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.

 

Breaking news: Putin: Russia will help Syria in case of foreign military assault.

page: 10
58
<< 7  8  9    11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 7 2013 @ 10:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by monkofmimir

Originally posted by Plugin
He just said; he knows the opinion of the people, not only in the US but also in Europe and elsewhere that the people wants this action to stop assad!??



Its like they're running through a pre-written script for this whole thing and are ignoring anything that doesn't fit.


You better believe there is a script.

You also better believe that the push on social media sites like Facebook is beyond amazing. Just recently I saw a picture on George HW Bush. The caption read something along the lines of, "I told you there were WMD's in the Middle East"- see how right I was now..... what I found most shocking is that it was obvious to me the intention was to drum up support for a strike because it would make Obama look bad and Bush look like he was correct all along and justified in his wars... and my Republican friends were eating it up. I was floored by it all. I am not sure I have ever seen something like it before... I will have to find it and post it for ATS to see.




posted on Sep, 7 2013 @ 10:23 AM
link   



posted on Sep, 7 2013 @ 12:49 PM
link   
reply to post by MisterMahound
 


It is now USA one one side and (Russia+China) on the other side.



posted on Sep, 7 2013 @ 01:25 PM
link   
'Sourced by RT' - aka the Russian CNN, aka your elite propaganda for pusing global agendas..

I cant stand logging onto Ats, and everyday its a new Syrian thread, sourced by the SAME MAINSTREAM media outlets; CNN or RT. Does that not SPEAK for itself? The entire thing is a clear set up! Putin, Obama, Assad, the UK government.. ALL in on it, throw China in there too.

Thread - WW3 is an orchastration

You people come here everyday; scrolling through MSM sites; then come on to Ats and copy/paste their global propaganda. Come onto these threads, star and flag over and over.. Exchange about the world affairs like you know whats going on and you understand war..

You are a human who is slave to your habitual mind activty. Doing the same thing over and over. Coming home to look at a screen, to see 'what the big news is today'...

Its so easy to take control of this planet; because the people behave like animals, who actually THINK they have a clue what is goin on in the reality they call 'earth'..

Its getting pathetic. THIS IS A CONSPIRACY SITE, NOT A MAINSTREAM NEWS OUTLET. Which is what its becoming..



posted on Sep, 7 2013 @ 02:40 PM
link   
I hate shills and fake 404 HTTP messages. A IPv6 website will soon see the day which will expose it all.
You've just been made. Bye now.
edit on 7-9-2013 by kusmanklute because: Of course, ATS uses plaintext authentication, which is as good as no authentication at all.



posted on Sep, 7 2013 @ 02:52 PM
link   
Deny ARROGANCE.



posted on Sep, 7 2013 @ 03:07 PM
link   
REASONS BEHIND ILLEGAL SYRIAN INVASION

Shut down Syrian independent banking system a banking system we all should have not the Zionist corrupt banking system we have now

Further steal Palestinian land as called land settlements

Destroy Russian-Iran-Syria Silk Road Pipeline

Benefit Israeli Leviathan gas, oil & transportation industry which means billions and billions of dollars for Israel - as in the proposed Benjamin Netanyahu and Joseph Paritzky Israeli ( Minister for National Infrastructures ) oil pipeline from Iraq to Israel

Benefit Industrial Military Complex multibillion contracts

Allow Israel annex South Lebanon for water supply & Golan Heights for oil & gas

Strengthens AIPAC's power base in Washington

Advance Zionist Agenda for “Great Israel”; JWO -Jewish World Order

edit on 7-9-2013 by garfield because: (no reason given)

edit on 7-9-2013 by garfield because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 7 2013 @ 03:17 PM
link   
So what happens if Obama does strike Syria? What will the repercussions be on our mainland. What would happen. THE BIG PICTURE. What is the time line and how will it affect the U.S as a nation.



posted on Sep, 7 2013 @ 03:43 PM
link   
I think it's "funny" that the US is against chemical weapons.

