Russia invades ...

POSTED BY: SIGNYM
UPDATED: Wednesday, May 13, 2026 05:41
VIEWED: 21925
PAGE 19 of 20

PREV PAGE 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 NEXT PAGE

1KIKI

Sunday, December 27, 2015 4:10 AM

'G'

Did you know that Russian forces were already stationed in Crimea ...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Sea_Fleet
The Black Sea Fleet (Russian: ???????????? ????, Chernomorsky Flot) is a large operational-strategic command of the Russian (and formerly Soviet) Navy, operating in the Black Sea and the Mediterranean Sea since the late 18th century. Its ships are based in various harbors of the Black Sea and the Sea of Azov, while its aviation and infrastructure is based in various locations in Crimea and Krasnodar Krai.

in a force consisting of 26,000 personnel?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Russian_military_bases_abroad

SAGAN: We are releasing vast quantities of carbon dioxide, increasing the greenhouse effect. It may not take much to destabilize the Earth's climate, to convert this heaven, our only home in the cosmos, into a kind of hell.

1KIKI

Sunday, December 27, 2015 4:21 AM

The Guardian claims Assad '(has) made few meaningful gains on the ground'. This is a map from Australian news, posted 17 hours before I reposted it.

http://cdn.newsapi.com.au/image/v1/dd29d020c0263fa2ae08ee41e16be7db

SAGAN: We are releasing vast quantities of carbon dioxide, increasing the greenhouse effect. It may not take much to destabilize the Earth's climate, to convert this heaven, our only home in the cosmos, into a kind of hell.

1KIKI

Sunday, December 27, 2015 5:58 AM

Well, apparently when I go away to real-world land some whoppers posted by 'G' go unaddressed. So, better late than never ...

The discussion was about the FACT that the CIA had secretly, with secret funding, and without congressional approval, started operations in Syria to fund, arm, and train ISIS and its affiliates, in order to get rid of Assad. The FACT that the CIA was on Syrian soil, supporting military operations, against the Syrian government, without asking and without permission, makes the US an aggressor nation.
That FACT was uncovered when Russia started bombing CIA camps in Syria. And the US had to admit that indeed, they were there.
And my point was that the MSM, in its wisdom, chose to not report the CIA's actions that contravened international laws until that FACT could no longer be ignored (thanks to Russia).
In reply 'G' posted some links. So as not to confuse anyone, especially 'G', I've addressed them in order.
http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/congress-debates-arming-moderate-syrian-reb
els-fight-isis
This one talks about the congressional debate about funding rebels, but nothing about the CIA at all.
http://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2014/04/23/306233248/cia-is-quie
tly-ramping-up-aid-to-syrian-rebels-sources-say
This one talks about a CIA program in Jordan, but ... not about the one in Syria.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/nov/17/isis-war-cia-armi
ng-rebels-syria
This one talks about the CIA 'arming' rebels - but nothing about their presence on Syrian soil.
http://www.cnn.com/2014/09/11/world/meast/isis-syria-iraq/
This one talks about the CIA assessment of Syria, but nothing about its presence or actions - anywhere.
Oddly enough, the point in debate - which was the illegal, secretly funded, secret presence of the CIA IN SYRIA unreported by the MSM - was not in any of 'G's' links about that very point.
Gosh - who could have seen THAT coming?

But, the debate has moved on. The FACT that the USA could covertly do anything militarily illegal with its government-paid people in a foreign country; and the FACT that the media failed to be the watchdog it's supposed to be; is a non-issue to people like 'G' - and also, kpo and THGR.

And recently I've been discussing the role of the media with other people. You see, all along I assumed 'they' - the editors here in the US MSM - were sifting through news feeds from around the world, deciding what to bury, what to report, and how to spin whatever they decided to dole out to us. It didn't occur to me that the foreign reporters were just like our national reporters - passing along official transcripts, or carefully transcribing official speeches like stenos, or passing along official 'unofficial' gossip from 'unnamed sources' - and simply scribing them and sending them along for our consumption. And so, it didn't occur to me that global news feeds were just like US 'reporting', except, well, they came from somewhere else. It didn't occur to me that the foreign reporters were as lazy and corrupt as US reporters, and all of them as lazy and corrupt as their media bosses.

This needs some thought about what it means for the condition of our 'news'.

