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: khnum
a reply to: TinfoilTP
It was a British intelligence false flag its all detailed at LarochePac.com by people that know their stuff not internet or media shills
originally posted by: TinfoilTP
Putin is morally bankrupt for letting Assad have his chemical weapons and using them under his watch.
originally posted by: the2ofusr1
There were no missiles that Russia needed to stop and no need to fire off any S400's . Reports out of Syria is that they shot down 10 missiles and that 6 people were injured . All at a cost of aprox 1.8 million per missile x 50 plus the cost to deliver them . do the math
originally posted by: TinfoilTP
originally posted by: VimanaExplorer
originally posted by: TinfoilTP
originally posted by: VimanaExplorer
Look at the Russian's annual military budget vs US ($70 billion vs $710 Billion). If Russia had that kind of money at her disposal, imagine what kind of damage Russia can do.
Russia is not going to retaliate instead it will save those $$$ and hope oil price increase will Make Russia Great Again. And also hope the America overspends with another endless war.
So tuck tail, run and hide, wait it out for their eventual collapse like his beloved former Soviet Union did when they tried to match the West with arms, proxy wars and non existent economic power.
If you are Putin, who is a better candidate than a morally bankrupt who have 5 bankruptcies to his credit.
Putin is morally bankrupt for letting Assad have his chemical weapons and using them under his watch.
originally posted by: khnum
a reply to: TinfoilTP
....and the Vietnamese attacked a US warship at the Gulf of Tonkin and Iraq had weapons of mass destruction,your White Helmets are Al Qaeda you know the ones that allegedly did nine eleven and the poms finance them...but believe what you want the truth is irrelevant now
The strikes were "quite measured, the administration wants to mete out punishment" without getting embroiled in a long-term conflict, said Behnam Ben Taleblu, a research fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. Noting that Trump extended "an olive branch" to both Russia and Iran in his speech, Taleblu added that "the question for the US and the coalition is how long are they prepared to sustain this," he asked. "Fundamentally the U.S. is going to have to prove does it have a goal in Syria," and that it has an endgame in mind, Taleblu added.
The US/UK/France did not shoot at any Russians and so they didn't have the need to shoot them down or strike the launchers . Do you think that Russia is responsible to do all the shooting for Syria or do you think that maybe just maybe Syria can carry some of the load ? I think it was the Syrian's who shot down the Israel jet a few weeks back . not the Russians . I think it was Iran's troops who were targeted by Israel missiles not Russians . Do you think that Russia is responsible for Iran too . Russia is playing a roll and has been doing a great job . ISIS is toast thanks to Putin and the Russians .
The math says Putin didn't stop the missiles and he didn't wipe out where they launched from. He didn't live up to his strongman rhetoric and goes to sleep tonight a broken man.
Why are you literally bombing them, instead of actually bombing them?
originally posted by: Ghostsinthefog
Doesn't look like he isnt doing anything
russias response article