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 Upgrades Syrian Radars to Warn of U.S., Israeli Attack

page: 2
7
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 27 2012 @ 08:35 PM
link   
reply to post by maloy
 


I'm sure they have and there is more to it, but I bet someone is profiting off of it all the same.

What reason do you think the US wants to attack Syria and Iran? To subtly encroach on to a strategic position for a war with Russia and China?




posted on Feb, 27 2012 @ 08:44 PM
link   
Good point Maloy...

Russia could do the same to Mexico that was done to Libya...

Anyway, I didn't post this article because the real source is DEBKA... not Russian news.

Debka is well known for posting BS... So unless there's confirmation somewhere else... it's probably bull.

Remember the source of DEBKA... extremists zionists in Jerusalem who have been making stuff up 24/7 for the last 6 years at least (I have been reading them since then).

Wiki entry on Debka :

Wired.com's Noah Shachtman wrote in 2001 that the site "clearly reports with a point of view; the site is unabashedly in the hawkish camp of Israeli politics," adding that Debka had partnered with the right-wing news site WorldNetDaily for a weekly subscription product.[3] Yediot Achronot investigative reporter Ronen Bergman states that the site relies on information from sources with an agenda, such as neo-conservative elements of the US Republican Party, "whose worldview is that the situation is bad and is only going to get worse," and that Israeli intelligence officials do not consider even 10 percent of the site's content to be reliable.[1] Cornell Law professor Michael C. Dorf calls Debka his "favorite alarmist Israeli website trading in rumors."[4]

Debka is worse than News Of The World in the credibility department.
edit on 27-2-2012 by Vitchilo because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 27 2012 @ 08:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by RSF77
reply to post by maloy
 


I'm sure they have and there is more to it, but I bet someone is profiting off of it all the same.

What reason do you think the US wants to attack Syria and Iran? To subtly encroach on to a strategic position for a war with Russia and China?


That's one theory. Personally I think US has recently started to apply a new strategy in the Middle East and surrounding regions, and all of these "spontaneous" revolts have something to do with it. What is the purpose of US's involvement? That's anyone's guess. They are trying to replace less friendly but more pragmatic regimes, with more friendly but potentially idealogical ones. The US already tried this trick once with the colored revolutions throughout Eastern Europe a decade ago (Serbia, Ukraine, Georgia, etc). That was a testing ground, and there is far more at stake in the Middle East.

Of course the White House version is that there is freedom and democracy that needs some spreading, and wouldn't you know it US is the right country for the job.
edit on 27-2-2012 by maloy because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 27 2012 @ 08:51 PM
link   
reply to post by Vitchilo
 


You are right, Debka is at best an equivalent of a political tabloid.



posted on Feb, 27 2012 @ 08:54 PM
link   
reply to post by maloy
 


Wouldn't the US be allocating a lot more military assets into the middle east then?

Also, why did they basically abandon Iraq for all strategic purposes? (as far as starting a war with any major power) The worst they have done is put up interceptors in Romania, and even that is a defensive asset not an ICBM installation reminiscent of the Cuban missile crisis. Iraq would have been more of a liability since a lot of our troops were there.

Just seems like they totally failed if that was their agenda, the only rational thing I can think of as the reason for all this is profit.
edit on 27-2-2012 by RSF77 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 27 2012 @ 08:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by ken10
Good on the Russians.


Screw the Russians on their continued support for the genocide being committed under the current despotic regime. Whats happening in Syria is a catastrophe , a human abomination that would not be possible if Russia had the guts to 1: not sell them jack, in particular weapons and 2: not at least veto an attempt for the UN, toothless but symbolic as it may be to put an end to this horror by 3: allowing NATO to do what it did in Libya by following #2. Not rocket science. They only need abstain from a vote, need not even think about actually doing the right thing.

And Assad is now saying we need to "dialog"with the opposition. Right... As if they should all ID themselves and have the goons of Assad know them and arrange for something "tragic" to happen. Like the building or room the saps are gathered in to have a tragic structural failure... Think it hasn't been thought of or happened before? You don't want to know.

Think those who believe in helping people enslaved in a despotic system and lending our voice to that nations own citizens will not be very vocal and very political, doing what ever is possible? Try to stop us...



posted on Feb, 27 2012 @ 09:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by RSF77

Wouldn't the US be allocating a lot more military assets into the middle east then?

Also, why did they basically abandon Iraq for all strategic purposes?


Perhaps if US had the means to. From the budgetary perspective US military is stretched thin with the current deployements. And like you said, they want to be subtle about it.

Iraq and Afghanistan was part of the old strategy - massive military deployments and efforts to restructure the country's government from the outside. Needless to say US faced a lot of issues, with no clear outcome. Iraq has some potential to remain a US ally, but Afghanistan is a lost cause. Any further large deployements in both will not lead to a better outcome, it would just be replaying the same thing over and over. Intead of throwing good money after bad, perhaps they tried to change the strategy.

The new game is to let the locals fight it out, with support in the form of supplied arms and air strikes. No large deployment makes it cheaper and less contentious both at home and abroad. But the goals of the game are the same. This opens up a new can of worms however. US tried a similar strategy before - in Afghanistan in the 80's. Retrospectively we can say that that had major long-term tactical oversights. It spawned a whole new threat in the region - bigger than the original threat US was fighting against.



