‘It’s just not true’ – Russia rejects claims that it’s bombing civilians in Syria




Russia has rejected accusations that it’s been bombing civilians in Syria.

The denial came at a security conference in Munich, as Moscow pressed on with its campaign in support of President Bashar al-Assad.

This despite major powers agreeing on Friday to a pause in combat in Syria.

“There is no evidence of our bombing civilians, even though everyone is accusing us of this,” Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev told the Munich conference.

“Russia is not trying to achieve some secret goals in Syria. We are simply trying to protect our national interests.”

Medvedev spoke just moments after his French counterpart, Manuel Valls, called for Moscow to stop striking civilians.

“To find the path to peace and of negotiation again, the bombing of civilians has to stop,” said Valls.

The agreement for a pause in combat – which will allow humanitarian aid in – will not take effect for a week.

Western powers say that without an end to Russia’s bombing, there is little hope for Syria, where the continuing conflict has killed more than a quarter of a million people.

-- (c) Copyright Euronews 2016-01-14

Wow. What a lie. If you drop a bomb on terrorists, the possibility of hitting a civilian is extremely probably. No wonder nobody believes what Russian leaders say.

More appropriate would be a statement like: "We try to limit civilian casualties." LOL

But at least he was honest about the reason for the bombing. Protecting Russia's national interests there.

I guess the people in these pictures aren't civilians???

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-35490273

Wow. What a lie. If you drop a bomb on terrorists, the possibility of hitting a civilian is extremely probably. No wonder nobody believes what Russian leaders say.

More appropriate would be a statement like: "We try to limit civilian casualties." LOL

But at least he was honest about the reason for the bombing. Protecting Russia's national interests there.

I guess the people in these pictures aren't civilians???

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-35490273

So what is wrong with bombing terrorists?

Wow. What a lie. If you drop a bomb on terrorists, the possibility of hitting a civilian is extremely probably.

Craig. This line is subliminally brilliant.

It is 100% correct, but goes against your postings of yesterday extolling the virtues of Western bombing causing next to no. or very little collateral damage.

Unless the West are bombing anthills in the middle of the desert, then every single bomb they drop will be causing collateral damage. Regardless of what the press says.

Wow. What a lie. If you drop a bomb on terrorists, the possibility of hitting a civilian is extremely probably.

Craig. This line is subliminally brilliant.

It is 100% correct, but goes against your postings of yesterday extolling the virtues of Western bombing causing next to no. or very little collateral damage.

Unless the West are bombing anthills in the middle of the desert, then every single bomb they drop will be causing collateral damage. Regardless of what the press says.

I never extolled the virtues of the coalition bombing campaign. Specifically, I said they did their best to limit collateral damage, but it still happens. As opposed to what's happening now. Basically carpet bombing entire neighborhoods.

That was kinda my point. Russia is saying there is NO civilian deaths. I've never read a report from the coalition saying they've had ZERO collateral damage.

Wow. What a lie. If you drop a bomb on terrorists, the possibility of hitting a civilian is extremely probably. No wonder nobody believes what Russian leaders say.

More appropriate would be a statement like: "We try to limit civilian casualties." LOL

But at least he was honest about the reason for the bombing. Protecting Russia's national interests there.

I guess the people in these pictures aren't civilians???

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-35490273

So what is wrong with bombing terrorists?

I don't think the kids in this picture are terrorists! LOL

Wow. What a lie. If you drop a bomb on terrorists, the possibility of hitting a civilian is extremely probably. No wonder nobody believes what Russian leaders say.

More appropriate would be a statement like: "We try to limit civilian casualties." LOL

But at least he was honest about the reason for the bombing. Protecting Russia's national interests there.

I guess the people in these pictures aren't civilians???

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-35490273

So what is wrong with bombing terrorists?

What wrong with bombing civilians?

Bombing civilians with out oficial war its be terrorism?

Bombing civilians with oficial war its be what?

PS

Any war , oficial or not is blood, death, hunger, disease, devastation. modern ALL wars (the last 100 years) it still BIG lies, provocations, propaganda, hypocrisy.

