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.
Originally posted by victor7
reply to post by longlostbrother
Let's not split hairs here. When blocs and alliances are made then their goals and objectives change along with changes in the geopolitics and other prominent factors. NATO is at open hostility towards Russia. Only drunk and incompetent will deny this fact.
Originally posted by FissionSurplus
Seems to me that Syria was on the drawing board as one of the nations to be taken down, as early as 2003, per General Wesley Clark back in 2007:
Every nation that we have heard about over the last few years that somehow started doing bad things out of the blue and are a sudden and immediate "threat" that needs to be dealt with is on that list.
Whether the numbers in the OP are inflated or not, whether there is hyperbole concerning how many troops, weapons, fighter planes, etc., keep in mind the basic fact that this is all planned way ahead of time!
Let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater here.
From the beginning NATO was hotile toward Russia and if you believe in concept of puppet masters (TPTB), than they have knowned (back then when NATO was established) for sure NATO's fundamental purpose. - To start WW3 with Russia and China.
Originally posted by longlostbrother
reply to post by Fichorka
Sorry but that's not in ANY WAY proof that NATO was invented to invade China and Russia.
Is it.
Care to try again?
Originally posted by Fichorka
From the beginning NATO was hotile toward Russia and if you believe in concept of puppet masters (TPTB), than they have knowned (back then when NATO was established) for sure NATO's fundamental purpose. - To start WW3 with Russia and China.
Originally posted by longlostbrother
reply to post by Fichorka
Sorry but that's not in ANY WAY proof that NATO was invented to invade China and Russia.
Is it.
Care to try again?
Originally posted by longlostbrother
Originally posted by Fichorka
From the beginning NATO was hotile toward Russia and if you believe in concept of puppet masters (TPTB), than they have knowned (back then when NATO was established) for sure NATO's fundamental purpose. - To start WW3 with Russia and China.
Originally posted by longlostbrother
reply to post by Fichorka
Sorry but that's not in ANY WAY proof that NATO was invented to invade China and Russia.
Is it.
Care to try again?
Sorry, asking me to "believe in [a] concept" is not proof that NATO was created on the premise of invading China.
Here's a hint: There's NO EVIDENCE that NATO was created to invade Russia and China.
Believing that to be true, for whatever reason, is fine, as long as you don't go around claiming it's a fact based belief.
Believe in fairies and dragons if you want as well... I don't care... but don't claim BS you make up is factual.
And btw., you know what the bible says about TPTB I assume? Especially considering that's the source of that particular title?
And please, will you tell me how NATO felt about NATO member Germany in 1949?edit on 11-12-2012 by longlostbrother because: (no reason given)edit on 11-12-2012 by longlostbrother because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by victor7
Originally posted by Snoil
If the West interferes, I'll bl;ame two people for not taking this fire from a flame to a simmer, Obama, and Putin. Putin needs to stop pretneding the hero and be one for real for his ally, and Obama needs to make sure he doesn't get invested in the 'legacy' trap by finally winning a war.
Damascus needs to be saved, if we as people can't do that, why bother?
Please do not expect Russia to get into the military mess just because Assad could not give up some of his powers right away and work towards increasingly more democratic and economically viable country. Russia is in no shape to fight even Turkey let along the whole of NATO. Russia is getting sucked from inside by folks near and dear to Putin and his United Russia party.
Also, someone mentioned importance of Syria for naval base and force projection. I wonder if Russia is able to project force right next to its own shores and sealines. Nyet! Russians institutions have been looted by its own people. Like Pakistan and North Korea, only defense for Russia are its nukes.edit on 10-12-2012 by victor7 because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Fichorka
From the beginning NATO was hotile toward Russia and if you believe in concept of puppet masters (TPTB), than they have knowned (back then when NATO was established) for sure NATO's fundamental purpose. - To start WW3 with Russia and China.
Originally posted by longlostbrother
reply to post by Fichorka
Sorry but that's not in ANY WAY proof that NATO was invented to invade China and Russia.
Is it.
Care to try again?
Originally posted by Antonio1
reply to post by victor7
That wasn't a test invasion of Russia, that was Georgia attempting to reclaim territory that legally belongs to them that is being occupied by Russia. Also, do you really think that Georgia's military is the best that NATO has?
Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by zeeon
The C/D isn't the Super Hornet, and there is no such thing as a "Baby Hornet", and you're wrong on the numbers. They carry three Navy Hornet Squadrons, one Marine Hornet Squadron, one squadron for electronic attack (EA-6B), one for early warning (E-2C/D 2-4), a logistics support squadron (usually 2 C-2s), and a helicopter squadron.
That's 12 F/A-18E/F (Super Hornets), 36 F/A-18A-D (Hornet), four E-2C/D (Hawkeye), four EA-6B (Prowler), four SH-60, two HH-60 helicopters, and the occasional C-2 Greyhound for mail runs, now that the S-3 is out of service.
Originally posted by Signals
reply to post by jhn7537
The Syrian Government has every right to expel foreign terrorists and rebels trying to overthrow them....
We have no right to intervene.
Originally posted by Gomar
Originally posted by Signals
reply to post by jhn7537
The Syrian Government has every right to expel foreign terrorists and rebels trying to overthrow them....
We have no right to intervene.
But the US did in Serbia when the Serbs tried to expel Muslim terrorists and rebels from their land.
Now the Syrians are fighting against the Arab invader... which the US is supporting,
Originally posted by victor7
Originally posted by Antonio1
reply to post by victor7
That wasn't a test invasion of Russia, that was Georgia attempting to reclaim territory that legally belongs to them that is being occupied by Russia. Also, do you really think that Georgia's military is the best that NATO has?
The goal was to test Russian reaction to encroachment on its lands by former CIS nations who are now friendly to NATO and West.
Trust me,
if any NATO nation goes hot on Russia
, then next thing we will see are Iskander and Topol-Ms giving some nuclear cough syrup to any and all NATO nations. It will happen so fast and keep on happening continously, that common folks around the world would 'just not care' until their city is finally also blown up in the madness.
Originally posted by jhn7537
So are you suggesting that Syria shouldn't be stopped?
This is the same sort of point of view you see in the Isaiah quote. It has nothing to do with a war destroying the city, it is about people going back to the farm and leaving the corrupting influence of city life.
For the first time in all my years in the Levant, I saw how corrupting the peasant and the bedouin found the city. Arab tradition said that every other generation brought a wave of reformers, religious zealots, from the desert to purify the city. It had happened in Saudi Arabia many times, lasting until the luxury of city life corrupted that generation’s sons. I wondered whether it would happen in Syria.
Aleppo: How Syria is Being Destroyed
Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
Originally posted by Gomar
Originally posted by Signals
reply to post by jhn7537
The Syrian Government has every right to expel foreign terrorists and rebels trying to overthrow them....
We have no right to intervene.
But the US did in Serbia when the Serbs tried to expel Muslim terrorists and rebels from their land.
the US was almost 300 years from existing whenthat happened in the 1490's!!
Now the Syrians are fighting against the Arab invader... which the US is supporting,
Seems unlikely, since that happened in the 600's - go read about the battle of Yarmuk....
Originally posted by Xcathdra
reply to post by HabiruThorstein
You have an interesting version of history my friend...
wiki - Bosnian Genocide
I think those men and boys who were killed would disagree about the charges being trumped up.edit on 12-12-2012 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)