Originally posted by RSF77
The worst they have done is put up interceptors in Romania, and even that is a defensive asset not an ICBM installation reminiscent of the Cuban missile crisis.


ABM installations may be defensive if viewed solely by themselves, but when fielded by a superpower with a nuclear triad they become part of the country's nuclear strategy - both defensive and offensive (i.e. defense from a retaliation to a preemptive strike).

And again, I am not saying that the interests that US has in Middle East have to do with surrounding Russia militarily. US wants a sphere of influence for a wide range of purposes, and Russia/China want to deny US that sphere of influence for a similarly wide range of purposes. Everyone has a long-term perspective here.



Originally posted by RSF77
Just seems like they totally failed if that was their agenda, the only rational thing I can think of as the reason for all this is profit.


I guess you can call having influence as being profitable. I doubt however that US can offer up enough money to Russia or China to have them go along with everything in its playbook.



posted on Feb, 27 2012 @ 09:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by arbiture
Screw the Russians on their continued support for the genocide being committed under the current despotic regime.


Do you know what the definition of genocide is? I don't think you do.

Did the Union commit genocide against the Confederacy in the US Civil War? Did any side in France commit genocide during the French Revolution? What about the Spanish Civil War?

There is a difference between a civil war-type conflict, and genocide against a specific subgroup of the population.



Originally posted by arbiture
Whats happening in Syria is a catastrophe , a human abomination that would not be possible


What was happening in Sudan? Russia didn't have any involvement there, nor did anyone else. How in your opinion was that possible? How was Rwanda possible, or countless other slaughters in Africa? Or do you only pay attention to catastophies that are highlighted in a 2 minute segment during your nighly news?

Russia had nothing to do with the events that gave rise to the rebelion in Syria. US likely had more to do with it than Russia. As for Assad's actions - it is by far not the first or the last time a regime takes a hardline stance like that against its opponents. Humane? Perhaps not. Neither are "Shock and Awe" bombings or targeted assasinations abroad. That's the political reality - deal with it.



Originally posted by arbiture
They only need abstain from a vote, need not even think about actually doing the right thing.


There were many times when the same could be said for the US. And Russia is doing the right thing - from their perspective. The "right thing" is in the eyes of the beholder.


edit on 27-2-2012 by maloy because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 27 2012 @ 10:31 PM
link   
The tactic would be a medium to high altitude overfly, probably wouldn't even violate airspace.
This would cause land-based radar to light up. ....
I'd guess about 5 minutes or less and ...terrain following Tomahawks don't have much of a radar signature.. until they're right on top of you.


edit on 2/27/2012 by abecedarian because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 28 2012 @ 08:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by ken10

Originally posted by Clisen33

Originally posted by ken10
Good on the Russians.


Lol good on the Russians for what, supporting the endless slaughter in Homs and other areas of Syria by the regime? Have you seen any videos from Liveleak.com on the grotesque results of Syrian regime forces firing on innocent civilians?


Brainwashed much are we ?


LMFAO!




posted on Feb, 28 2012 @ 09:04 AM
link   
Dont mess with Russia




posted on Feb, 28 2012 @ 12:03 PM
link   
reply to post by ken10
 


Are you so desperate to vilify the west, you'll over look a slaughter?
While the world sits on its hands, thousands have died, simply because a hatred of the west. If the US and NATO, hadn't been involved in ANY wars in the last 10 years, everyone would back them going in and saving these people. So, essentially, peoples ignorance and blind hate, will cause many more deaths.

Did the US belong in Afghanistan and Iraq.... Not a chance.. BUT, because of people like yourself, that are unable to separate between Syria and Iraq, hundreds will die.

The people of Homs have been slaughtered by their Govt. Period! No brain washing required.

They have ZERO food, they have ZERO medical... They want change and are willing to fight for it. Do you think the US are the rebels in Syria? I'll assume you think the US stirred it up... How exactly did they do that? Did the US hypnotize them?? These people started out as a peaceful protest, until the Govt. decided to take a barbaric approach and decided to smash the uprising. Now they fight, and here you are stuck on your hatred of the US and NATO.

Thankfully much more compassionate, brighter and braver people than yourself, are making the decisions.

I also detest the US foreign policy, but I wont let that hate, lead to inaction, for a just cause.



posted on Feb, 28 2012 @ 05:19 PM
link   
Assad would be a fool to deny food and medical attention to the people trapped in fighting areas. These should not even be denied to fighters who have surrendered even after attacking the government forces.

Assad has every right to confront these elements who just thought it right to ask him to leave and started attacking government forces. Assad has declared elections for 2014 and few days ago constitutional referendum was passed. If opposition decided to boycott these referendum then that is their problem.

Time for Syrian people to make their political parties and impress upon general populations regarding their various agendas. Free elections will take place in 24 months after the various democratic institutions have been well entrenched and experienced in running vital organizations. Not like Libya where 6 months after removal of the regime different parts of country are guarded by different militias and no proper rules or constitution established to run the country. Shock therapy is not advised especially in Third World nations as opportunists will take to power and it will all be the same, all the while common person will continue to suffer.



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1   >>

log in

join