Game changer : Russian Iskander (SS-26) Mobile Ballistic Missile Delivered to Syria

page: 4
19
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 10:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by intrptr
reply to post by ausername
 


No, don't believe everything you read. There have been atrocities committed by both sides, outside of Syria it is all a propaganda war. You have to choose which lies you are more inclined to believe.

But you are inclined to believe the louder lies, right?


I'm not inclined to believe anything that can't be independently verified coming from either side in Syria.



I'll ask them to take it outside for you if you like. This also begs the question: why would a real Syrian resistance movement risk injuring the poor, sick and old people left in town in order to defeat Assad? You think they would protect them from harm by not fighting the Army where they live???


Wars will always have civilian deaths, especially in regional conflicts. The conflict between Israeli forces and Hamas is a good example. Also, how many innocents were killed in the Iraq war? Afghanistan?

Have any idea how many civilians were killed in WWII? Major powers on all sides specifically targeted civilian populations as a part of their war strategy... War is hell. To defeat an enemy completely, will almost always require directly targeting civilian populations.

Most of the regional conflicts in the middle east are centuries old, while some of the tactics and weaponry have changed, the battles are almost always fought in around and among the people.

There is no such thing as a clean war, where just soldiers are killing soldiers.




posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 11:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by Alternative4u
reply to post by maddy21
 


I am just getting reports that America has backed down after being told by Iran & Russia that a World War will happen over Syria,,, within hours of Russia saying this American Aircraft Carrier & War ships have already left Syrian waters, well done Russia, I knew you were top dog over USA, always have and always will be, we need a strong Russia to keep yanks in check these days.


The U.S. aren't afraid of Russia. You think the U.S. Govt care about losing millions of their own people, when they are pumping their soldiers full of mercury to counter the depleted uranium rounds they used in Iraq?

I think the U.S. are making a strategic withdrawal. They will remove their forces and let the European powers take up positions.

The U.S. will shift their power to Asia in a bid to stop Chinese expansions. (The PLA were ordered to be ready to 'face regional war', just days before Russia announces that Syria can only be solved through war, and Iran announces that World War is on the cards.)


The U.S. will shift their main power to Asia, try to box China in and let the E.U., Turkey, Israel and Gulf States square up to Iran, Syria and Russia.

It's only a matter of time now



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 11:54 AM
link   
I just saw where NBC mid-east correspondent Richard Engel has been announced as missing in Syria. Could be just another piece of the puzzle falling into place?

www.breitbart.com...

edit on 17-12-2012 by Sandcastler because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 12:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by jrx2020

Syria, Iran and Egypt are no match for anything the US arms Israel with...

I am excited to see the fireworks too! What do you think 24 hours for complete American air superiority, with give or take another 48 for the ground?

I cannot wait to see the US over power that weapon system too.


Iran is the 12th most powerful standing military in the world. Israel is 11th, even with U.S. military funding.

Also, in Iraq, the U.S. didn't have to face the Iraqi air force because none took to the air. The standing Iraqi army also didn't take to the field (all the men you were fighting belonged to the extreme-paramilitary). Iraqi military were largely conscripts who either joined or died.

Iran, however, have a cohesive air force, domestic missile systems that are complimented by foreign systems, a 650,000 active, 500,000 reserve, 250,000 Rev. Guards and 11 million man paramilitary ground forces.

If Iran was such an easy target, don't you think Israel would've hit them already?

Israel might not fear Iran or Syria, but they fear the combined might of Iran AND Syria.



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 12:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by DarknStormy
Well, if the west weren't to clear about which side Russia are batting for and this is true, I think they know now.


I thought it was well known from the beginning?



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 01:32 PM
link   
reply to post by ausername
 

Biiig difference between Guerrilla war and open war. You are comparing apples and oranges.

Reference the Vietnam War. (Hint: we call it a war today.)



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 01:46 PM
link   
reply to post by PieceOfThePuzzle
 


If you look at the way the west have been talking over the last week, you would think Russia were looking for a way out of backing Assad..



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 01:53 PM
link   
reply to post by intrptr
 


Semantics.

War is war, no matter what name is applied to it, or how big or small, it is all about killing and destruction, a method of extreme violence intended to achieve a goal, settle a dispute, or for land and/or resources. etc.

It gets more complicated (like in Syria) when outside parties, nations or international coalitions get involved, either overtly or covertly... Which is why it would be best if there was NO outside involvement of any kind in Syria.

This Syrian conflict can have much broader implications as a result, maybe by design.



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 02:00 PM
link   
reply to post by ausername
 


Another member believes he has a video of Australians in there fighting.. This is how F#d up the situation is in Syria. When he throws it up I'll link it to this thread.



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 02:01 PM
link   
post removed for serious violation of ATS Terms & Conditions



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 02:17 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 02:23 PM
link   
Out of curiosity there is a lot if this happens and so forth including from myself but its there actual genuine conformation on this ?



