Clashes at Republican Guards HQ near Damascus, reports of British forces in Syria

As Russia has just made a huge Euro loan to Cyprus, I would think the Russians are going to abandon Syria as too unstable, and with Cyprus in its back pocket (if it had one) the Russian bear has a warm water port where it has wanted one for the last 200 years, the southern flank of Europe. (In the Mediteranian sea).

Originally posted by pikestaff
As Russia has just made a huge Euro loan to Cyprus, I would think the Russians are going to abandon Syria as too unstable, and with Cyprus in its back pocket (if it had one) the Russian bear has a warm water port where it has wanted one for the last 200 years, the southern flank of Europe. (In the Mediteranian sea).

The problem with this being that the UK is already heavily militarily involved in Cyprus. That would make Russian relocation there highly unlikely.

reply to post by stumason


Here is the original source that RT pulled from:

Original Source

British and Gulf TV stations are again running interviews with dozens of Syrian soldiers taken prisoner by rebel forces and transferred to Free Syrian Army centers in South Turkey. But this time, they are being aired in conjunction with those two developments, indicating pivotal and coordinated military action inside the embattled country, or even the start of western intervention against the Assad regime.

Originally posted by princeofpeace
This has nothing to do with Article 5. Where are you getting this stuff??

Originally posted by DevilJonah
RT Report

Guess Article 5 is in effect. Reports of shell attacks on the presidential palace....waiting to hear more!

Please update if you uncover more information. Since this is breaking news, there should be more updates to come!

Does anyone think Russia will interfere on behalf of Syria?

Since you obviously don't know what Article 5 of the NATO treaty is:

Article 5 is at the basis of a fundamental principle of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation. It provides that if a NATO Ally is the victim of an armed attack, each and every other member of the Alliance will consider this act of violence as an armed attack against all members and will take the actions it deems necessary to assist the Ally attacked.

If it is confirmed that British troops are in fact in Syria on behalf of Turkey...how would it not be Article 5??? Your logic is flawed.

I've checked several news agencies and whilst there are reports of heavy fighting in and around Damascus. I also phoned a friend based on Akrotiri in Cyprus and he told me that no unusual troop movements there.

I think it's complete BS that the UK has any involvment other than the supply of weapons to the Free Syrian Army.

Peace

Rock Ape

Ummm thats a big IF in your statement. Plus these soldiers havent even been identified as UK troops. If article 5 was invoked you wouldnt see this my friend. Step away from the crack pipe.

Originally posted by DevilJonah

Originally posted by princeofpeace
This has nothing to do with Article 5. Where are you getting this stuff??

Originally posted by DevilJonah
RT Report

Guess Article 5 is in effect. Reports of shell attacks on the presidential palace....waiting to hear more!

Please update if you uncover more information. Since this is breaking news, there should be more updates to come!

Does anyone think Russia will interfere on behalf of Syria?

Since you obviously don't know what Article 5 of the NATO treaty is:

Article 5 is at the basis of a fundamental principle of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation. It provides that if a NATO Ally is the victim of an armed attack, each and every other member of the Alliance will consider this act of violence as an armed attack against all members and will take the actions it deems necessary to assist the Ally attacked.

If it is confirmed that British troops are in fact in Syria on behalf of Turkey...how would it not be Article 5??? Your logic is flawed.

british sas/sbs and sfsg are there,
they have been for a while
who do you think is coordinating the reble's?

but your not gonna get much evidence about it

Originally posted by Flavian
reply to post by DevilJonah

 

Any other sources than RT?

Can't find any UK sources saying British troops involved in any action in Syria? Makes me doubt the credibility of the story to be honest. Rightly or wrongly, our media usually bangs the drum for any action involving our forces.

Russia Today is usually a credible source of information. Especially information that Western powers that be might not want the general public aware of.

Originally posted by princeofpeace
Ummm thats a big IF in your statement. Plus these soldiers havent even been identified as UK troops. If article 5 was invoked you wouldnt see this my friend. Step away from the crack pipe.

