Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Russian Warships Enter Syrian Waters To Prevent NATO Attack

page: 5
43
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 18 2011 @ 11:31 PM
link   
Help me out here.

Let's say that in a few years the "Muslim Brotherhood" has control of most of the Middle East and North Africa. A peasant uprising of sorts.

Is it realistic to think that they can form alliances except with each other?

What sort of standard of living changes can we expect to see in the next decade? Mind you, the Muslims are fighting one another, and the "cleansing" seem expected to continue.

So a group who have had political influence in the name of their religion (but with nary a thought to Allah) are now in control of actually trying to run a 21st Century government based on laws that were intended to operate a tribal people. How is that likely to work out?

Maybe I have a false picture. But if I have some measure of accuracy, then strategically, helping the Muslim Brotherhood (in an indirect and plausibly deniable way) take power, may well bring both the Middle East and North Africa to its own Dark Ages-- no threat, no economy, and back to tribal living-- in other words-- like Somalia.

And how is Somalia working out for them? Anyone afraid of Somalia?




posted on Nov, 19 2011 @ 01:22 AM
link   
reply to post by antar
 


Glimpses of what exactly? Please share.

edit on 19-11-2011 by thepixelpusher because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 19 2011 @ 01:32 AM
link   
Personally, I don't think Russia likes the U.S. and it's allies very much. Especially because in recent months Russia and China have been becoming good friends. Putin made a remark about how he thought it was illegal how the U.S. and NATO entered and bombed Libya (which is now ruled by Al-Qaeda). Obama knows that Russia doesn't like how the U.S. is doing pretty much whatever it wants, whenever it wants so Russia decided to step in to make things a lot more complicated.

I am anxious to see what happens in 2012. This will be a very interesting year.



posted on Nov, 19 2011 @ 01:48 AM
link   
reply to post by davereality
 


Like us or not, they are unable and unwilling to enter a skirmish with the west.
It's not that I think ones stronger than the other, its that both know doing so would clusterf*k this fragile equilibrium theyve created. The economy and the general populace at breaking point and both leaders know there countries cannot afford anything....

so lets wait and see what Russian Warships really mean.. should only be a couple of days??

then we'll decide which Russia showed up.



posted on Nov, 19 2011 @ 02:27 AM
link   
reply to post by Frira
 


The 'russian' iraqi tanks were monkey models and Iraqi shoddy versions of T-72 like Lion of Babylon which could not even stand up to Warsaw pact T-55's with K-5 Heavy ERA. The penetrators were steel based(which warsaw pact stopped using in the 60's ,rather than tungsten carbide based).

Secondly,Russia never had military naval base in Libya,Vietnam,China,North Korea.Syria and Cuba have military naval base of Russia /USSR(Cuba has not been invaded remember) .I wouldn't want my Texas Brethren to be under thermonuclear or biological attack thanks to the criminal NWO elite that occupies Texas and North America. The faster we secede the more better it is ,unless Ron Paul is elected.

IF Texas remains part of USSA ,then be prepared for Mexican cartels ,NWO UN troops and US police forces.All of them work together for the final takeover of America.



edit on 19-11-2011 by ludwigvonmises003 because: (no reason given)
edit on 19-11-2011 by ludwigvonmises003 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 19 2011 @ 03:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by Majic
reply to post by xavi1000
 

The new "liberated" Syria would be a prize for Turkey, another strategic foothold for NATO, a slap in the face for Russia, a watchtower over Iraq, one less threat for Israel, cut off Hezbollah in Lebanon and be another nail in Iran's coffin.

¡Viva la Revolución!


Yeah, the Russians saw the con-job NATO did in Libya:

>lol we are enforcing a no-fly zone to protect civilians
>well, now we're arming rebels trying to overthrow the government
>and now 'enforcing no-fly zone' actually means 'bombing the Libyan Army out of existence so the rebels can take over'
>and now we aren't going to stop bombing until the leader of that country is dead or in prison
>and now we're giving air support to the rebels who are level the city of Sirte with heavy artillery, killing thousands of civilians
>we totally didn't just come up with an excuse to knock over Gadaffi and get his oil

And see us trying to do it again to their favorite ally in the Middle East, especially since their navy base at Tartus just went online, meaning as long as Assad's in power Russia has naval access to the Med without having to beg NATO allies Ukraine and Turkey for permission.

The fact that our media keeps pushing this "lol their totally killing unarmed protesters how evul" line, when what's going on is an armed insurgency engaging in street battles with the government, in which both sides are getting killed, is surest proof that NATO and it's interest is behind it all.

