.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Barin
-
Posts
484 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Downloads
Posts posted by Barin
-
-
On American saying about the Russions: "Their strategy in Syria is fundamentally flawed".
He should know: US strategy in the region has been grande. Ask any refugee flooding into the Europe today.
So you think the US is responsible for all this. Wow, how deluded and sad you are.
This war was started by a rebellion against a horrible dictator, Bashar al-Assad. I'm proud of my country for helping the rebels, though it is a bit dicey since some of those rebels are considered by some to be or could be terrorists given different circumstances. And as far as ISIS goes. If you think they should just be allowed to run around decapitating and terrorizing people and destroying 1000 year old world treasures, well then what a sad individual you are.
So Russian comes in to directly support the dictator Bashar al-Assad by targeting the rebels fighting against him and to a much lessor extent ISIS. The flaw the US is talking about is Russia supporting Bashar al-Assad. It's that simple. But now we have Russia firing cruise missiles over Iran and some of those missiles are falling in Iran. That's a little flaw also.
You believe what you want because you and many others like you are disposed to always think the US is in the wrong, the US is horrible and the US is the Great Satan.
Sometimes I do think we should just close our borders and let the rest of the world fend for itself. You might jump for joy, but after a time I don't think you would like the result.
So the liberal socialist Assad who made evil things like free education, women rights and health care, will be replaced by the humanist Al Quaida rebels. I am proud that my country is to insignificant to help the extremists.
Without America, we would have a stable Iraq, Afghanistan without narcotic exports and a stable Libya. And no refugees in Europe. I think I would like that. And the mothers of the dead US soldiers would also like to not have lost their sons for useless wars.
Yes, I totally agree with you.
It looks as if America did not learn any lessons from the Vietnam War?
Does America want another "Vietnam War" (to be called the "Syrian War")?
-
"...Moscow was swift to deny there was any malfunction with them..."
Well let's do just a tiny bit of logical thinking here.
Any country (US being a prime example) that has good satellite coverage over this war torn area can EASILY determine if missiles have landed in Iran so let's take that as a given. That leaves us with 3 possibilities; either the missile was programmed on purpose to hit Iran or it was programmed wrong or it malfunctioned. I'll give the Russians this; I doubt they programmed it to hit Iran on purpose.
No, it is clear as daylight that no any missiles have landed in Iran! This is a piece of American propaganda, without any proof as always.
You are absolutely right in saying that :
Any country (US being a prime example) that has good satellite coverage over this war torn area can EASILY determine if missiles have landed in Iran
However there is only one country (namely USA) who is claiming this fact. This is a serious accusation, why not provide a proof?
Why not show the satellite images?
-
To date the USG nor CNN, et al, has given any real proof of the accusation only unsubtantiated statements. RT news chased down the reporter guy that first voiced this situation, the British online investigative group Bellingcat, Eliot Higgins, and he ran and hid. Not an overly credible source. It seems that the USG wants to deflect attention from their own screwups by pointing the finger at others (one of their now time honored traditional practices) also there is no proof as yet. Since CNN, Fox, WSJ all fabricate their own news and are so bad at it they continually get caught out, I agree with the Russkies, enough with innuendo...show evidence. Is this like the WMD in Iraq? I don't really care if these missiles crashed or not but, I do care though that the USG is showing itself to be so ever more anal that they need to resort to this type of high school nonsense if not true. This isn't realpolitik this childish. So put up or shut up.
Yes, it is absolutely right. I do totally agree with you!
“About the Iranian impacts of cruise missiles, we did have some indications that that was the case and if so that would indicate malfunctions of those missiles,” he told reporters.
... we did have some indications ...
-
Just a clarification. A majority of the Russian efforts are not against ISIS. They are against the anti government rebels. And the current secretary general of NATO is from Norway, not the US.
Interesting analysis here. Basically saying Russia isn't in this for the long term (even their officials say this). Just trying to get Assad back into a position where he can negotiate. This has nothing to do with ISIS, as Russia initially stated. Misinformation.
I don't think you are right.
What you are saying is a typical American propaganda, as always without any proof.
99% of sources indicate that the main target of the Russian strikes is in fact the so called "Islamic State".
This is a primary target!
The anti-government rebels are the secondary target, and they must be destroyed as well.