Wasn't IG Farben the manufacturer of the chemical that was used for mass murdering Jews during WW II?

IG Farben



posted on Sep, 7 2013 @ 04:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by TrustNO1evr
So what happens if Obama does strike Syria? What will the repercussions be on our mainland. What would happen. THE BIG PICTURE. What is the time line and how will it affect the U.S as a nation.


This is my take on how things will go.

1. First the US will do a light missiel attack on Syria as a punishment for using chemical weapons. Taht will take place some time this week.

2. A week or two go by, and we will have a new chemical attack within Syria. And Assad will be blamed no matter what. The US will have evidence but will not provide them to the publick because of national security reasons.


3. The US will demand a full scale attack to take out Assad and hes forces. To put a end to the war.

4. Russia will respond by targeting US intrests within the Middle east. Not the US directly.



posted on Sep, 7 2013 @ 04:45 PM
link   
reply to post by spy66
 

Having followed with some interest what all is going on and if I was the leader of Syria, this is what I would do and it is plausible.

The first is that Syria has been in an armed conflict with Israel for a long time. The past conflicts have left the leaders of Syria with the mentality of keeping assets mobile and easily moved. This way it is harder for the military assets from being destroyed. Now Syria has allies in the area and with Russia, that has been supplying resources to the government there. It did not take to the local uprising and started a civil war. That is what is going on with Syria right now. The problem is that too many different countries and groups are all involved in that country where it is going to take years to try to solve and calm down. But beyond that, if I was the leader of Syria, I would move the assets as close to, if not onto the Russian Naval base that is still an operational military facility. Now here is the problem that the US would have, to take out the Syrian assets, without harming what would be considered Russian territory. And Russia with its current military movements, simply put ships both close and far, that way any missile fired and doing damage gives them the provocation to respond to any attack.

It is a means of goading and ultimately with no goal no end game it will only serve to drain the USA more of its resources. Along with Iran and other countries siding with Syria, means that they are gaining more support from other countries. The question for all of those who are urging attacking Syria, are we prepared to go into a war with say Russia or China or both?

If this is indeed true, the President may be hoping that congress with shoot it down and that way he will have a way out of this prediciment and safely turn the blame from himself.



posted on Sep, 7 2013 @ 04:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by sdcigarpig
reply to post by spy66
 

Having followed with some interest what all is going on and if I was the leader of Syria, this is what I would do and it is plausible.

The first is that Syria has been in an armed conflict with Israel for a long time. The past conflicts have left the leaders of Syria with the mentality of keeping assets mobile and easily moved. This way it is harder for the military assets from being destroyed. Now Syria has allies in the area and with Russia, that has been supplying resources to the government there. It did not take to the local uprising and started a civil war. That is what is going on with Syria right now. The problem is that too many different countries and groups are all involved in that country where it is going to take years to try to solve and calm down. But beyond that, if I was the leader of Syria, I would move the assets as close to, if not onto the Russian Naval base that is still an operational military facility. Now here is the problem that the US would have, to take out the Syrian assets, without harming what would be considered Russian territory. And Russia with its current military movements, simply put ships both close and far, that way any missile fired and doing damage gives them the provocation to respond to any attack.

It is a means of goading and ultimately with no goal no end game it will only serve to drain the USA more of its resources. Along with Iran and other countries siding with Syria, means that they are gaining more support from other countries. The question for all of those who are urging attacking Syria, are we prepared to go into a war with say Russia or China or both? If this is indeed true, the President may be hoping that congress with shoot it down and that way he will have a way out of this prediciment and safely turn the blame from himself.


Star for the highlighted text .. as i was thinking the very same thing for a few days now.
It what I'm hoping for anyway.



posted on Sep, 7 2013 @ 05:09 PM
link   
reply to post by sdcigarpig
 


The problem with this conflict is knowing exactly what the US, UK and French real goal is. To punish Assad for Chemical weapon use sounds to thin.

