Rasta Ton Posted August 27, 2013 Share Posted August 27, 2013 Russian Warships now in Syrian waters There have been Russian warships in Syria since May/June this year. How else do you think they guarantee their supply of arms? FIRST DIVISION RUNNERS UP 2012/13 Hey Man - Enough of your Stupidness Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
forza ton Posted August 27, 2013 Share Posted August 27, 2013 "We" should not be getting involved in this s***-storm. Absolute bell-ends are running amok on both sides and they are quite literally as bad as each other. No-one likes to see footage of civilians being harmed but to get involved militarily will only bring more bloodshed. Personally i'm not sure that democracy will work in the middle east when religion plays such a massive part in politics and everyday life. The Ba'athists don't have a good record on human rights but then again neither do ****in al-qaida. Are we to bombard them into accepting democracy? This wont work when the religious fandans hold all the weapons and all the cards. If NATO were planning to provide military assistance to a group who were intent on democracy and indeed the populace actually wanted democracy then i could perhaps see their point; as it stands we need to leave them to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BluebirdTon Posted August 27, 2013 Share Posted August 27, 2013 If it could potentially bring down the cost of Oil and ultimately Petrol then I say go for it! A pipe line through Syria into the Mediterranean would be cooshty as f*ck. The Ton Survived & Your Pipe Dream Died 18th September 2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrissiboi Posted August 28, 2013 Share Posted August 28, 2013 Given that Assad forces were regaining territory and the Rebel force were killing each other off only a matter of weeks ago, what benefit in Assad using chemical weapons , ok he could be a nutter in a world of ruling nutters. There were as many casualties in Egypt but thats ok because thats the good guys, Assad is a bad guy as he is backed by the Russians, yet it was the Russians who negociated the weapons inspectors presence after the rebels had been suspected of using chemical weapons on 2 occasions. Cameron said that there may not be concrete proof of Assad's guilt but in a court of law we deal in definites not unsubstantiated rumours, given our own forces could be in danger and the civilian population will most certainly be in danger if we we start raining in cruise missiles. There is no good guys in this, not us, Assad, the rebels, the US or Russia and China it is all imperialistic power games. How much help goes to the refugees who should be our only concern, don't supply weapons to tin pot dictators. Chemical weapons what stocks have we got ? Why have we got them ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost Posted August 28, 2013 Share Posted August 28, 2013 There have been Russian warships in Syria since May/June this year. How else do you think they guarantee their supply of arms? A couple have been there (supply and escorts)constantly but added a few more over the last couple of days, i keep an eye on things myself on whats going on out there and anti aircraft ships arent supply ships ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trick37 Posted August 28, 2013 Share Posted August 28, 2013 you are forgetting that war makes rich people money... and if the US Govt really cared about its own poor people, they would probably have to abolish Capitalism altogether, or at least stop looking after their own wealthy elites' interests. in other words, its not gonna happen I agree that it probably won't happen. The money we spent in Iraq alone could give everyone in the USA free health care. Funny how there's no money for this stuff or fix our infrastructure, but there's money to invade Iraq and the like. Posting Commie rubbish like that will get you on a watch list. Probably, yes. Russian Warships now in Syrian waters There have been Russian warships in Syria since May/June this year. How else do you think they guarantee their supply of arms? A couple have been there (supply and escorts)constantly but added a few more over the last couple of days, i keep an eye on things myself on whats going on out there and anti aircraft ships arent supply ships ! The Russians have been using a port in Syria for years. The Russians give the Syrians weapons and support, and the Syrians give the Russians a "warm water" port (one that doesn't freeze over, like their own) in a strategic area...namely, the Med. If push comes to shove, and if the "anti-aircraft" ships that the Russians now have in the area intervene, then the Russians would send more from their Black Sea fleet. However, the Turks (as a part of NATO) could very well shut down the Dardanelles, thus denying Russia's fleet movement into the Med. This, of course, would be an escalation (as would the Russian ships near Syria getting involved), thus it could easily get out of hand. I wonder, though, if the Russians would fire on the Tomahawks, or