Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Syrian War

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • I don't think Putin wants a war. I do think he wants a fight.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Tea drinker View Post
      Re Taranis.... I miss that 2495 guy, he was the dogs for secret aero stuff...what ever happened to him? Snatched off the street like an unattended puppy?
      He got a job and had to move on - Really nice guy.

      Ghouta when?

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Rchrd View Post
        I don't think Putin wants a war. I do think he wants a fight.
        He's not, and here lies the problem: Russians are ready to kick off NATO butt and only Putin saves the West from punishment.

        Comment


        • [
          Originally posted by HeWhoReads View Post


          So much drama and paranoia. Can't tell if seriuos or you just been trolled by a black cat.
          You dear leaders - which I might not like all of the time - are definetely not so criminally stupid to start a war for a damn oil rig in the desert. As if Russia needs more oil or gas anyway.

          And the USA won't get into serious confrontation with Russia for the very same reasons. The rest of the west doesn't even care about what's happening in the ME, for it's a half a century that's more of the same.

          And no, nobody will take Putin's place, unless he wants to. That much is clear to everyone.
          Maybe I'm paranoid and dramatic. I hope so, because I don't like the way things are headed.

          Originally posted by Akril View Post

          He's not, and here lies the problem: Russians are ready to kick off NATO butt and only Putin saves the West from punishment.
          I don't think most people want an actual war. Kicking NATO butt is a little silly because that will just end in nuclear apocalypse, Russia doesn't have the power to take all of NATO on conventionally.

          The country has to be prepared for an escalation though of any kind. Right now it's just not.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by flamming_python View Post

            No-one in Russia wants a war, so kicking NATO butt is a little silly because that will just end in nuclear apocalypse.

            Who cares about such peculiarities? The Westerners don't care about the consequences of their policy, why Russians should be more reasonable?
            I'am sure we will deal with this problem somehow after, like the West did with Afghani Islamists.
            We just need to lure them into a trap first, and draw them into as much wars as possible at once.
            I see good candidates in this thread for the next American president who will do the job, we just need crowdfund them by the force of 26 Russians this time.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by flamming_python View Post
              Kicking NATO butt is a little silly because that will just end in nuclear apocalypse
              Meh... I'm still strongly of the opinion that nukes are paper tigers. They're useful as bargaining chips. But once shit hits the fan, too many important people will be too concerned about their well-being and possessions to press any big buttons.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Nyl View Post

                Meh... I'm still strongly of the opinion that nukes are paper tigers. They're useful as bargaining chips. But once shit hits the fan, too many important people will be too concerned about their well-being and possessions to press any big buttons.
                Well a giant conventional war for a few weeks with the potential for hundreds of thousands of deaths isn't much better.

                As for nukes - the trouble is not with people with too much to loose; but with people who lost too much already and nothing else to lose, with people hungry for revenge and anything else that's going to start emerging out of a war pretty quickly.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by blackcatnursery View Post
                  its in the USAF budget statement which has just come out - if you hazzard to actually look at a copy

                  B1 & B2 to be 'retired' - B52 refitted(now that's interesting) - there is talk of long range fighter as well - couple of links below - (B2 likes a cozy hanger and a lot of pampering)

                  B21/Northrop Grumman got the contract to build them in 2015 - so if it is crap its a hell of a budget to cover something else....
                  https://edition.cnn.com/2015/10/27/politics/long-range-strike-bomber-northrop-grumman/

                  Also muted in certain circles a stealth tanker/a large drone carrier to swamp air defence / a very quiet C130/ and a more advanced version of aurora (SR91+++) - but until one either crashes somewhere (stealth helo as an example) or we get some decent pictures you won't ever know (but some of these make a lot of sense)

                  I will just get back to looking for a decent picture of a SU in Syria as no one seems to have an i-phone with a camera on it in Syria

                  http://www.news.com.au/technology/in...84c2e2494c70d9
                  Which sits exactly as I said, neither here nor there regarding Syria right now...... What they want to do is all well and good yet remains to be seen both in reality and in the present time which is what we're talking about....
                  The reason I say its crap is because these new projects for the US appears to have next to zero relevance to Syria today and the deployment of Su-57 into Syria, likewise you were the one talking about Russians wetting their pants over the Su-57 when most all the russians here thus far was talking simply about its potential activities in Syria, indeed so much did you care about their wetting their pants you decide to wet your own about an Aircraft or two that as far as we can tell have only just finished the design stage...