And start for one reason MAKE MONEY.

I am not sure from where this is Photo and when..

Edited February 14, 201610 yr by ardokano

Of course its not true. Russian bombs kill civilians, just as US drone strikes kill civilians,

as does all allied bombs and missile strikes. Even smart bombs are not the same as

snipers with there 1 shot, 1 kill ethos. Smart bombs and missiles may actually kill more

civilians as commanders make the call to hit specific targets in civilian areas,

precisely because they are accurate. With an unguided bomb you would not drop it

because you may miss the target. With a smart bomb you will not miss the target. The

wedding party you also hit is considered an acceptable collateral loss. Thousands and

thousands of civilians are killed all through Pakistan, Iraq, Syria. Civilians amongst them.

Of course Bashar al Assad and the Russians show less caution that the US and its allies.

They seam quite fine to drop unguided munitions as with zero concern for civilians.

In there eyes, you are either with us or against us. Innocents be dammed. Then like

most governments, deny, deny, deny.

Better be careful what you believe from the mainstream..quite possible that they(America and allies) are trying to demonize Russia through the actions of other nations/ISIS...

All of this lying and cheating and killing could have been prevented if the UN had any balls, gd...

Wow. What a lie. If you drop a bomb on terrorists, the possibility of hitting a civilian is extremely probably. No wonder nobody believes what Russian leaders say.

More appropriate would be a statement like: "We try to limit civilian casualties." LOL

But at least he was honest about the reason for the bombing. Protecting Russia's national interests there.

I guess the people in these pictures aren't civilians???

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-35490273

So what is wrong with bombing terrorists?

I don't think the kids in this picture are terrorists! LOL

They also don't look dead to me.

Wow. What a lie. If you drop a bomb on terrorists, the possibility of hitting a civilian is extremely probably. No wonder nobody believes what Russian leaders say.

More appropriate would be a statement like: "We try to limit civilian casualties." LOL

But at least he was honest about the reason for the bombing. Protecting Russia's national interests there.

I guess the people in these pictures aren't civilians???

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-35490273

So what is wrong with bombing terrorists?

I don't think the kids in this picture are terrorists! LOL

They also don't look dead to me.

It's an old photo.

Wow. What a lie. If you drop a bomb on terrorists, the possibility of hitting a civilian is extremely probably.

Craig. This line is subliminally brilliant.

It is 100% correct, but goes against your postings of yesterday extolling the virtues of Western bombing causing next to no. or very little collateral damage.

Unless the West are bombing anthills in the middle of the desert, then every single bomb they drop will be causing collateral damage. Regardless of what the press says.

I never extolled the virtues of the coalition bombing campaign. Specifically, I said they did their best to limit collateral damage, but it still happens. As opposed to what's happening now. Basically carpet bombing entire neighborhoods.

That was kinda my point. Russia is saying there is NO civilian deaths. I've never read a report from the coalition saying they've had ZERO collateral damage.

Where did the Russians said there are NO civilian deaths, for sure it isn't in the OP.

What they said is :

“There is no evidence of our bombing civilians, even though everyone is accusing us of this,” Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev told the Munich conference.

Something completely different in my book. You can't have a war without civilian deaths, virtually impossible, but it doesn't mean they are targeting civilians.

As another poster said already, we all know that certain nations want to blame the Russians for everything.

Better be careful what you believe from the mainstream..quite possible that they(America and allies) are trying to demonize Russia through the actions of other nations/ISIS...

Russia does a fine job demonizing themselves, they don't need help from anyone.

Russia carpet-bombed their own citizens in Grozny. You think they would take care in Syria?

Russia has killed thousands of Russian-speaking civilians in eastern Ukraine including ethnic Russians, you think they would think twice about doing it to Syrians?

In war, Russia thinks telling the truth is stupid (it kinda is). You are at war. You do not tell the enemy (or anyone else) what you are doing or what you plan to do. That is something that open societies expect and Putin's Russia is not an open society. They will look you straight in the eye and lie to you all day long. I'd like to think that people would have figured this out by now.