ETA: Maybe this belongs here. http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?bid=18&tid=57708&p=2#1
006281

SAGAN: We are releasing vast quantities of carbon dioxide, increasing the greenhouse effect. It may not take much to destabilize the Earth's climate, to convert this heaven, our only home in the cosmos, into a kind of hell.

SIGNYM

Tuesday, December 29, 2015 7:20 PM

Quote:
There is precious little news on what is happening "on the ground", although the impression that I get is that Russia is now making a serious attempt to deny Turkey and ISIL the fruits of their mutual trade (oil, antiquities, opium, weapons, and - some say- human transplant organs). The recaptured Kweires airport is now hosting Russian helicopter gunships, and Russia is (supposedly) building another airport nearer to Damascus. Although the USA may have dropped its tacit support of ISIL in Syria, ISIL by itself is still a tough fighting group, containing tens of thousands of foreigners from places as far-flung as Saudi Arabia, Tunisia, Malaysia, China (Xingjiang), Russia, Brussels, and the USA.... So fighting on the ground I think will be a tough slog, although Assad and the Russians seem to have a timetable for when it will end. = SIGNY

Do tell what that timetable is.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/dec/21/russias-airstrikes-on-syr
ia-struggle-to-spur-progress-on-the-ground
When Russia launched an air campaign to support Bashar al-Assad, it was banking on a ground force of Syrian troops to finish what its warplanes started. However, more than 12 weeks later, Syria’s army and the large numbers of Shia militias that back it have made few meaningful gains on the ground. Meanwhile, Moscow’s jets have added a new layer of carnage, reportedly killing at least 600 Syrian citizens

Uh huh

Quote:
including 70 in Idlib on Sunday. In Syria’s north and in opposition-held parts of the cities of Hama and Damascus, the destruction wrought on civilian infrastructure and population centres over the past fortnight is more intense than at any point in almost five years of war, residents of the communities and observers outside Syria say. Meanwhile, the US has claimed that a once-broad gap with Russia over how to end the war has been narrowing, with both sides last week championing a peace process that aims to defuse a conflict that has killed at least 250,000 people

Over half of which were fighting forces, so this is not civilian deaths ...

Quote:
and left Syria in ruins. On the ground in rebel areas, there is little faith in the process. “Where are these reasonable Russians that Kerry claims are starting to see the light?” said a doctor in an Idlib

Controlled by Nusra (al Qaida). I'm not expecting much objectivity from THEM!

Quote:
hospital who was treating casualties, referring to the US secretary of state, John Kerry. “Bashar’s jets never bombed us like the Russians do. Isis never hunted us down like this.”

So, the Russians ARE making progress, it seems.

Quote:
The Syrian Network for Human Rights, which chronicles attacks across the country, said mosques, bakeries, residential buildings, schools, power stations and water supplies have been repeatedly hit. It has compiled records of 570 civilians, including 152 children, killed in Russian attacks.

Needs verification.

Quote:
In Idlib, which fell to opposition groups led by jihadists including Jabhat al-Nusra last spring, civil defence workers say at least six airstrikes hit a residential neighbourhood in the heart of the city, killing at least 70 people and wounding more than 100. The attacks followed documented strikes on at least 13 hospitals and medical clinics since early October

Which the USA State Department refused to locate or identify. Sounds like 95% bullshit.

Quote:
and attacks just south of the two main border posts between Turkey and north-western Syria in December."- G

So, you're citing al Qaida now, are you? At least we know which side YOU'RE on!

I follow Russian news (well, not Russian news meant for Russians, Russian news meant for English-speaking westerners - i.e propaganda) pretty closely. Even in those sources, there is criticism of Russian involvement in Syria. Here is one such article

http://russia-insider.com/en/curb-your-enthusiasm-part-2-russia-still-
not-winning-syria/ri12018

It's always best to try to ascertain the facts, s

SIGNYM

Tuesday, December 29, 2015 10:18 PM

Quote:
Ultimately, SOMEbody needs to close the ISIL-controlled gap along the Euphrates River as it crosses from Turkey into Syria. That is still a main supply route from Turkey to ISIL in Syria. - SIGNY

Ultimately your desires don't mean squat to the people living and dying and scheming in that part of the world, so saying "this needs to happen" is pure fantasy. You speak for no one but yourself, and I can't measure how little that means in even the smallest terms. - G

Well, if SOMEbody wants to defeat ISIL, that has to happen; otherwise the Qatar/Saudi to Turkey to Syria supply line remains open.

