Syria crisis: Nato to discuss Russia air campaign

a reply to: PublicOpinion

Yeah, sure. They will attack Turkey shortly and you're off your meds, Erdogan.
Crazy hypocrisy full of hyperbole, awesome stuff.

Ah! So you like crazy hypocrisy full of hyperbole! No wonder you love Putin! :rofl:

a reply to: DJW001

The western media can't begin to keep up with you guys when it comes to propaganda and disinformation!

Gee, thanks ....I didn't know my small contributions to such topics would or could have such a effect . Makes me want to try even harder until the western BS stops flowing .

originally posted by: DJW001

originally posted by: marg6043
a reply to: InnerPeace2012

And what NATO is going to do? bomb Russia in return?

Never is going to happen.

No, just close the Bosporus to Russian shipping, bomb Russian air bases in Syria and threaten to sink the Black Sea fleet at anchor. (There should be an emoticon for "grim.")

Which would be a real stupid thing to do over Syria.


NATO needs to just cut its loses there and move on, they dithered and they lost.

a reply to: crazyewok

Which would be a real stupid thing to do over Syria.

It would not be about Syria, it would be about putting little Putin in his place. In the Arab world, they have an expression: "to kill a cat." This comes from an old custom of killing a cat and nailing it to an enemy's door to prove you're serious. It is only a matter of time before Putin finds a dead cat on his door.

NATO needs to just cut its loses there and move on, they dithered and they lost.

The problem is that technically, NATO is not involved. The United States should never have gotten involved. You'd think they would have learned their lesson after Iraq. Unfortunately, Russia will soon learn the lesson the US should have.

originally posted by: DJW001


It would not be about Syria, it would be about putting little Putin in his place.

So you basically want to start WW3 over Syria just to put him in his "place"?

Yeah......im not going to fight that war........You go ahead though.


Maybe he does need putting in his place? But its not worth doing so over fecking Syria.

a reply to: DJW001

Never let a good Idiocrazy go to waste!

I'm just Not Sure and in desperate need for some Brawndo, can I have yours?

The problem is that technically, NATO is not involved. The United States should never have gotten involved. You'd think they would have learned their lesson after Iraq. Unfortunately, Russia will soon learn the lesson the US should have.

What? You've had too much, bro.

en.wikipedia.org...
en.wikipedia.org...

a reply to: the2ofusr1

Gee, thanks ....I didn't know my small contributions to such topics would or could have such a effect . Makes me want to try even harder until the western BS stops flowing .

It's not your small contribution, it's the machine you are tapped in to. The Kremlin cooks up a story line to mask its real strategy, the official news media tells it in a responsible way so as to retain their credibility, RT then creates works of fiction which are dutifully reported and exaggerated by FSB run blogs like globalresearch.com. Visual memes are generated so that they can be endlessly repeated with no effort. Here is an example:



The beauty of this is that the posters don't even need to speak English! It combines a truth (the length of time the US has spent wasting bombs in Syria) with not one but two lies. The Russians have not been bombing Daesh as the United States was, it has been bombing the FSA. As for Daesh it is nowhere near the ropes. In fact, Russia has been avoiding damaging it so that its atrocities can be used to make Assad's regime look like the better alternative.

Anyway, an army of sock puppets is then dispatched to star and flag every post that hits the "message of the day." Two days ago it was "US bombs hospitals" yesterday it was "Russia strikes ISIL with precision missiles." Today's talking point seems to be that the president of Turkey is crazy. I agree, but Russia needs to heed his warning. Crazy people start world wars and Putin has brought us to the brink.

a reply to: PublicOpinion

Ah, another uninformed person who does not know the difference between the United States and NATO. The United States has formed a coalition to combat Daesh. NATO, which is a defensive organization of European states, is not involved. You really need to stop getting your information from Russian sources. Anything that does not chant Ross-i-ya! Ross-iya! is considered to be NATO there.

a reply to: crazyewok

So you basically want to start WW3 over Syria just to put him in his "place"?

It's not about Syria, it's about Ukraine, Georgia, Belarus, Poland, Kazakhstan....

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: crazyewok

So you basically want to start WW3 over Syria just to put him in his "place"?

It's not about Syria, it's about Ukraine, Georgia, Belarus, Poland, Kazakhstan....