There will always be civilian deaths when bombing dug-in terrorists, silly for Russians to deny it. However the story is being used to further demonize Russia, like things were better in Syria under the head chopping ISIS. Hmmm.

In other news Turkey has been shelling the Kurds in N Syria and also apparently the Syrian army, yet not a squeak from the west condemning this. The Russians also claim the Turkish army is mobilised on the border and maybe preparing to invade Syria, lets see if we get the usual false flag as the justification.

So what happens if the Turks (and Saudis) invade and the Russians counter attack? NATO alliances and all, potentially could see war declared against nuclear Russia. Of course Turkey wouldn't do it if the US hadn't already given the nod. Things are getting very interesting, who will blink first?

If Turkey makes a unilateral decision to get into the conflict, NATO is under no obligation to help them. NATO will help if Turkey is attacked.

According to estimates I read the Russian bombing campaign has cost the lives of 1400 civilians, if it is true the lack of massive demonstrations of left wingers and Muslims in European capitals is noteworthy though sadly not surprising.

http://in.reuters.com/article/mideast-crisis-syria-russia-idINKCN0V80CX

Edited February 14, 201610 yr by Steely Dan

They also don't look dead to me.

A simple Google search will bring up plenty. No need to post them here....

Wow. What a lie. If you drop a bomb on terrorists, the possibility of hitting a civilian is extremely probably.

Craig. This line is subliminally brilliant.

It is 100% correct, but goes against your postings of yesterday extolling the virtues of Western bombing causing next to no. or very little collateral damage.

Unless the West are bombing anthills in the middle of the desert, then every single bomb they drop will be causing collateral damage. Regardless of what the press says.

I never extolled the virtues of the coalition bombing campaign. Specifically, I said they did their best to limit collateral damage, but it still happens. As opposed to what's happening now. Basically carpet bombing entire neighborhoods.

That was kinda my point. Russia is saying there is NO civilian deaths. I've never read a report from the coalition saying they've had ZERO collateral damage.

Where did the Russians said there are NO civilian deaths, for sure it isn't in the OP.

What they said is :

There is no evidence of our bombing civilians, even though everyone is accusing us of this, Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev told the Munich conference.

Something completely different in my book. You can't have a war without civilian deaths, virtually impossible, but it doesn't mean they are targeting civilians.

As another poster said already, we all know that certain nations want to blame the Russians for everything.

OK. Could be issues with translations...or semantics. But with the millions of refugees fleeing these areas, are you saying Russia isn't bombing civilians???

Because Russia does want to blame the West for everything bad. Right? The West aren't the ones doing the current bombing in these areas. Only Russia and Syria.

Can you suggest any other way how to make civilians go away from terrorist's area, so they would't get harm?

Or even any other way how terrorists can be eliminated better way in current existing conditions?

Obviously nobody wants to kill any good people here, and it's obvious that this statement being used to accuse RU, to pose it like they're doing it on purpose. Psychological stuff.

Edited February 14, 201610 yr by AlexStepashkin

Can you suggest any other way how to make civilians go away from terrorist's area, so they would't get harm?

Or even any other way how terrorists can be eliminated better way in current existing conditions?

Obviously nobody wants to kill any good people here, and it's obvious that this statement being used to accuse RU, to pose it like they're doing it on purpose. Psychological stuff.

An easy and quick way is to stop the bombing immediately. It is Russia who is doing the bombing. And these are the bombs that are killing the civilians. Right?

What was the reason for establishing the UN?

Can you suggest any other way how to make civilians go away from terrorist's area, so they would't get harm?

Or even any other way how terrorists can be eliminated better way in current existing conditions?

Obviously nobody wants to kill any good people here, and it's obvious that this statement being used to accuse RU, to pose it like they're doing it on purpose. Psychological stuff.

An easy and quick way is to stop the bombing immediately. It is Russia who is doing the bombing. And these are the bombs that are killing the civilians. Right?

