Jump to content
Login with your Gmail HERE and start posting in seconds! ×
Don't just read! Be part of the Community! Join the conversation ×

Russia accuses U.S.-led coalition of 'barbaric' bombing of Syria's Raqqa

webfact

By webfact
in World News

 Share

Recommended Posts

webfact Grand Master Member

webfact

Posted
Posted

Russia accuses U.S.-led coalition of 'barbaric' bombing of Syria's Raqqa

 

tag-reuters-3.jpg

FILE PHOTO: A fighter of Syrian Democratic Forces stands amidst the ruins of buildings near the Clock Square in Raqqa, Syria October 18, 2017. REUTERS/Erik De Castro

 

MOSCOW (Reuters) - Russia accused the U.S.-led coalition in Syria on Sunday of wiping the city of Raqqa "off the face of the earth" with carpet bombing in the same way the United States and Britain had bombed Germany's Dresden in 1945.

 

The Russian Defence Ministry, which has itself repeatedly been forced to deny accusations from activists and Western politicians of bombing Syrian civilians, said it looked like the West was now rushing to provide financial aid to Raqqa to cover up evidence of its own crimes.

 

Major-General Igor Konashenkov, a spokesman for the Defence Ministry, said in a statement that around 200,000 people had lived in Raqqa before the conflict in Syria, but that not more than 45,000 people remained.

 

U.S.-backed militias in Syria declared victory over Islamic State in Raqqa, the group's capital, last week, raising flags over the last jihadist footholds after a four-month battle.

 

"Raqqa has inherited the fate of Dresden in 1945, wiped off the face of the earth by Anglo-American bombardments," said Konashenkov.

 

Most of the German city was destroyed in Allied bombing raids just before the end of World War Two.

 

Though he said Russia welcomed Western promises of financial aid to rebuild Raqqa, Konashenkov complained that numerous Russian requests for the West to give humanitarian aid to Syrian civilians in other parts of the country had been rejected in previous years.

 

"What is behind the rush by Western capitals to provide targeted financial help only to Raqqa?," said Konashenkov.

 

"There's only one explanation - the desire to cover up evidence of the barbaric bombardments by the U.S. air force and the coalition as fast as possible and to bury the thousands of civilians 'liberated' from Islamic State in the ruins."

 

The U.S.-led coalition says it is careful to avoid civilian casualties in its bombing runs against Islamic State in both Syria and Iraq, and investigates any allegations. It has previously denied killing civilians in air strikes on Raqqa, saying its goal is "zero civilian casualties."

 

(Reporting by Andrew Osborn; Editing by Toby Chopra)

 
reuters_logo.jpg
-- © Copyright Reuters 2017-10-23
Link to comment
Share on other sites

FreddieRoyle Newbie

FreddieRoyle

Posted
Posted

The leveling of Raqqa proves the "allied forces" are still treating the symptoms without any desire to understand the cause.  Political correctness, wonderful for grading bananas and cabbages, and keeping useless jobsworths at the trough, but not entirely successful as a war strategy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
boomerangutang Platinum Member

boomerangutang

Posted
Posted

With each day, Trump's (and his dufus aide's) bleatings sink them deeper in the swamp of their own making.   As Trumpsters sink, Russians, Chinese, Iranians look a bit credible in comparison. 

 

As for Raqqa:  I thought similar thoughts (to the Russian announcement) after looking at the pics of devastation in past weeks.  I understand that fighting against embedded fanatic fighters in an old city is very difficult, ......but to carpet bomb the city to smithereens....?!   Yea, you win the battle, but the city is rubble.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
craigt3365 Star Member

craigt3365

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, pegman said:

Making American Armourment Manufacturers Geat Again (MAAMGA)

Russia's got the US beat with regards to this.  Big time.

 

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2016/04/syria-war-showroom-russian-arms-sales-160406135130398.html

 

Quote

 

Syria's war: A showroom for Russian arms sales

 

In 2015, Russian arms exports hit a record $14.5bn because of their "reliability and high effectiveness", President Putin said in late March. The figure was higher than expected, and foreign orders for Russian weapons exceeded $56bn, Putin added, addressing a meeting of defence officials.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
boomerangutang Platinum Member

boomerangutang

Posted
Posted

Trump can't be bothered with silly issues like this.  He's busy on his golf courses, and making sure he's always got two scoops of ice cream and lots of cold coke nearby.   

 

Meanwhile,  Kushner, with the giant portfolio of over a dozen important issues he's been put in charge of, .......is also in charge of middle east peace.    That would be comical if it weren't so sad.   Kushner's involvement with M.East peace is about as effective as putting a harness on a toad and trying to get it to pull your truck up a hill.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Morch Star Member

Morch

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, boomerangutang said:

Trump can't be bothered with silly issues like this.  He's busy on his golf courses, and making sure he's always got two scoops of ice cream and lots of cold coke nearby.   

 

Meanwhile,  Kushner, with the giant portfolio of over a dozen important issues he's been put in charge of, .......is also in charge of middle east peace.    That would be comical if it weren't so sad.   Kushner's involvement with M.East peace is about as effective as putting a harness on a toad and trying to get it to pull your truck up a hill.

 

War isn't pretty. You'd whine as much and criticize Trump even more if the fighting involved USA forces on the ground clearing the town house by house, while suffering high casualty rates.