If they march into Poland then I will act.


In not going to support world war three over Syria or a bunch of tin pot dictatorships!

a reply to: DJW001

Gee maybe they learned from the west on that point . I think of WMD's and baby's being thrown from incubators and Bush jr. with the placard Mission Accomplished on the Iraq war on every western news outlet for the 24/7 news cycles . Oh how did that Mission Accomplish Iraq thing turn out ?

If Russia wasn't destroying so many US assets (covert of course) in their campaign one might have to question the success story happening in Syria . But it seems that if they are loosing then it's only a matter of time that Assad jumps on a Russian plane or boat and high tails it out of there with the Russians ... Talk to me next week and we shall see how it's going . It's only the first week into the campaign and we know from the US experience that these sorts of things can take years .

a reply to: crazyewok

He claims

It's not about Syria, it's about Ukraine, Georgia, Belarus, Poland, Kazakhstan....

but didn't Russia defeat Georgia a few years back ? I seem to recall that they did but for some reason Georgia is still not part of any Russia federation and is still not occupied other then maybe some peace keeping .

a reply to: DJW001

Erm... uninformed you say?

The president commented on the battle against the Islamic State during a news conference at the NATO summit in Wales.

www.nytimes.com...

9 member-states partake coincidentally, of course. NATO is a bit too much involved to be not involved at all. Split some hairs maybe?

Nwo (pun intended) gimme your Brawndo!

a reply to: the2ofusr1

I seem to recall that they did but for some reason Georgia is still not part of any Russia federation and is still not occupied other then maybe some peace keeping .

Russia carved out two slices and called them "South Ossetia" and Abkhazia. Please educate yourself.

a reply to: PublicOpinion

President Obama escalated the American response to the marauding Islamic State in Iraq and Syria on Friday, recruiting at least nine allies to help crush the organization and offering the outlines of a coordinated military strategy that echoes the war on terror developed by his predecessor, George W. Bush, more than a decade ago.

Your own source.

So why would the United States need to recruit nine NATO nations if NATO were already involved? Admit it, you don't understand what NATO actually is and how it works.

a reply to: DJW001

Why is something so simple, twisted into to all this mumbo jumbo.

Why is NATO all about painting Putin as the bad guy, and seem to forgot the atrocities committed by the US in Iraq, and Libya and recent bombing of a hospital in Afghanistan.

The crux of the matter regarding Turkish airspace incident was officially announced by the Russian Military as being done by accident to avoid bad weather, of which the Russian jets only entered Turkish airspace for seconds.

So I think this whole, thing is been inflated by the US and it western allies through NATO to somehow pressure Russia to stop it's campaign in support of the Assad government.

Any sane person would think it's reasonable to rid of an extremist group like ISIS, which are the root cause of Refugee Crisis, and basically instability in the area. Now, that doesn't mean other western backed insurgents such as FSA can run freely in sovereignty state.

The simplest of solutions is avoided by the Western Allies, such as a coalition with Russia to eradicate ISIS and come t think of it what business does the West have on determining which government runs their own country.

I say let Russia deal with any insurgents whether IS or not and later people of Syria decide at the polls their next government.

a reply to: InnerPeace2012

Why is something so simple, twisted into to all this mumbo jumbo.

There is absolutely nothing simple about this situation. The incursion into Turkish airspace is a stalking horse; Turkey is not-so-covertly supporting the FSA. In bombing the FSA, Putin is killing Turkish "volunteers."

Why is NATO all about painting Putin as the bad guy, and seem to forgot the atrocities committed by the US in Iraq, and Libya and recent bombing of a hospital in Afghanistan.

Why are you so busy painting NATO as the bad guy by bringing up the past. Russia is the one mixing it up in another country's civil war now.

The crux of the matter regarding Turkish airspace incident was officially announced by the Russian Military as being done by accident to avoid bad weather, of which the Russian jets only entered Turkish airspace for seconds.

Then they had better be more careful in the future, as Turkey would love to prove that it, not Iran, is the big regional power.

So I think this whole, thing is been inflated by the US and it western allies through NATO to somehow pressure Russia to stop it's campaign in support of the Assad government.

It's barely getting any coverage in the United States. You must be following those media which are trying to make Russia look like some kind of victim,.