Because they are terrorists and they want to overthrow the legitimately and democratically elected President of Syria.
This is a request by the Syrian government, not the sole initiative of Moscow.
I would like to refer everyone to the brilliant post of the respected Cashboy
I shall make a few points.
Assad was a democratically elected prime minister of Syria.
I have read at least one person state that the majority of people didn't vote for him and so it was not democratic.
Then you can argue that 80% of the elected prime ministers are not democratically elected. Take the UK with Cameron as prime minister whom's party only got 36% of the vote.
The USA basically only has a choice of two parties (virtually the same) so clearly there is a majority.
I would suggest you ask any Syrian whether they were better off with asad running the country than how it became after the protests.
How the Syrian problem came about
Basically Qatar and Saudi wanted to build an oil/gas pipeline to West Europe through Syria and Turkey.
USA corporations would have got the contract.
Russia would have lost exports of oil and gas to western Europe.
Asad was asked by Saudi, Qatar and US to let them build a pipe line through Syria. Asked by Saudi, then USA government. Asad said NO !
It was decided that Asad had to go as he was not co-operating, much like Egypt, Iraq and Libyan leaders.
So the CIA trained up, armed and gave Saudi cash to some people to act as rebels / protesters against Syria.
They started to protest but unfortunately Asad fought back (probably with Russian help) and they were unable to bring down Asad.
These rebels gave up fighting Asad, but with CIA supplied equipment and Saudi money decided to call themselves ISIL and go and in effect loot Iraq. The result was that they took control of some oil fields and sold the oil and had even more money to continue.
USA had left things continue because it was a satisfactory position for USA
1) Syria was in economic crisis (like they did to Egypt, Iraq and Libya)
2) USA thought the price of oil would go up meaning fracking in the USA would be competitive (break even price for oil production is a barrel of oil being US$75)
3) liked the idea of Syrians fleeing to the EC creating economic and political problems in the EC.
Russian Involvement
Putin has basically, as usual, played a nice strategic game.
Putin wants the price of oil and gas to go up as it is important for the economy of Russia.
Putin has now told the world that he is sorting out ISIL because the USA clearly cannot. The fact is that the USA doesn't want the crisis to end (read reasons given above) and this is clear from:
1) how quickly ISIL are running from Syria within one week of Russia getting involved and yet USA could not get rid of ISIL in more than three years.
2) USA and the west are not helping Russia.
I would think that Putin's plan is to push ISIL into Iraq. Iraq then ask Russia and Iran help them to get rid of ISIL. Russia and Iran will then push ISIL into Saudi Arabia.
ISIL may well then wipe out the Saudi king and family and Saudi will be in a mess and the rebels will control the Saudi oil.
This is a win win situation for Russia as the price of oil will go up.
I would think that the USA might be considering starting WW3 as this would hide the embarrassment of losing the Middle East situation and would also be a good cover up for the economic crisis / financial turmoil that may well hit the USA economy in the coming months.
-
you mean the USA wants a war with Russiait won't be long until we have Nato/US targeting Russian aircraft, I predicted quite a while ago that Russia would get directly involved in the Middle East and that it would escalate from there, looks like Russia wants a war with the west and are now pushing limits with that aim, they have been proding defence networks for some time now
and their ship launched cruise missiles hit the wrong country ? ahem
Given Russia attacked Iran with four cruise missiles it could appear the ayatollahs are all talk about defending their homeland against foreign attacks. Those robes they wear are beginning to look like prom gowns.
The Tehran A's are sending a group of about 2000 at the most of fierce fighters who as with their forces sent in 2013 look like they're going to be drivers, cooks, towel boyz cause Tehran is not sending any tanks, no artillery, no armed personnel vehicles, no missiles -- nothing heavy except the Iranian soldiers mustaches. No wonder Putin bombed 'em.
Even though Vlad denies doing it.Now, Publicus, I notice you are a great stickler for 'formalities'. A shameless lie was published about some of the Russian rockets falling in Iran. Both Russia and Iran deny this.
Eagerness in using such information in your posts here... I am really at a loss for definition...
You must be a day dreamer trying to pass your sweet dreams for reality, a provocateur or simply prone to uphold lies appealing to your fancy.
Your elation and hand clapping "No wonder Putin bombed 'em.
