliverer a total of 87 Abrams M1A1 tanks, 20 Paladin artillery vehicles and 136 Bradley fighting vehicles to Eastern Europe, according to Reuters. 


People keep purposefully down playing NATO's numbers in Europe, parts East?

pick a link



posted on Jan, 7 2017 @ 02:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: PlasticWizard

US insurgent army is squashed, defensive missile batteries in place, peace agreement signed with Turkey, Russian carrier was primarily a show of force. No longer needed, returning to base.

The Russian airbase at Latakia and sea port at Tartus will remain open...

these things are omitted from the western press as much as possible. We lost.

RT





A broken show of force that barely made it to the MED

WHAT HAPPENED TO ADMIRAL KUZNETSOV: PHOTO OF TOWING OF RUSSIAN AIRCRAFT CARRIER PUBLISHED ONLINE

And has had two major accidents involving flight ops
Russian Su-33 crashed in the Mediterranean while attempting to land on Kuznetsov aircraft carrier



posted on Jan, 7 2017 @ 02:07 AM
link   
a reply to: intrptr

They are, never mainstream.

I was disgusted 5 years ago, I was sickened by Libya. Assad said in the early days he'd welcome a western coalition if the aim was to tackle terrorism.

He allowed Syria's chemical weapons to be taken, the only safe bet in his arsenal against an Israeli conflict.

His airforce have been fighting with homemade weaponry, we point our fingers and say "barrel bombing" well what else can they use... Spray down the lotion and give them all lovely soft skin?

Disgusting really, Western pride got in the way of us easing the suffering of millions of people.

God knows what's next, the next few month and years are going to be interesting. I fear worse may still come.



new topics

top topics



 
10
<<   2 >>

log in

join