Any sane person would think it's reasonable to rid of an extremist group like ISIS, which are the root cause of Refugee Crisis, and basically instability in the area.

Correct, but Russia is not targeting Daesh. They are continuing Assad's policy of allowing Daesh to terrorize the region so that Assad looks like an acceptable alternative.

Now, that doesn't mean other western backed insurgents such as FSA can run freely in sovereignty state.

I don't disagree, but why isn't Russia going after the actual terrorists first?

The simplest of solutions is avoided by the Western Allies, such as a coalition with Russia to eradicate ISIS and come t think of it what business does the West have on determining which government runs their own country.

I agree with you there. The problem is that Westphalian principles have never taken root in that part of the world.

I say let Russia deal with any insurgents whether IS or not and later people of Syria decide at the polls their next government.

Well, we all know that there are not going to be actual elections in Syria's future... unless Putin sells Assad up the river. Which he might.

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: the2ofusr1

RT then creates works of fiction which are dutifully reported and exaggerated by FSB run blogs like globalresearch.com. Visual memes are generated so that they can be endlessly repeated with no effort. Here is an example:

These are visual propaganda designed to rally support and demoralise the enemy. Russia is far from unique in using this form of propaganda as this allied poster from WW2 demonstrates



So, Russia is playing the game and it is playing it well. We've seen nothing of the sort from the US coalition, which is part of the reason it has failed. And the US coalition was invited by Putin to work with him - he even visited NY and was expecting to work out a deal similar to that in WW2 with Obama, but he refused.

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: InnerPeace2012

There is absolutely nothing simple about this situation. The incursion into Turkish airspace is a stalking horse; Turkey is not-so-covertly supporting the FSA. In bombing the FSA, Putin is killing Turkish "volunteers."

Of course their is nothing simple about this whole mess, I just meant to say there are alternative simple solutions indirectly.

Why are you so busy painting NATO as the bad guy by bringing up the past. Russia is the one mixing it up in another country's civil war now.

I don't think NATO is the bad guys either, I think there are much more sinister agendas at play here if you follow the money.

Then they had better be more careful in the future, as Turkey would love to prove that it, not Iran, is the big regional power.

Yep, I do agree, since it was a mistake and so Russia should not get into any country airspace without permission. It's just that an unfortunate incidents such as this can be used to drive agendas further to an already established view of the bad guy image of Putin.

It's barely getting any coverage in the United States. You must be following those media which are trying to make Russia look like some kind of victim,.

Lol, the real victims here are the innocent civilians who want a normal life and nothing else, not saying Putin is a victim. I only think propaganda is creating too much hate, although I may have on some instances fall victim to that but I do realize and reassess my views on the matter.

Correct, but Russia is not targeting Daesh. They are continuing Assad's policy of allowing Daesh to terrorize the region so that Assad looks like an acceptable alternative.

So your saying now Assad is responsible for Daesh or IS. But you do know western back rebels, have also left and joined IS with the their brand new Western weapons. How can that card be played on Assad? Who do we believe on this one?

I don't disagree, but why isn't Russia going after the actual terrorists first?

Because, rebel held areas lies between Syrian Army advancement to ISIS territory. Besides the whole, point of Russia been there is to support it's ally Syria upon their request, so it's expected though. Basically whether IS or not they are all insurgents.

Well, we all know that there are not going to be actual elections in Syria's future... unless Putin sells Assad up the river. Which he might.

Well, only one way to find out, get rid of IS first and will see from there.

a reply to: InnerPeace2012

So your saying now Assad is responsible for Daesh or IS. But you do know western back rebels, have also left and joined IS with the their brand new Western weapons. How can that card be played on Assad? Who do we believe on this one?

Yanukovich always made sure that Svoboda got more media coverage than it deserved. It's nice to have a monster you can threaten the disaffected with.

Because, rebel held areas lies between Syrian Army advancement to ISIS territory. Besides the whole, point of Russia been there is to support it's ally Syria upon their request, so it's expected though. Basically whether IS or not they are all insurgents.

I see... Russia doesn't have any paratroops.

Well, only one way to find out, get rid of IS first and will see from there.

And Assad and Russia are going to make sure all the political opposition is eliminated before the get rid of Daesh.