I have been paying attenion to how the Russians have placed their fleet. Right now the 6 US destroyers er boxed in by two Russian ships of the coast of Syria and another 5 russian ships behind the US fleet. Russia have another 9 ships behind the British and french fleet.

Personaly i think Russia will do two things to help Assad before the first strike.

1. Give a early warning of US missiel attack. If Syria is to have a chanse at retaliation they can not hide their assets. Syria must must get their assets of the ground befor e the US missiels start to hit targets.

2. I think the Russians will try to make the US fleet move closer to the Syrian coast. Either to the North or to the South. Because the US would not dare to fire their cruise missiels over the two Russian destroyers of the Syrian coast.






edit on 27.06.08 by spy66 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 7 2013 @ 05:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by GargIndia
reply to post by 2012newstart
 


What is going to happen in your view?
I fully expected US will not go for a small strike as it serves no purpose.

However the issue is post-strike. What happens after the bombs. US air campaign will end in 2-3 days. What after that?
Turkey is amassing forces on the border. 5000 US soldiers wait in Jordan. So what is the game here?
Next issue is escalation. What if couple of US ships go down or a few planes are hit? What happens then?


'small strike' would hopefully scare Mr. Assad into surrendering or whatever. remember, Obama and most of his cronies have no knowledge of how the Military works. They can't understand why peace hasn't broken out all over with Bush gone and them in charge.

striking back (at a ship for instance) would be the stupidest thing Syria could do. that would legitimize huge reaction (though again wi Obama who knows).

note to all; use of chemical / WsMD supposedly changes the paradigm. EVERYBODY is supposed to join together against such use. the fact that UN/NATO isn't helping gives the green light to any petty warlord with some chem warheads. the lack of enthusiasm in shutting Assad down is troubling.

having said that, there's certainly some buzz suggesting that it was the rebels that used them. After all, Assad is winning, why would he risk bringing everyone down on him?

Hokay, Obama, you wanted this job. Do it.



posted on Sep, 7 2013 @ 05:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by deviant300

The alleged chemical weapons use in Syria is a provocation carried out by the rebels to attract a foreign-led strike, Russian President Vladimir Putin said at the G20 summit.




100 bucks says hes correct.



posted on Sep, 7 2013 @ 05:27 PM
link   
Has John McCain ever been in favor of diplomacy. I can't think of a single time where tensions built and Senator McCain supported acting cautiously. This guy is stuck in Vietnam.



posted on Sep, 7 2013 @ 05:32 PM
link   
reply to post by spy66
 

I don't believe that line, to punish a country for using chemical weapons. It is deplorable for the use of such, however, if the US is going to follow through on this, then it could be argued, that why has the US not brought more pressure to bear on North Korea? After all it has developed weapons of mass destructions, its people are starving, and the government is very brutal towards its citizens. Why has nothing been done there to alleviate their suffering? is starvation far better way to die versus that of being under a chemical attack or are both equal in such?



posted on Sep, 7 2013 @ 05:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by sdcigarpig
reply to post by spy66
 

I don't believe that line, to punish a country for using chemical weapons. It is deplorable for the use of such, however, if the US is going to follow through on this, then it could be argued, that why has the US not brought more pressure to bear on North Korea? After all it has developed weapons of mass destructions, its people are starving, and the government is very brutal towards its citizens. Why has nothing been done there to alleviate their suffering? is starvation far better way to die versus that of being under a chemical attack or are both equal in such?





I agree. Its not easy to make sence of what the goal is with the Obama argument. I also think Putin know this very well. Putin know that the US rocket chield is not to defend the US or Europe from a Iranian or NK missiel attack. It is to protect the US and EU from what is going to come from future US geoplitical goals.

The reason Putin is on the line right now is because he know that the US is up to no-good.



posted on Sep, 7 2013 @ 05:45 PM
link   
reply to post by sdcigarpig
 


Apparently president Obama is unfamiliar with Darfur.



posted on Sep, 7 2013 @ 06:21 PM
link   
then we go after russia ww3



new topics

top topics



 
58
<< 7  8  9    11  12 >>

log in

join