" would have been a shame even if this was a true fact. I think you disgrace yourself by your emotional inappropriate gloating.
Yes, absolutely right. Very well said!
-
Much of this wouldn't have been necessary if Turkey had made a real effort to tackle the ISIS & Al-Nusra. Just because the Kurds were fighting against the invading Daesh, Turkey - who has an awful record of attacking the Kurds - has overtly pretended to be against Daesh and covertly supported them. They are two-faced.
NATO would be better off staying as far as possible away from Syria after their disastrous, lying destruction of Libya.
BTW of course Russia is targetting any militia that is against Assad. Stoltenburg would be more constructive by telling his bosses in Washington to either shut up or come to an arrangement with the Russians who are doing what others have failed to do.
Still trying to get the United States to surrender to Russia in Syria I see.
We will see soon, perhaps by the end of next week, whether the remnants of the Syrian army supported by Russian air forces can drive the rebels out of their positions in the central areas of the country. The campaign is underway now. The rebel groups have all year fought with unprecedented cooperation and effectiveness to reduce the Syrian army to around 80,000 from its 300,000 of five years ago. More than 40 rebel groups are united against this new Russian-Syrian armed forces offensive.
If the offensive fails Putin and Iran are going to have to throw their own forces into the mix, which means Russian casualties and Russian rubles. Even if the offensive has success, there are a lot more rebels and a lot more territory for the Russian-Syrian forces to move through.
Which raises the question of how many missiles Putin has left to scatter throughout Iran.
Washington can sit tight for a while cause the heat is on Putin and Assad. You can bet the farm the United States won't be handing its sword over to the Russians.
Still twisting what I say, I see. Coming to an arrangement is rather different to surrendering but I suppose to the US-is-the-master boyz every other country must be told what to do.
Yes all those rebel militias including the Al-Qaeda group, the ISIS group, the Islamists group and those supported by neocons and right-wing 'think-tanks' are doing a great job - in reality setting up Syria for another failed state. It's a dirty war and Russia may well not solve it successfully but at least they are trying, unlike the left out cry babies.
A poster asked for evidence of Russian tanks being blown up by some militia and you posted a totally irrelevant photo of a tank in Moscow. Methinks you are only trying to distract the thread with half-cocked and full-cocked responses.
Yes, khunken, I totally agree with you on everything you say!
We can see now how many people on Thaivisa Forum condemn America and support Russia!
America lovers and NATO admirers are certainly in the minority.
Even though there are very few Russians on this Forum (less than 0.1%).
the left out cry babies...
-
Some more details of the missiles:
-
it won't be long until we have Nato/US targeting Russian aircraft, I predicted quite a while ago that Russia would get directly involved in the Middle East and that it would escalate from there, looks like Russia wants a war with the west and are now pushing limits with that aim, they have been proding defence networks for some time now
and their ship launched cruise missiles hit the wrong country ? ahem
On 08 Octover 2015, CNN reported that four of the 26 missiles fired from Russian warships in the Caspian Sea went off target and crashed in Iran. That report was based on anonymous Pentagon sources, who despite claiming to have evidence of the targeting malfunction, could not identify where, precisely, the missiles landed. "No matter how unpleasant and unexpected for our colleagues in the Pentagon and Langley was yesterday's high-precision strike on Islamic State infrastructure in Syria, the fact remains that all missiles launched from our ships have found their targets," ministry's spokesman Maj. Gen. Igor Konashenkov said.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/russia/club.htm
-
Much of this wouldn't have been necessary if Turkey had made a real effort to tackle the ISIS & Al-Nusra. Just because the Kurds were fighting against the invading Daesh, Turkey - who has an awful record of attacking the Kurds - has overtly pretended to be against Daesh and covertly supported them. They are two-faced.
NATO would be better off staying as far as possible away from Syria after their disastrous, lying destruction of Libya.
BTW of course Russia is targetting any militia that is against Assad. Stoltenburg would be more constructive by telling his bosses in Washington to either shut up or come to an arrangement with the Russians who are doing what others have failed to do.
Yes, that is correct.
America has lost its face again.
America and NATO have proved to be absolutely useless and incapable of fighting ISIS in Syria.
A complete failure!