So stop the bombing and give the terrorists free play?

We all know the US created ISIS, but that doesn't mean they still have to protect them.

Russia is supporting Assad, and there is nothing against that, since it is Assad's country and not any business of the west to decide to remove him.

Can you suggest any other way how to make civilians go away from terrorist's area, so they would't get harm?

Or even any other way how terrorists can be eliminated better way in current existing conditions?

Obviously nobody wants to kill any good people here, and it's obvious that this statement being used to accuse RU, to pose it like they're doing it on purpose. Psychological stuff.

An easy and quick way is to stop the bombing immediately. It is Russia who is doing the bombing. And these are the bombs that are killing the civilians. Right?

And how exactly that would help eliminate terrorists in this region?

"It’s just not true" sounds very familiar to me. Same when invading Crimea or Ukraine

Can you suggest any other way how to make civilians go away from terrorist's area, so they would't get harm?

Or even any other way how terrorists can be eliminated better way in current existing conditions?

Obviously nobody wants to kill any good people here, and it's obvious that this statement being used to accuse RU, to pose it like they're doing it on purpose. Psychological stuff.

What its good people? And who want kill who? Only bad people want kill another bad people?

Can you suggest any other way how to make civilians go away from terrorist's area, so they would't get harm?

Or even any other way how terrorists can be eliminated better way in current existing conditions?

Obviously nobody wants to kill any good people here, and it's obvious that this statement being used to accuse RU, to pose it like they're doing it on purpose. Psychological stuff.

An easy and quick way is to stop the bombing immediately. It is Russia who is doing the bombing. And these are the bombs that are killing the civilians. Right?

And how exactly that would help eliminate terrorists in this region?

Give one of lider group terrorist hero award and promise part of region.

And give big amount money evry year.

So this is group of terrorist be "big guys" in region and clean it or report it be cleaned.

Can you suggest any other way how to make civilians go away from terrorist's area, so they would't get harm?

Or even any other way how terrorists can be eliminated better way in current existing conditions?

Obviously nobody wants to kill any good people here, and it's obvious that this statement being used to accuse RU, to pose it like they're doing it on purpose. Psychological stuff.

An easy and quick way is to stop the bombing immediately. It is Russia who is doing the bombing. And these are the bombs that are killing the civilians. Right?

So stop the bombing and give the terrorists free play?

We all know the US created ISIS, but that doesn't mean they still have to protect them.

Russia is supporting Assad, and there is nothing against that, since it is Assad's country and not any business of the west to decide to remove him.

I never said that. But the bombing of innocent civilians is for sure a crime against humanity. There are other ways to stop ISIS. And as we all know, Russia isn't just bombing ISIS. They are bombing the rebels against Assad who are ALSO fighting ISIS. So Russia is making things worse, not better. Unless of course you are Assad. Then you are happy with what they are doing.

Please stick to the topic. Plenty of sites out there for conspiracy theories. Ours is not one.

Can you suggest any other way how to make civilians go away from terrorist's area, so they would't get harm?

Or even any other way how terrorists can be eliminated better way in current existing conditions?

Obviously nobody wants to kill any good people here, and it's obvious that this statement being used to accuse RU, to pose it like they're doing it on purpose. Psychological stuff.

An easy and quick way is to stop the bombing immediately. It is Russia who is doing the bombing. And these are the bombs that are killing the civilians. Right?

So stop the bombing and give the terrorists free play?

We all know the US created ISIS, but that doesn't mean they still have to protect them.

Russia is supporting Assad, and there is nothing against that, since it is Assad's country and not any business of the west to decide to remove him.

I never said that. But the bombing of innocent civilians is for sure a crime against humanity. There are other ways to stop ISIS. And as we all know, Russia isn't just bombing ISIS. They are bombing the rebels against Assad who are ALSO fighting ISIS. So Russia is making things worse, not better. Unless of course you are Assad. Then you are happy with what they are doing.

As I said in the post you replied to, it is Assad's country, and his decision how he solves issues inside his country, nothing the west ( read US ) has to do with it.