Originally posted by DevilJonah

Originally posted by princeofpeace
This has nothing to do with Article 5. Where are you getting this stuff??

Originally posted by DevilJonah
RT Report

Guess Article 5 is in effect. Reports of shell attacks on the presidential palace....waiting to hear more!

Please update if you uncover more information. Since this is breaking news, there should be more updates to come!

Does anyone think Russia will interfere on behalf of Syria?

Since you obviously don't know what Article 5 of the NATO treaty is:

Article 5 is at the basis of a fundamental principle of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation. It provides that if a NATO Ally is the victim of an armed attack, each and every other member of the Alliance will consider this act of violence as an armed attack against all members and will take the actions it deems necessary to assist the Ally attacked.

If it is confirmed that British troops are in fact in Syria on behalf of Turkey...how would it not be Article 5??? Your logic is flawed.

You're right. Rumored interference from the UK, a NATO member, in Syria just one day after Turkey envoked Article 4 of the NATO treaty does seem ridiculous. How could I have even made that conclusion? Crack pipe...your right...everyone on here who thinks that it isn't that far fetched must be smoking crack as well. Your logic that it would be impossible for governement official to lie about envoking article 5 to suprise the enemy and topple a regime makes much more sense.

Russia Today is usually a credible source of information. Especially information that Western powers that be might not want the general public aware of.

exactly

reply to post by babybunnies


You see i actually disagree. RT is very hit and miss with it's stories. Many have absolutely no basis whatsoever, others are completely correct.

This often leads you to suspect the accuracy of whatever the latest story they are pushing. That said, most news outlets are also guilty of this - hence the request for other sources. If more sources are reporting this, there may be something in it. Otherwise it is probably another story they have made up.

Originally posted by rigel4
reply to post by DevilJonah

 

With any luck our commandos will get into the presidential palace, find the criminal Bashar,
and execute him. Doesn't matter what the Russians do then, because Assad will be dead
and can't be saved.

Russians government is nothing more than Mafioso..........

What if they retailiate and off the Queen or the prince or their baby?

YOu see you shouldn't go after leaders unless you want to live in a world where Fidel Castro spent his entire life.

you cant trust any MSN whatever the country its from.

they all tell you what there government wants you to hear,
just diff government MSN tell you what other government MSN dont
want you to know lol.

Its another "Gulf of Tonkin" incident... Take a look on this opinion

Originally posted by rigel4
reply to post by DevilJonah

 

With any luck our commandos will get into the presidential palace, find the criminal Bashar,
and execute him. Doesn't matter what the Russians do then, because Assad will be dead
and can't be saved.

Russians government is nothing more than Mafioso..........

With any luck? Ever heard of 'presumed innocent until proven guilty'. He should go to the Hague. Calling for the assassination of state leaders seems inappropriate.

If you really think that British regulars would go in without US backup then @ u

Fox news is talking about his too and quoting their article:

State-run news agency SANA confirmed clashes in the area, claiming that dozens of gunmen attacked civilians and troops in Hammah. SANA said troops fought the attackers, including foreign fighters, killing dozens of them and detaining others.

INCLUDING FOREIGN FIGHTERS, they say... So its at least feasable that these foreigners may be british...

The first thing to remember in situations like this is you cannot believe what you read because it is propaganda.


People lie to gain support for their actions which are financially motivated.

You don't know the facts. If Assad is the bad guy of the moment, it is probably because he has been painted that way by people who want to invade, murder, rob and steal.

British are not good guys. They give small pox infested blankets to Indians, they go to war with countries like China, to force them to accept the fact that want to sell socially crippling drugs to their people. etc.

The opium wars.

And yes, if those people set foot in Syria, China, Russia, Pakistan and very many countries will destroy Britain and if you think that can't happen, it can.

And when people start dieing all of sudden the spoiled people will attack their own government and aristocracy for bringing this down o their heads. But then it will be too late. One small attack and your economy will be crippled. Your financial markets cannot handle disruption of any kind. You will lose all investment capital.

reply to post by Rocketman7


Baby?

What baby?

reply to post by Juggernog


no @ u