-
You just made my point. Putin discussed coordinating efforts, but never did. Show a reference to an article where Putin called Obama to tell him personally he was going to bomb Syria. Not an article from RT, please. But you are 100% correct, Putin indicated a desire to do this, just never did.
Probably you are wrong.
Israel and Russia have agreed to coordinate military actions over Syria in order to avoid accidentally trading fire, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said during a visit to Moscow.
Netanyahu told Israeli reporters that he had informed the Americans "on each and every detail" of his Moscow visit, adding: "Everyone has an interest in avoiding an unnecessary clash" over Syria.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/09/21/us-mideast-crisis-russia-israel-idUSKCN0RL10K20150921
While the bombing campaign has escalated tensions between Moscow and NATO members, Shoigu said Russia is ready to accept what he called U.S. proposals on coordinating strikes against Islamic State, a notion dismissed later on Wednesday by Defense Secretary Ashton Carter.
The United States on Wednesday ruled out military cooperation with Russia in Syria's war, accusing Moscow of pursuing a "tragically flawed" strategy that would force it to limit military talks to basic pilot safety.
U.S. Defense Secretary Ash Carter's critique amounted to a rebuff of Russia, which had sought greater coordination as Moscow escalates its military role in support of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.
"We are not prepared to cooperate in a strategy, which as we explained, is flawed - tragically flawed - on the Russians' part," Carter told a news conference during a trip to Rome.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/us-russia-syria_56163408e4b0082030a1305a
So who is to blame for the so called "collateral damage" now?
America shares the responsibility because it refused to cooperate with Russia thus jeopardizing the lives of many innocent people in Syria.
Again we can see the ugly hypocritical face of America!
-
I admit not being fully up to speed with the rights and wrongs of it all, but why is Russia's taking out ISIS/DAESH a bad thing if we in the west don't have the balls to do it ourselves? Are there forces in the west that secretly wish them to remain or something? Do western governments not wish to upset their new culture enrichers or what?
If they were only bombing ISIS sites, then it would be better. Unfortunately, a majority of the strikes are against anti-government rebels. With lots of collateral deaths.
Add to that, there are lots of coalition war planes in the area. Russia came in without a warning and NO coordination with anybody. Like a bull in a china shop.
Russia came in without a warning and NO coordination with anybody. Like a bull in a china Shop.
I believe this is not true.
Before starting the attacks in Syria the Russian President frequently proposed that Russia wanted to cooperate with the Western Coalition headed by the US in order to coordinate the military operation and avoid any civilian casualties and minimize the so called "collateral damage".
Unfortunately the US have rejected the Russia's proposal.
So what are you talking about now?
Updated Sept. 28, 2015 3:00 p.m. ET
UNITED NATIONS — Russian President Vladimir Putin said Monday he will launch discussions on a United Nations resolution aimed at coordinating international efforts to fight Islamic State militants.
In a speech to the U.N. General Assembly, which came hours before his first formal meeting with U.S. President Barack Obama in more than two years, Mr. Putin attacked Western policies in the Middle East, including U.S. and European opposition to the Assad regime in Syria. He called for a broad coalition against Islamic State.
“First of all, we propose discussing whether it is possible to agree on a resolution aimed at coordinating the actions of all the forces that confront Islamic State and other terrorist organizations,” he said.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/putin-urges-u-n-to-help-coordinate-fight-against-isis-1443460834
-
Europeans were so ready to "do the right thing" ...and assimilate all the refugees. In Hiney site....now they are krappin der Lederhosen, thinking that they have just welcomed in a bunch of IS...and the Ruskies now have a reason to engage warship activity... Turkey is at risk....the middle east (as we known and hated)...is gone. Turkey now has the "watch".
Hellespointe.... heavy on the Hell
Yes, probably from the American point of view (and America is always right, isn't it?) there is a risk to lose Turkey as a NATO country!
That is why NATO is in panic now...
Blowing all this hysteria around Turkey.
-
I admit not being fully up to speed with the rights and wrongs of it all, but why is Russia's taking out ISIS/DAESH a bad thing if we in the west don't have the balls to do it ourselves? Are there forces in the west that secretly wish them to remain or something? Do western governments not wish to upset their new culture enrichers or what?
Yes, very interesting point of view!
-
Among other things, Putin is punishing Europe, intensifying the fighting in order to exacerbate the influx of immigrants to the EU.