Current body count (by the OPPOSITION) is 2,700 civilians and 900 government soldiers. Assad says it's 1,150 soldiers, 700 insurgents, and 700 civilians: en.wikipedia.org...

Say, how did all those peaceful unarmed Libyan (and now Syrian) demonstrators turn into an army? Where'd they get all those guns? Do "evil oppressive dictators" just give out military-grade weaponry to the people they oppress? I mean, we can't own automatic rifles in most of our free democracies.



posted on Nov, 19 2011 @ 03:51 AM
link   
Russia has a Navy base in Syria . They have war ships going in and out all the time. It's when the Russian Navy leaves there port in Syria I would start to worry. If they do, It could mean the have set sail to take up tactical positions for sea and land warfare.
edit on 19-11-2011 by SJE98 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 19 2011 @ 04:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by Sinny
For some reason I think it would make me really happy for Russia and/or China to kick the wests arses


Im in the west to, but I dont mind


hmmmm... You do have some dumb people over here, but lot's of times... they are really from elsewhere at one point or another. I think you will mind when you see it happen and more truth unfolds. The US is an unruly bastard child. It has parents from all over and anything goes here. It will be reclaimed, spanked and told it was it's own fault... and it was... sort of.... but not really...

The people are American and the people who own it are just a bunch of chain jerkers from old money.

...and the one thing that can make that happen is division among the people. Whatever happens, do not let anyone corral you and do not let anyone attempt to engage you in their battle.
edit on 19-11-2011 by BlackSatinDancer because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 19 2011 @ 05:00 AM
link   
Russia is doing this because if Libian scenario happens to Syria, then this chaos will definitely spread deeper to Asia, closer to Russia and China. Russia is protecting itself from a chaos near its borders.
edit on 2011/11/19 by danieliusk because: Misspelled "Syria".



posted on Nov, 19 2011 @ 05:24 AM
link   
This is interesting, UK foreign secretary to meet Syrian rebel leaders.

I think Assad will step down at some point, now the Arab League are putting on pressure, but if he doesn't things may get intersting.




UK Foreign Secretary William Hague is to meet Syrian rebel leaders in London on Monday, the Foreign Office says.

Mr Hague will meet members of the Syrian National Council and the National Co-ordination Committee for Democratic Change.

www.bbc.co.uk...
edit on 19-11-2011 by II HAL II because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 19 2011 @ 08:37 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Nov, 19 2011 @ 09:10 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Nov, 19 2011 @ 09:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by ludwigvonmises003
reply to post by Frira
 


The 'russian' iraqi tanks were monkey models and Iraqi shoddy versions of T-72 like Lion of Babylon which could not even stand up to Warsaw pact T-55's with K-5 Heavy ERA. The penetrators were steel based(which warsaw pact stopped using in the 60's ,rather than tungsten carbide based).

Secondly,Russia never had military naval base in Libya,Vietnam,China,North Korea.Syria and Cuba have military naval base of Russia /USSR(Cuba has not been invaded remember) .I wouldn't want my Texas Brethren to be under thermonuclear or biological attack thanks to the criminal NWO elite that occupies Texas and North America. The faster we secede the more better it is ,unless Ron Paul is elected.

IF Texas remains part of USSA ,then be prepared for Mexican cartels ,NWO UN troops and US police forces.All of them work together for the final takeover of America.



edit on 19-11-2011 by ludwigvonmises003 because: (no reason given)
edit on 19-11-2011 by ludwigvonmises003 because: (no reason given)


I think you strayed from my point:

You were responding to the supporting information I gave regarding Russian interests-- specifically in arms sales.

What Russia sold was vastly inferior to what the US threw at it-- bad for sales.

As I recall, what Russia had available for its own defenses at the time was a relatively small number of more modern tanks but utterly reliant upon an enormous number of the ones essentially "made of paper." In the first Iraq war, Russia observed how useless those designs were even in huge numbers. The product and the tactic was proven to be inadequate.

An illustration you will appreciate: It was not just the armor. Nothing survives a direct hit. It was also the range. The 1836 Texans used Kentucky Long Rifles against Santa Anna's forces armed with various European rifles. The Mexicans were picked off and dead before they were within the effective range of their own weapons. Same principle.

So since Russia was keeping their few, best designs for themselves, selling their lesser equipment, the Iraq war showed that the investment in their products was a waste IF the equipment was to go up against a western design machine and western tactics.

