Russia 'sends six warships to Syria

page: 1
10
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 10 2012 @ 10:37 AM
link   

Russia 'sends six warships to Syria


www.dailymail.co.uk

Russia today dispatched six warships to its naval base in Syria in a move that is likely to spark concern in the West.

A flotilla led by an anti-submarine destroyer have sailed from the Arctic port of Severomorsk to Tartus.

However, military sources claim the deployment is nothing to do with the growing tensions in the country where the crackdown by government troops against opposition forces has intensified in recent weeks

Read more: www.dailymail.co.uk...
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Jul, 10 2012 @ 10:37 AM
link   
Russia is claiming the deployment of these six warships has nothing to do with the crisis in Syria, I for one think this is nonsense, how can you pretend that sending a substantial naval force to an already tense region is anything other than a finger to the West!

Russia is either playing a dangerous game of brinkmanship or they are serious about Intervening in Syria should the NATO launch an assault.
I really can't see this ending peacefully... Hope i am wrong though.


www.dailymail.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)
edit on 10-7-2012 by rigel4 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 10 2012 @ 10:43 AM
link   
Pskov and samara VDV brigades are in Syria.If NATO attacks it will be WMD allout.



posted on Jul, 10 2012 @ 10:53 AM
link   
Would they make up their dang minds. First they send helios, then it gets stopped, then it goes back to Syria, then Russia stop selling weapons to Syria, and now they are sending Warships? Heck, this is worse then day of our lives.
edit on 10-7-2012 by Manhater because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 10 2012 @ 10:58 AM
link   
reply to post by rigel4
 


3 of the vessels are transports with Russian Marines. The lead warship is an antisubmarine destroyer and the vessels in tartous are joining the fllet after they sailing vessels refuel and ressuply. They are suppose to patrol the med until Spetember. The Marines are suppose to be used to secure Russian vessels / added security in Tartous.

This is nothing new and Russia discussed this option a few months back.

As for all out WMD comment from another poster - Please live in the now and understand the politics involved. The constant invocation of wmd use does nothing but support the position that you are lost when it comes to geopolitical issues and results from those actions.

Russia is not going to risk wwIII over Assad or for Ahmadenijad for that matter.



posted on Jul, 10 2012 @ 11:01 AM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


And neither will NATO risk a nuclear war over Assad .That should be clear.That is why VDV brigades are there.Plus there are Russian SSN's in mediterran sea carrying tactical nukes. Also some of VDV brigades have WMD .



posted on Jul, 10 2012 @ 11:02 AM
link   
I think this is all a puppet show to be honest

All members of the UN Security Council are all in cahoots with each other



posted on Jul, 10 2012 @ 11:12 AM
link   
Russia 'sends six warships to Syria,
RF has right to do that as USA and any country
but the question is what for?
To spend huge money of poor country for show?
edit on 10-7-2012 by leosnake because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 10 2012 @ 11:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by mkgandhas
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


And neither will NATO risk a nuclear war over Assad .That should be clear.That is why VDV brigades are there.Plus there are Russian SSN's in mediterran sea carrying tactical nukes. Also some of VDV brigades have WMD .



The only person bringing up WMD's is you. Nothing has come from NATO about using WMD's just as nothing has come from RUssia about using WMD's. Yet for some reason you and a few others like to constantly threaten their use. Based on what we dont know as you just drop it in when its convient.

If your going to make a claim how about you actually support it with you know, evidence.

Russia is not going to risk its own security to protect assad or ahmadenijad. The sooner you and the others understand that the more we can concentrate on the topic instead of the baseles speculation.



posted on Jul, 10 2012 @ 11:37 AM
link   
I see this as a bit of fist shaking tbo, but then isn't that how wars start?



posted on Jul, 10 2012 @ 11:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by Manhater
Would they make up their dang minds. First they send helios, then it gets stopped, then it goes back to Syria, then Russia stop selling weapons to Syria, and now they are sending Warships? Heck, this is worse then day of our lives.
edit on 10-7-2012 by Manhater because: (no reason given)


Russia has only said they wont sing any NEW contracts with Syria. They have said nothing about discontinuing the current contracts.



posted on Jul, 10 2012 @ 11:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by ModernAcademia
I think this is all a puppet show to be honest

All members of the UN Security Council are all in cahoots with each other


Agreed. I think anyone who thinks nation state borders matter any more is living in the past. It's all about big money, weapons contracts, and resource extraction. That has more to do with international corporations than nation states.



posted on Jul, 10 2012 @ 12:09 PM
link   
Russia has stopped all arms delivery to Syria but correctly so as Syrians do not pay for them right away. $5B in past debts are due and Syrians show little signs of paying them quickly.