No, I believe that this is absolutely wrong.
Just the opposite: Putin wants to save Russia and Europe from the influx of the refugees from the Middle East!
-
Did anyone ask Turkey if it wants or needs the presence of NATO troops now?
It looks like everything is decided in Washington.
America always knows better?
America wants to rule the World?
Yes AMerica Australia and Uk are the barins its no secret and we have the superior back up
We also are the ones that go war and help others
What do others do FA
Oh, what an arrogance!
Another Russia's hater.
Now we already have three of them here.
-
Russia must be dealt with at full force
They are such a badly run country and that PM is another rotten apple
I don't think so.
-
It looks my posts here were prophetic.
Why NATO have to protect one of its members - Turkey?
Because ISIS terrorists are running there for cover from real bombing by Russians?
So, the incursion in Turkish airspace was not accidental? But neither was it without a cause.
To sum it up: some terrorists are valuable commodity. So valuable that needs protection by NATO?
Or NATO and Turkey are trying to save Russians from a "tragic mistake" as US called their bombing?
Yes, it is absolutely correct!
-
Turkey has been a member of NATO since 1952.
Yes, everyone knows that.
But is it an excuse to ignore Turkey's opinion?
Do you think that if Turkey is a member of NATO, it is supposed to obey orders from Washington?
Ask the people of Turkey.
The referendum is necessary!
-
Did anyone ask Turkey if it wants or needs the presence of NATO troops now?
It looks like everything is decided in Washington.
America always knows better?
America wants to rule the World?
-
I am prepared to accept this on a face value. I trust it is not a fake. But where is the arrow pointing at Moscow?
Who are these characters talking? Russians? Ukrainians? Are they talking to Russian command?
I hope those specialist Investigators have this too.
This was released right after the incident. The people having the conversation are the pro Russian separatists. The leader of the separatist movement of that time acknowledged on his "VK" webpage that his forces shot the plane by mistake thinking it was an Ukrainian plane. When they realized it was a passenger plane all the statements and the released information was deleted.
Later Russian mass media came with a zillion ridiculous theories about why the plane crashed in order to confuse the public.
This is nothing more than a pure speculation without any proof. The Ukrainian propaganda.
-
Doesnt care about Humanitarian issues ?...bit rich isnt given, given the US just bombed a hospital into the ground in Afganistan
That hospital bombing was horrible. But to single out one event is perhaps not the best thing to do. The US probably provides more humanitarian support around the world than any other nation. Definitely more than Russia.
USA also bombs more nations and kills more people than any other nation on earth.
Yes, that is correct!
-
-
This is a BS Ukrainian propaganda.
Who is this "Ukrainian investigator" to be authorized to make such a statement?
Only the official report from the Dutch authorities may be referred to.
Yes, the Buk missile systems were in fact deployed in that area controlled by the Ukraine Army.
Those Buk missile systems belonged to the Ukraine Army, not the rebels.
There is enough evidence of that fact.
The MH17 might have been shot down by mistake by the Ukraine Army itself.
The Ukrainian Army is notorious for making such terrible mistakes in the past.
Remember this one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siberia_Airlines_Flight_1812
It was the Russians FACT.
Just like its the Russians stirring the pot in Syria.
What do you mean by "stirring the pot in Syria"?
This is off-topic here.
To discuss this subject please go to another thread:
-
This is a BS Ukrainian propaganda.
Who is this "Ukrainian investigator" to be authorized to make such a statement?
Only the official report from the Dutch authorities may be referred to.
Yes, the Buk missile systems were in fact deployed in that area controlled by the Ukraine Army.
Those Buk missile systems belonged to the Ukraine Army, not the rebels.
There is enough evidence of that fact.
The MH17 might have been shot down by mistake by the Ukraine Army itself.
The Ukrainian Army is notorious for making such terrible mistakes in the past.
Remember this one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siberia_Airlines_Flight_1812
Even though Vlad denies doing it.
Russia denies US claims cruise missiles malfunctioned over Iran
in World News
Posted
If America would not have poked its nose into the internal affairs of many independent states acting as a self appointed World Policeman there would not have been any need to blame America on the consequences of such actions.
America is not the center of the world (surprise, surprise)...
The balance of forces on our Planet is shifting towards Asia nowadays.