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 02:41 PM
link   
reply to post by ANDERSON23
 


Nothing solid, to confirm this, doesn't mean anything at this point in time. could be a bluff, a lie, or the truth, and without real confirmation from reliable sources on the ground there now, there is no way to be certain.

One thing is certain, the Russians are fiercely opposed to the NATO deployment of missile defenses in Turkey, The Russians are equally opposed to ANY NATO/U.S. involvement in the Syrian conflict. These Iskanders being sold to Syria now could be the chess piece move that puts NATO in check.


edit on 17-12-2012 by ausername because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 02:43 PM
link   
reply to post by ausername
 


It gets more complicated (like in Syria) when outside parties, nations or international coalitions get involved, either overtly or covertly...

Thats all I was saying. Open warfare between nations like in WWII is "open". Guerrilla warfare is "sneaky", secret. They lie about why it is happening and hide who is really behind it.

Our government (thru the Media) wants us to believe that Syrians are the only combatants. Thats the difference.



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 03:04 PM
link   
Ah, that well known global media giant 'newenglishreview'.


I think I will wait until Reuters or the BBC report on it before heading to the bunker. Seems like the SS-26 is really just an updated scud, with a 280 mile range and listing conventional warheads 'including a cluster munitions warhead, a fuel-air explosive enhanced-blast warhead, an earth penetrator for bunker busting and an electro-magnetic pulse device for anti-radar missions'

Cant see how any of these would be relevant to counter the 'NATO anti-missile defence shield'- in fact, it doesnt seem to be a relevant platform at all, whatever the warhead.

en.wikipedia.org...

By the way- I cannot see any other news agency reporting this, apart from World Net Daily's Iranian Hamsayeh-

"According to Mashregh, the Iranian Revolutionary Guard media outlet, Russia had warned Turkey not to escalate the situation, but with Turkey’s request for Patriot missiles, it delivered its first shipment of Iskanders to Syria." (quote from 'newenglishreview' article)



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 03:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Thunda

Cant see how any of these would be relevant to counter the 'NATO anti-missile defence shield'- in fact, it doesnt seem to be a relevant platform at all, whatever the warhead.


www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 03:15 PM
link   
reply to post by ausername
 


Interesting- in your link it says that Syria already has this missile- "It's export variant, the Iskander-E, was sold to Syria (26 units)."

But I think you are misunderstanding what it means by ' designed to overcome air defense systems'. It means radar sites and missile bunkers, not taking out missiles in flight like 'Patriot'

Oh yes, and my mistake- its range is only 280 km- not 280 miles..



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 03:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Thunda
reply to post by ausername
 


Interesting- in your link it says that Syria already has this missile- "It's export variant, the Iskander-E, was sold to Syria (26 units)."


Sold but no official delivery ever reported.



But I think you are misunderstanding what it means by ' designed to overcome air defense systems'. It means radar sites and missile bunkers, not taking out missiles in flight like 'Patriot'


Not "overcome" as much as evade air and missile defense systems, which makes them the perfect missile to destroy air and missile defenses.

"Missile files at supersonic speed, excessively maneuvers in the terminal phase of the flight and releases decoys. "

The patriots seek and destroy the decoys, the missile destroys its target.



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 03:31 PM
link   
reply to post by ausername
 


So, are you saying that Syria paid for the missiles, but Russia didnt deliver them? I find that hard to believe.

Either way, hardly a 'game changer'.....

Edit: Same article " Iskander-E, export version, specially designed to meet MTCR restrictions. It a maximum range of 280 km. This missile is fitted with internal guidance system and has a CEP of 30 - 70 m. This missile system has been exported to Syria (26 units);"

Has been exported...........
edit on 17-12-2012 by Thunda because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 17 2012 @ 03:38 PM
link   
One other thing, the Russians also believe that the deployment of patriot missiles in Turkey is more about preparing for future military strikes on Iran than defense from Syria.

rt.com...


“Considering that the US wants to use Turkey as an advance missile shield, the Patriots might be stationed there forever. Turkey wanted to modernize its weapons anyway and already started taking bids for similar weapons systems. Under these circumstances, the weapons are most likely directed against Iran," Polikanov said, adding that any kind of provocation could now become a pretext for war. And the installation of NATO anti-aircraft missiles in Turkey means that Iran will no longer be able to retaliate if attacked.
Iranian armed forces chief General Hassan Firouzabadi said last Saturday that the lessons of 1962 Cuban missile crisis may return to haunt the world.


These games are extremely dangerous. If you are looking for motive for the Russians to deliver Iskanders to Syria, there is plenty. Whether they have or will remains to be seen.
edit on 17-12-2012 by ausername because: (no reason given)





 
19
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join