if they would simply alert Syria that they're coming. Hmmm...what if we used aircraft to bomb targets? Would the Russians try to shoot them down, too? I hope not, yet I don't trust Putin and his neo-Soviet/KGB thinking. If it could potentially bring down the cost of Oil and ultimately Petrol then I say go for it! A pipe line through Syria into the Mediterranean would be cooshty as f*ck. Yea.....oil was the reason Bush and his cronies went into Iraq. That didn't work out well, did it? The price of gas (petrol) in the US more than doubled after that (yet the Republican/Tea Bagger pundits blame Obama for the high price of gas....go figure). "Throw me to the wolves, and I'll return leading the pack." ---Unknown "May God have mercy upon my enemies, because I won't." ---General George S. Patton, Jr. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paddi Posted August 28, 2013 Share Posted August 28, 2013 People need to wake up and realize this is just a way to get into a war with Iran, the last independent oil producer left, and the west are fabricating stories to justify a war with them, it's not as if they haven't got previous for this is it ...Vietnam, Iraq (Twice),killing Gaddafi need i go on.... what happened to the report that the BBC and CNN done where the found evidence that it was in fact the Syrian rebels that had been using chemical weapons against their own people... it's not been splashed all over the news.. or even that only last week the Syrian rebels wiped out a village of Kurd's 250 people slaughtered... and remember no evidence has been found linking any chemical weapons use to the government yet... this war can't be allowed to happen... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davie McArthur Posted August 28, 2013 Share Posted August 28, 2013 I find it 'funny' that The West think it's obscene that civilians are killed with chemical weapons but perfectly acceptable when they are killed with cruise missiles or drones. Military people are a bit like criminals in that they have a bizarre take on 'morality'. MARTY OUT!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boozehound Posted August 28, 2013 Share Posted August 28, 2013 McArthur, you're a know nothing, non-military minded civilian puke. An internet fud is still a fud. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trick37 Posted August 28, 2013 Share Posted August 28, 2013 quote name='paddi' date='Aug 28 2013, 08:54 AM' post='938345'] People need to wake up and realize this is just a way to get into a war with Iran, the last independent oil producer left, and the west are fabricating stories to justify a war with them, it's not as if they haven't got previous for this is it ...Vietnam, Iraq (Twice),killing Gaddafi need i go on.... what happened to the report that the BBC and CNN done where the found evidence that it was in fact the Syrian rebels that had been using chemical weapons against their own people... it's not been splashed all over the news.. or even that only last week the Syrian rebels wiped out a village of Kurd's 250 people slaughtered... and remember no evidence has been found linking any chemical weapons use to the government yet... this war can't be allowed to happen... I agree that this may be a round-about way to get into it with Iran, but there were more direct ways to do it, too....both when we were in Iraq and since we've been in Afghanistan. I also agree that the rebels may have used chemicals, IF they got their hands on them. I don't think, however, that it's the Syrian rebels that would do it. Instead, I would believe that it's the "foreign" Al-Qaeda types that would do it....maybe to illicit us reacting, and then maybe having a chance to fight against our troops? Who knows.... I find it 'funny' that The West think it's obscene that civilians are killed with chemical weapons but perfectly acceptable when they are killed with cruise missiles or drones. Military people are a bit like criminals in that they have a bizarre take on 'morality'. I don't think that way. However, when you have an enemy that hides within the civilian population, and uses them as shields (both unbeknownst to the population), then it's unfortunate that civilian deaths will happen. The civilians are by far the ones that suffer the most in war. McArthur, you're a know nothing, non-military minded civilian puke. Hahahahahahahahahaha! "Throw me to the wolves, and I'll return leading the pack." ---Unknown "May God have mercy upon my enemies, because I won't." ---General George S. Patton, Jr. