OT Air strikes against Syria

And another thing. Nobody called for bombarding Schroedinger with cruise missiles when he suggested gassing that cat.

 

Napalm as in Mark 77s and White Phosphorus are chemical weapons

 

People keep banging on about the rebel groups and 'Al Shabab', yet notice how all these groups are part of the Salafi sect within Islam? Their the terrorists, I agree, but when you see the pictures of the civilians dying, its not radical extremists its normal people. In Syria, the majority of Muslims are of the Sunni sect, they are the ones being killed.

The Salafi groups are moving in from neighboring countries, all they do is make the 'rebels' look bad, whereas the real victims of the crime pretty much just suffer in silence.

I can understand why America wants to get involved, its not as easy as ignoring, as some have suggested. Its not about it being a civil war or not, surely the magnitude of a war is far greater than its title. By your very own logic, if the UK was to enter a civil war, say for example during some riots, similar to those in 2011, despite hundreds of thousands of innocent people being killed, there should be no foreign intervention at all? So your family, your wife, your children, parents, all being killed, but nope, no one can get involved just because its a 'civil' matter?

I'm just disputing the ridiculous claims put by people who would rather sit back and watch innocent people die than do something to help, meanwhile whilst being supporters of Human rights!

 

I did, but seeing that I didnt tweet, youtube or facebook it maybe I didnt.

 

What I think is the combined effort of the UN totally geared towards humanitarian support would have a significant impact on the suffering civilians, the capacity of a combined UN op would be massive. Instead NATO will blow the **** out of civilians as well as Syrian forces.

 

Now we have Russian British and US jets over the skies in Syria. This could get messy.

 

Beginning of third world war.

 

Dunno but I know the folk that manage that whole dooms day clock thing have it at 3 minutes to midnight atm and that was before this recent turn of events

please log in to view this image

 

Putin outsmarts Obama and West at every turn. Always helps when you dont have to pretend you're not just looking out for your own countries interests and have zero qualms about pretending you care about human rights lol.

Honest empire making!

 

I can't see Putin taking over Syria tbh just like I could never see Russia trying to occupy Ukraine, tactically speaking, Ukraine was perfect to keep Russia occupied while ISIL (Bad terrorists) and Al Nusra(good terrorists) did their thing againt Assad because then it leaves Iran virtually Isloated.
Iraq was getting all uppity and were wanting control back from the Americans, their puppets would not last, and so, Iraq now ceases to be a country and will never be one again.

NATO is trying to install are the exact same types they left in charge of Libya and we see how that is going. Assad is by far a better option than Sharia law religious extremist nuts like in Libya.

Russia has pacts with Iran and with the NATO sphere of influence as it is, with not only Iran being surrounded but also Russia, this is a natural tactical outcome seeing as it is a proxy the Russians would strike and not NATO directly, a reverse of Vietnam if you will where the Americans fought and the Russians advised and supplied the other side (less known that the same multinational US banks funded the US military and the Russian factories that made the VC weapons ).

Syria and Russia are allies, I mean it was Russia that stepped in and stopped full out war after the now proven to be false claims of chemical attacks, most likely and an educated guess, it was AL Nusra (Al Qaeda and ISIL coop group) and Turkey. The so called Free Syrian Army was defeated by 2012, and NATO and Turkey flooded in Libyan arsenals and Jihadis from Libya, the same guys that had hte uprising that led to the murder of Gaddafi and the ruin of probably the most civilised developed African state. The crime of destroying Libya cannot be understated, a whole country and it's population have been thrown into hell.

I mean look at this map and consider the past 2 decades.. you can see what is happening quite clearly from a strategic standpoint. This whole mess is clearly the designs of NATO + Certain Gulf states Israel and a hodhepodge of European interests, mainly France and Britain.
Yemen, Libya Iraq Afghanistan Syria, Lebanon and Iran would be next. if anyone really believes these are all just random wars and events that suit hte empire being created here.. the

please log in to view this image

Putin couldn't even dream about dreaming about competing with that.

Heck I am no putin, but I would have seized crimea too, tactically only a complete fool would not have

 

Oh and Russia is apparently bombing the "good terrorists"

NATO flattens the middle east for 14 years, no one bats an eyelid.
Russia strikes Al Nusra once in Syria, the whole world loses it's mind

 

No more "cold war", but "full blown war" if the West cannot get Russia on their side..

 

As you say it's more about keeping a sphere of influence. Rescue Assad, continued voice in Area.

Also puts Russia on stage as a viable partner militarily in future UN issues around the world.

The US thought they were smart switching to the JSOC approach since Iraq. No confessional oversight, no declaration of war or even upholding constitutional law regarding its own citizens on foreign soil.

The problem with it is if they are not there officially they can be largely ignored by Russia..which is happening in the first Russian strikes in Syria.

The US secret police was nice on paper but won't influence more than a local warlord..

To be fair it's also an easy way for Russia to send a direct message to its own Islamic extremists within its own Federation.

 

Some quality comments from the NATO folk
"Russia's airstrikes will create more terrorists" in some sick twisted faux moral amnesia.

Immediately after that NATO precision bombs a doctors without borders hospital in Afghanistan killing doctors patients and kids.

NATO also admitted the Saudis wiped out a whole wedding, 150+ people, bride groom guests kids, at least one entire extended family wiped out, NATO provide Saudi intelligence and targets, NATO had just wiped out a wedding convoy in Yemen last year. But as long as you claim "your intentions are good" then it plays well, with ******s. NATO talk of it like it was a natural disaster rather than a war crime and result of their actions as well as the Saudis

 

Despite all of the mistakes made by the West, Russia are still dodgey as ****. Us being arseholes doesn't somehow mean they aren't, the two things are not mutually exclusive.

 

You see this is what I find disgusting.

You take dead men women and children and dehumanise them by calling them mistakes. NATO does it by calling them "collateral damage".

You can't even see what I am talking about do you, only victims of those we dislike are worthy voctims, named and counteed and not called "collateral damage" or "mistakes".

This is so faux moral it actually physically hurts me

Russia is bad mmmmkay and the damage they may or have done totally means we should overlook ours right?

Who stopped Britain and the US bombing Syria to bits already creating another Libya and Iraq? I believe that was Russia.

 

By mistakes I wasn't referring specifically to the deaths of women and children. I was using mistakes to encompass a history filled with questionable or controversial decisions (like all nations). So don't give me that crap about me not caring or dehumanising people, or somehow suggesting you have a moral high ground over me. It doesn't add to the discussion.

Through all your outrage you've totally missed the point I was making. Which is that despite whatever the west may or may not have done and whatever your view may be about the west, that doesn't in any way shape or form change Russia and there actions.

Us being ****s, doesn't stop them being ****s.

 

Just seen this edit. So you basically agree with my point then but your trying to make it from the opposite direction and not realising that's what I'm saying?

One side being ****s, doesn't mean the other isn't!

 

Here's a little analogy for you re NATO bombings.

A guy just robbd you ona roof top, by the time you recover he has made his way down to the street, so you have a brick, you know you can throw it and get him but you also know it is far more likely you will kil someone else.

If you throw that brick and kill some woman. You are responsible for that death, no judge on the planet would say "well you are not guilty because you were trying to hit the robber", moreover you'd blame yourself for the person's death. By taking action knowing you may well kill someone innocent, it makes you guilty for their death.

But in the world of NATO slaughter, every single man woman and child they murder from afar are all dehumanised as mistakes and collateral damage.

It's disgusting to hear it repeated, this ignorant apologetic morally bankrupt stance spouted by governments. You should know better

 

Well none of that is even remotely relevant to the point I was making so I assume that was aimed at someone else!