                  We can do better than this

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Fred333 View Post
                    How many bakeries and hospitals in Ghouta? I expect there to have been a massive construction development since the rebels took over








                    Originally posted by Fred333 View Post
                    Jebus on a broomstick, Mosul and Raqqa were raised to the ground by airstrikes, no one gave a hitch.

                    If you're talking about smear campaign against the civilian victims, that's right. All jokes and giggling about the regular bombing raids on hospitals pops up only when Russia is the perpetrator.

                    Comment


                    • https://www.washingtonpost.com/world...=.9a317ed53474

                      Putin ally said to be in touch with Kremlin, Assad before his mercenaries attacked U.S. troops

                      A Russian oligarch believed to control the Russian mercenaries who attacked U.S. troops and their allies in Syria this month was in close touch with Kremlin and Syrian officials in the days and weeks before and after the assault, according to U.S. intelligence reports.

                      In intercepted communications in late January, the oligarch, Yevgeniy Prigozhin, told a senior Syrian official that he had “secured permission” from an unspecified Russian minister to move forward with a “fast and strong” initiative that would take place in early February.

                      Prigozhin made front-page headlines last week when he was indicted by special counsel Robert S. Mueller III on charges of bankrolling and guiding a long-running Russian scheme to conduct “information warfare” during the 2016 U.S. presidential campaign.

                      Comment


                      • Back to fake news?

                        A Russian oligarch believed to control the Russian mercenaries who attacked U.S. troops and their allies in Syria this month was in close touch with Kremlin and Syrian officials in the days and weeks before and after the assault, according to U.S. intelligence reports.

                        In intercepted communications in late January, the oligarch, Yevgeniy Prigozhin, told a senior Syrian official that he had “secured permission” from an unspecified Russian minister to move forward with a “fast and strong” initiative that would take place in early February.

                        Comment


                        • Since when did Russian mercenaries attack US troops?

                          Is this the US's new justification?

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Nyl View Post

                            Meh... I'm still strongly of the opinion that nukes are paper tigers.
                            Even in case of nuclear the consequences are exaggerated. I mean people are still living Hiroshima and Nagasaki, rather big cities, and you can safely travel Chernobyl and Fukushima if you avoid reactor. Not to mention Russia is wast with plenty of space to be populated by those who survive. Yes, they will speak Chinese in the end, but Russians are supposed to shrink and speak Chinese by Western designs eitherway so why don't take this designers into the grave too? The West has more to lose from confrontation with Russia so Russia can take more bold action in international politics actually. But the Putin team is reluctant.

                            Originally posted by Mitleser1987 View Post

                            Back to fake news?
                            Just to put some perspective.

                            Prigozhin is businessman in restaurants and catering businesses who often serves Kremlin dinners.

                            He is accused by Washington as the chef of Russian "Troll factory", chef of Wagner mercs (despite the actual chef is another person) and listed among the 13 Russians that unilateraly elected Trump for a nation of 325 millions.

                            Someone in Washington really don't like the borsh he ate at Kremlin parties

                            Comment


                            • So Akrill, just for the sake of argument: what is exactly that Russia has to gain by starting a war (apart from pleasing some random internet warrior ego, that is)? More space? More oil? More resources? As if all those assets were not abundantly available already in Russia.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by HeWhoReads View Post
                                So Akrill, just for the sake of argument: what is exactly that Russia has to gain by starting a war (apart from pleasing some random internet warrior ego, that is)? More space? More oil? More resources? As if all those assets were not abundantly available already in Russia.

                                Just the same US will gain in Syria. Why are you there?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X