 

And actually, this was pretty much in line with new policies introduced by the current administration. As mentioned on other topics, the USA military does have more freedom to act without lengthy consultations with the WH. In one way, it does reinforce the notion that Trump "can't be bothered", but seen from a different angle, it is at least a measure of realism with regard to the feasibility of micromanaging USA military operations by the WH (which is closer to the approach taken under Obama).

 

OP doesn't have much to do with the ME peace process.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Morch Star Member

Morch

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, FreddieRoyle said:

The leveling of Raqqa proves the "allied forces" are still treating the symptoms without any desire to understand the cause.  Political correctness, wonderful for grading bananas and cabbages, and keeping useless jobsworths at the trough, but not entirely successful as a war strategy.

 

It doesn't "prove" anything of the sort, or at least your post doesn't make it clear how it does. There's addressing the underlying reasons for a situation, and then there's addressing a situation at hand. One does not exclude the other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
craigt3365 Star Member

craigt3365

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Krataiboy said:

Just more pro-West anti-Assad/andiRussia propaganda from an unreliable source.

 

https://thewallwillfall.org/2016/01/12/madaya-west-engineer-another-humanitarian-media-hoax-in-syria/

Good gosh.  The things people fall for.  From that article about the author.  And you criticize me? 

 

Quote

I have appeared on RT Cross Talk, RT News, Press TV, Ron Paul Report, Sunday Wire, Sputnik Radio

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Krataiboy Gold Member

Krataiboy

Posted
Posted
30 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Quoting one biased source to counter what's claimed to be another isn't about "balance" - more like partisan tit for tat.

 

With so much tat from the pro-US lobby and their tame media sources, a bit of tit from the other side is overdue.

 

The London-based Syrian Network For Human Rights has been widely criticised as a pro-West, anti-Assad/Russia outfit. This view is reinforced by the particular source I quoted. Others I checked believe the Network uses dubious methodology and produces exaggerated figures.  

 

Did you actually actually visit the website I recommended and check the author's credentials? If so, perhaps you would explain why you consider it biased. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Krataiboy Gold Member

Krataiboy

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

Good gosh.  The things people fall for.  From that article about the author.  And you criticize me? 

 

 

Sorry, Craig - CNN, Fox News and your other favourites, for some unfathomable reason, weren't interested in what she had to say.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
craigt3365 Star Member

craigt3365

Posted
Posted
12 minutes ago, Krataiboy said:

With so much tat from the pro-US lobby and their tame media sources, a bit of tit from the other side is overdue.

 

The London-based Syrian Network For Human Rights has been widely criticised as a pro-West, anti-Assad/Russia outfit. This view is reinforced by the particular source I quoted. Others I checked believe the Network uses dubious methodology and produces exaggerated figures.  

 

Did you actually actually visit the website I recommended and check the author's credentials? If so, perhaps you would explain why you consider it biased. 

Many of my posts are to counter the numerous anti-US posts.  Many with links to very dodgy websites, which luckily, get removed.  Post credible links and you'll earn more respect here.

 

And yes, I visited that website.  It's done by a single lady.  Pure opinion pieces with no validation.  Picked up by Russian media sources as they are anti-US.  Sources you seem to gravitate towards. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
craigt3365 Star Member

craigt3365

Posted
Posted
15 minutes ago, Krataiboy said:

Sorry, Craig - CNN, Fox News and your other favourites, for some unfathomable reason, weren't interested in what she had to say.

I stick with sites that vet their news.  Fox isn't one of them.  You've never seen me post a link from there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Krataiboy Gold Member

Krataiboy

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

I stick with sites that vet their news.  Fox isn't one of them.  You've never seen me post a link from there.

So everything that comes out of CNN and the rest of the news Western new outlets you refer to is the plain unvarnished truth. If only. . . 

 

7 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

Many of my posts are to counter the numerous anti-US posts.  Many with links to very dodgy websites, which luckily, get removed.  Post credible links and you'll earn more respect here.

 

And yes, I visited that website.  It's done by a single lady.  Pure opinion pieces with no validation.  Picked up by Russian media sources as they are anti-US.  Sources you seem to gravitate towards. 

Well, at least you have finally come out as the ThaiVisa human shield for Uncle Sam. Not cover CIA by any chance, are we? Everybody knows the boys and girls at Langley have a reputation for infiltrating the mass media and social networks with sleepers.

 

You've got cojones, I'll say that for you, flagging referencing a site which relies for its propaganda on a discredited outfit like Syrian Network For Human Rights then talk of earning respect. Hilarious.

 

Your reference to the site I referenced as being "done by a single lady" sounds somewhat sexist. Her opinion pieces are research and evidence based, as her biog makes clear - which is more than can be said about some of her pro-West counterparts.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
craigt3365 Star Member

craigt3365

Posted
Posted
45 minutes ago, Krataiboy said:

So everything that comes out of CNN and the rest of the news Western new outlets you refer to is the plain unvarnished truth. If only. .

 

Where did I ever say that?  You're losing credibility quickly.  The rest is just an off topic rant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Krataiboy Gold Member

Krataiboy

Posted
Posted
44 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

Where did I ever say that?  You're losing credibility quickly.  The rest is just an off topic rant.

 

46 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

Where did I ever say that?  You're losing credibility quickly.  The rest is just an off topic rant.

I'll let others be the judge of who is losing credibility. I think you're just sore at being outed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.








×
×
  • Create New...
""