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paddi Posted August 28, 2013 Share Posted August 28, 2013 true that it may not be the rebels themselves but the mercenaries who are plying their trade , and as you say Al-Qaeda types that are carrying this out, but they are getting help from the west to do this ... the self same people that the west were fighting against not that long ago are suddenly going to be allies... i think not.. but the Americans did train them all in the first place , and are training them again and also remember the west gave Saddam the technology to use chemical weapons which he did , then we decided we needed an excuse to invade... and did so with no evidence what so ever The west couldn't go to war outright with these places , they have to concoct lies to justifies these wars, the divide people on the things that should matter with distracting silly stories , and then brain wash with glorified media reports and lies there has been an itch to attack Iran for a long time now , Israel also fuel this with the threat of nuclear attack, whats up with a country wanting to have nuclear power capabilities for its citizens? , but does anyone give Israel a hard time for invading another country and committing atrocities daily ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trick37 Posted August 28, 2013 Share Posted August 28, 2013 All I'm going to say at this point is "true dat" for the most part.....for the most part. From what I'm seeing now, all I'm going to say is........nothing of interest that I can say. "Throw me to the wolves, and I'll return leading the pack." ---Unknown "May God have mercy upon my enemies, because I won't." ---General George S. Patton, Jr. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost Posted August 28, 2013 Share Posted August 28, 2013 I find it 'funny' that The West think it's obscene that civilians are killed with chemical weapons but perfectly acceptable when they are killed with cruise missiles or drones. Military people are a bit like criminals in that they have a bizarre take on 'morality'. No bother Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
9 Strathblane Crescent Posted August 28, 2013 Share Posted August 28, 2013 A thankless task with, more than likely, unachievable aims. The primary aim would be stopping the slaughter and achieving a ceasefire, but what comes after that? How long before a peacekeeping intervention force becomes, in the eyes of the population, an occupation force? How long before troops are left standing in the middle, hated by all factions? There must be a clearly credible, defined and agreed exit strategy and I wouldn't expect the likes of Cameron and Obama to be capable of devising one. So true. The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alibi Posted August 28, 2013 Share Posted August 28, 2013 I find it 'funny' that The West think it's obscene that civilians are killed with chemical weapons but perfectly acceptable when they are killed with cruise missiles or drones. Military people are a bit like criminals in that they have a bizarre take on 'morality'. Exactly what I said to Mrs Alibi yesterday. Does it matter how people are killed? It's that they are killed at all that is the obscenity. Hague is desperate for a war. Alarming to see. Regarding the post further up the thread about having an oil pipeline to the Med, I think there may already be one, but in any case there is at least one new pipeline from Kurdistan to the Med via Turkey due for completion in a matter of weeks. Exxon are in Kurdistan, say no more. "Any nation given the opportunity to regain its national sovereignty and which then rejects it is so far beneath contempt that it is hard to put words to it." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davie McArthur Posted August 28, 2013 Share Posted August 28, 2013 No bother Apologies. I should have said 'military hierarchy' rather than just 'military people'. MARTY OUT!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost Posted August 28, 2013 Share Posted August 28, 2013 Apologies. I should have said 'military hierarchy' rather than just 'military people'. Oh i definately agree with you there Davie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigdoc1874 Posted August 28, 2013 Share Posted August 28, 2013 All modern weapons are chemical, never heard of an 'organic' bomb. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alibi Posted August 28, 2013 Share Posted August 28, 2013 All modern weapons are chemical, never heard of an 'organic' bomb. What about knives? Or light sabres? "Any nation given the opportunity to regain its national sovereignty and which then rejects it is so far beneath contempt that it is hard to put words to it." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest David Edwards Posted August 28, 2013 Share Posted August 28, 2013 I find it 'funny' that The West think it's obscene that civilians are killed with chemical weapons but perfectly acceptable when they are killed with cruise missiles or drones. Military people are a bit like criminals in that they have a bizarre take on 'morality'. Not just the way the West or the military think, but the way politicians act the world over. Doublespeak is their common language, nothing bizarre about it, it's an everyday reality where morals / ethics/ principles hardly figure at all. I'm sure there's more honesty to be found in criminals, certainly more in the military. 'Funny' old world indeed, although not many laughs to be had in Syria at the moment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.