As for the Russian Navy ship in port in Tripoli-- the point was that Russian presence was not then to be taken as opposition to a US strike. Russia had no interest in defending Libya in the 1980's. I imagine Libya hoped it would be seen that way at the time-- but the US did not and the Russians did not. We bombed the begeezus out of the Libyan defenses and the Russians not only had a good view, but smiles on their faces.



posted on Nov, 19 2011 @ 09:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by one4all
reply to post by Frira
 


[SNIP] Off-topic comments removed[/SNIP]

...



I'm sorry, you mistook me for someone who was asking for you to go off on an anti-religious rant.

I am not that person. I don't appreciate your hateful rhetoric. Stay on topic.

[SNIP]
edit on 11/19/2011 by dbates because: Removed off-topic content



posted on Nov, 19 2011 @ 10:24 AM
link   
reply to post by Frira
 


I believe I am on topic because I believe that Russia like the US like China,like Iran is made up up PEOPLE,people who dont want to die for stupid reasons based on religous and political rhetoric,those russian ships are being directed by religous leaders and government decision makes----exclusive to the true wishes of the Russian people.Why dont you read into posts a little deeper or at least keep your nastiness to yourself.

There isnt a country in the world today that isnt affected by the dynamic I explain ,and NATO is also under these influences.

I appreciate your inability to see my perspective ,but please defend your religous views somewhere else,religon has no special meaning to me,it is just a group dynamic.I am not anti-religous,I am an observer who isnt blinded by false divinity and refuses to even aknowledge attempts like yours to protect religon so called sanctity.Anti-religous rant,Ha Ha Ha ,even here you think that there is some little rule to protect your own ideas of what is relevant on this thread,a rule that entitles you to attack my perspective,Ha Ha Ha,think again.You may comment but the truth is still obvious.

I am pro-humanitarian,and as I said my posts are VERY relevant because these ships are supposed to go where the people of Russia want them to go and that is not happening for the reasons I listed.

NATO is supposed to act as the people say but that is not happening,you are part of this problem,you seem to think
that that your voice is supported ,but by what?an imaginary majority?The truth speaks for itself and opposite to what you obviously have been taught,there is a new kid in town and it is called humanity,and humanitys needs supercede those of groups.religons,and countries,you are seeking protection and support from an archaic system that is crumbling before your eyes,and you are hanging on,good for you that is ok by me.But dont try to drag me or anyone else down with you becaus I personally see benefit in pushing you back into the darkness with the rest of the slow learners,contrarian thinking in the defense of individualism represented by the false ideals of religon supported by government IS A THING OF THE PAST.

There was a mistake made in America during the Vietnam era and the politicians didnt know the longlasting effects it would have,you see,THE PEOPLE didnt want war in Vietnam,if there had been a true democreacy excluding the crooked dynamics I explained in my post then there wouldnt have been a war.

We are facing the same issue here,THE PEOPLE DONT WANT A WAR,but today we can take it a step further and say that the people are being defied by their own leaders and their voices are not being heeded.and we can prove this via the internet,if the net existed in the 60s there wouldnt have been a Vietnam.Now those same crooked powers have been stupid enough to try the same tactics because they havent learned to survive since the advent of the internet,and they are struggling to exist.

Even if you try to keep your own head buried in your arse ,ANYONE WHO CARES TO BOTHER can pop your head right back out in a couple of minutes online.There is nowhere to hide not even in your own dark little hole

As I said the Russian people havent been heard on this,nor have the American ,or Iranian,or Isreali people for that matter.There are dynamics that prevent them from being heard.

Put it this way,there can be no such thing as a true democracy unless EVER VOICE ON EARTH IS HEARD AND GIVEN EQUAL LEVITY.Get that?This means you have been lied to and mis-represented.,there is no other option to realise.So by proxy you are supporting lies and you and I clash.

I support a one-world democracy because I see that we need to correct all the damage we caused to get humanity this far,and I am not so blind to think that what got us here can help us correct the imbalances humanity is enduring.

And because you are lucky enough to be educated and be on-line why dont you commit a little time to seeking the truth on behalf of humanity??Use the resource you have in front of you,and do it a little faster than you seem to be doing it.We dont live forever you know.



posted on Nov, 19 2011 @ 10:36 AM
link   
edit on 11/19/2011 by Majic because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 19 2011 @ 10:52 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Nov, 19 2011 @ 11:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by Majic
It doesn't matter if Russian warships have entered Syrian waters or not.

The fact is, it's been widely reported, and that makes it factesque.