I do not think Russia has any plans to get into a mess with Syria. These war ships are more to do with Iran theater where be September, the US-NATO attack is predicted. Furthermore, this is just a show of force or solidarity. Russia will not get involved in Iran or Syria. If either of these nations are attacked then Russia will seek a land grab in Georgia and create another area for Armenian minority and have an open road to its base in Armenia by negating the Georgian claim to the area.



posted on Jul, 10 2012 @ 12:15 PM
link   
reply to post by rigel4
 


There is a saying the world over in every Navy.

In wartime, there are targets and and there are submarines.


But with todays tech, even the subs aren't to safe.



posted on Jul, 10 2012 @ 12:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Xcathdra
reply to post by rigel4
 


3 of the vessels are transports with Russian Marines. The lead warship is an antisubmarine destroyer and the vessels in tartous are joining the fllet after they sailing vessels refuel and ressuply. They are suppose to patrol the med until Spetember. The Marines are suppose to be used to secure Russian vessels / added security in Tartous.

This is nothing new and Russia discussed this option a few months back.

As for all out WMD comment from another poster - Please live in the now and understand the politics involved. The constant invocation of wmd use does nothing but support the position that you are lost when it comes to geopolitical issues and results from those actions.

Russia is not going to risk wwIII over Assad or for Ahmadenijad for that matter.


We could just as easily say would " Obama risk going to ww3 over Assad or Ahmadenijad".

I don't see how Russia defending its only naval base in the Med be anything other than defending its geopolitical interests. If anyone is to attack that particular naval base then it is obvious that they are attacking first and not the other way around. therefore i would not blame the Russian federation in responding with whatever military response it see's as appropriate.



posted on Jul, 10 2012 @ 12:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by ModernAcademia
I think this is all a puppet show to be honest

All members of the UN Security Council are all in cahoots with each other


I will venture further out on a limb and say that the so-called "Security Council" is but a facade for the International Military Industrial Complex.... which is a subsidiary of the Global Financial Cartel.... all of whom are in bed with Big Energy, Big Pharma, and Big Aggro.



posted on Jul, 10 2012 @ 01:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by cerebralassassins
We could just as easily say would " Obama risk going to ww3 over Assad or Ahmadenijad".

More appropriately is should the US stop Iran before Iran causes WWIII and the answer is yes.


Originally posted by cerebralassassins
I don't see how Russia defending its only naval base in the Med be anything other than defending its geopolitical interests.

Its not a Russian base, which people dont seem to be grasping. They are using the facilities and thats it.. Supply... repairs.... access to the med... thats it.



Originally posted by cerebralassassins
If anyone is to attack that particular naval base then it is obvious that they are attacking first and not the other way around. therefore i would not blame the Russian federation in responding with whatever military response it see's as appropriate.

There would be no need to attack Russian vessels in a Syrian port and their vessels will be lying the Russian flag and not the Syrian. Russian vessels would be technically neutral unless they are targeted or if they fire first at incoming.The easy fix for that would be for Turley to deny Russia access through the Bosphorus straights.

We are getting ahead of ourselves thoughy because nothing has occured... Russia is distancing itself from Assad and rightfully so. If Assads regime continues down the path its on, Assad is going to end up like Ghadaffi and again, rightfully so.

We are no longer living in the cold war with countries aligning themseleves between West and East. There are other countries that would allow Russian naval vessels access for resupply and repairs, just as they would US vessels.



posted on Jul, 10 2012 @ 01:51 PM
link   
No move from China yet ?



posted on Jul, 10 2012 @ 01:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ben81
No move from China yet ?


For the time being they are following Russia's lead and being cautious so as not to align themselves with the wrong side.



posted on Jul, 10 2012 @ 03:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 





The easy fix for that would be for Turley to deny Russia access through the Bosphorus straights.


I do not think any military vessel of any country can pass through Bosphorus straits. That is Turkey's policy going back to Cold War days.

Assad has to act more decent than unleashing civilian militias and saying that his government has nothing to do with them. Once the basic human values are taken care of, there is a lot of room for diplomacy and negotiations. Outright slaughtering people is barbaric.

ps; what is actuality on ground vrs what is cooked by media is another issue. Something common civilians won't know without going into that country. Not recommended.





new topics




 
10
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join