Lol. Thats an interesting way of looking at it.



posted on Nov, 19 2011 @ 11:27 AM
link   
Well let's back up for a minute.

We have a PrisonPlanet article referring to an article from Haaretz.

from the PP first and second paragraphs:

Russian warships have entered Syrian territorial waters in an aggressive move designed to prevent any NATO-led attack on the country under the guise of a “humanitarian intervention”.


“Russian warships are due to arrive at Syrian territorial waters, a Syrian news agency said on Thursday, indicating that the move represented a clear message to the West that Moscow would resist any foreign intervention in the country’s civil unrest,” reports Haaretz.


"Russian warships have entered Syrian territorial waters"

THEN;

"Russian warships are due to arrive at Syrian territorial waters


Conflicting statements all within 20 words of each other.



How many "religions" are in Russia?

How many nations have central banks tied to the World Bank, Bank of International Settlements, International Monetary Fund ..... etc. ?

The NWO is here in the form of central banking and international corporations.

Things like national borders, religions, nations, governments, etc. are the fronts for the international money system.

Figure out WHO started with gold and silver money systems thousands of years ago, and you will find TPTB.

And, gold and silver are industrial commodities too ...... Hmmmmm

Gold and silver as commodities and as money at the same time ?

Sounds like a good double standard to me.



posted on Nov, 19 2011 @ 11:39 AM
link   
Believe it or not I was making a genuine reply on this thread,,If we have been fighting I have been an unknowing participant.

Even though you have made direct personal accusations and attacked my integrity,I am not engaging you on that level,that is not why I am here.I didnt intentionally direct any specific religous criticism to you personally,I referred to the religous ideals and the average persons intgral interaction or dynamic within the actualisation of that ideal through religous particapaction and support of that activity through "outside"the church but"within the religous peer group"interactions.People who work together in the non-religous economic structure who without the religous connection would be unlikely to combine resources to attain a greater end result are who I was referring to ,it was not a particular personal reference,I do not humanise religon,I dont quantify you as a person and your belief system as one thing,your religous views are what you want to be ,but your persona is who you are.You react to my critique of your or a belief system in a defensive manner because you cannot understand that there was no context of personal critiques in the content of my posts.Until you became hostile,and the dynamic changed for both of us.

Do the church and people of Russia support the ship movements in reaction to NATO activities,could have easily sufficed to make my point,however many people wouldnt be able to read enough into the comment to actually understand the point,we all have different ways of disseminating new information and have individual perspectives ,so sometime it is comforting to expand on our thoughts a little to include as many peoples perspectives as we can,this is why there is a limit to a post,we are allowed to expand and are encouraged to expand our thoughts for the betterment of the thread and symbioticly the posters and members of ATS.

My contribution to the thread was to share my personal perspective that these Naval movements are not necessarily sanctioned by the people of russia ,that Russia like many countrys in the world is influenced by entities that prevent the peoples voices from being heard or who intentionally ignore those voices .In view of this ,I think that when we consider NATO as an organisation we must remember that those same entities influence NATO,NATO is as suceptible to acting independantly of the peoples wishes as Russia is.

Therefore as a whole we might want to consider the interests of these entities that directly influence the movements of these military forces when we try to surmise the actual end-purpose of these movements.

When I seek this answer I come up with Isreals religous differences with Iran as the root cause of these Naval movements so when I take the natural next step as to why this conflict between Isreal and Iran exists I come to religous differences---hence my inclusion of religon in my posts,it is the root cause of the Naval movements,so of course we have to talk about it.

And when we do talk about it we eventually get to the question of ,Is this what the PEOPLE really want?Or are there other forces making this happen?This is a natural path of discourse or discussion that is most definatly contextually relevant to the original thread ,so the question is this---

Does anyone else here think that we might need to seriously look at the religous structures of the major nations involved and focus mainly on these motivating factors??Because if the root cause of the problem is religous in nature then,if we cant isolate that root cause ,we will be in bigger trouble than we think.Nato and Russia have the same basic religous motivators in my opinion so I wouldnt exclude the possibility that Russia is positioning itself near soon to be allies in a religous based conflict???Would Russia forsake its Religous influences to defend Isreal in favor of destroying Nato which also supports the same religous influences??I dont think so.I think there is a bigger picture here and the lines being drawn and the allies being leaned on are connected more by idealisms than economics,there is an economic endgame but the motivating forces seem to be religous based.



edit on 19-11-2011 by one4all because: (no reason given)






top topics



 
43
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join