You DO want to defeat ISIL, don't you?

Quote:
NPR and other American propaganda: Especially when reporting "advances", American press never ... and I mean never ... mentions Russia by name. I fact, you should make this a drinking game- every time the USA press mentions Russian progress, drink a shot of vodka. The only problem is, everyone would stay stone-cold sober. You would be forgiven for not knowing that Russia is doing anything at all to fight ISIL. The only time you hear about Russia (and it's few and far between) is criticism. The more progress Russia makes, the more criticism I hear. - SIGNY

Not surprisingly, you still don't understand how The Press works.- G

HAHAHAHA!
I know how "The Press" works, especially in national issues: Unlike you, I actually watch them. They sit like good little boys and girls at the WH/State/Pentagon/NATO/CIA press briefing, taking assiduous notes, and nervous that if they ask impertinent questions they'll be relegated to the back row, never chosen to ask questions, or "dis-invited" altogether. The only person that I've EVER seen giving anyone a hard time is the CNN reporter grilling whoever the State Department tosses up on the podium that day. Other than that, they're a really tame bunch.

If you really think that The Press is so freewheeling and independent, the riddle me this: How do you suppose the Saddam has WMD/ Qaddafi is killing his people hoaxes got such major play?

Quote:
Supposedly the USA has agreed to let Assad run for President, and Russia and the USA have agreed on an interim Prime Minister (a London businessman of Syrian extraction). IF TRUE, the USA would never concede such an important point unless there was no other choice. It looks like a political solution will come before ISIL, al Nusra (al Qaida) and other Islamist jihadists are defeated "on the ground". - SIGNY

Um, wrong again. Solving the Assad problem removes one major complication. Maybe you should look up the word "interim" and have a ponder on it's meaning.- G

Maybe you should have noticed that the "interim" position was the Prime Minister, NOT the President. Assad is President, and that would be the position he would run for again, if he so chooses, not "Prime Minister".

The outline of the deal is that the interim Prime Minister is to draft two Constitutions. WHEN elections are held (presumably under the new constitution) Assad would be free to run for President again, if he so chooses. This would be a complicated transition, involving a new Constitution, new rules, a new Parliament, and new elections. I don't have the details, and I have no confirmation that this has been agreed to by both Russia and the USA and, most importantly, Syria.

If the Russians are so ineffective, how come all of the sudden there are UN deals and bargaining going on, while "Assad must go" has faded from the picture?

Instead of arguing with pure information (it's information, dude, not anything else) why not just listen to it and take it in?

--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

There is a difference between THUGR is a genius., and THUGR is a "genius". And everyone knows it except THUGR, who is a "genius".

1KIKI

Tuesday, December 29, 2015 10:48 PM

"NPR and other American propaganda: Especially when reporting "advances", American press never ... and I mean never ... mentions Russia by name."

I was curious if any other countries were flying over Syria by agreement with Syria and Russia. it was a fruitless quest to get that specific information, but I DID find my way to a declassified Pentagon graphic about how many weapons were released per month.
http://www.defense.gov/Portals/1/features/2014/0814_iraq/docs/30_Novem
ber_2015.pdf
Given Russian figures regarding sorties and weapons, it looks like ALL of them are Russian. But you won't see the name Russia anywhere on that graphic. Nope. All of this is (implied to be) due to the United States Air Force Central Command Combined Air and Space Operations Center.

SAGAN: We are releasing vast quantities of carbon dioxide, increasing the greenhouse effect. It may not take much to destabilize the Earth's climate, to convert this heaven, our only home in the cosmos, into a kind of hell.

SIGNYM

Tuesday, December 29, 2015 11:10 PM

The US military actually released RUSSIAN videos of airstrikes and claimed them as their own. That's pretty cheesy!

Some of those weapons in Syria (a few) are French, who are there by the invitation of Syria and Russia.

--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

There is a difference between THUGR is a genius., and THUGR is a "genius". And everyone knows it except THUGR, who is a "genius".

1KIKI

Wednesday, December 30, 2015 2:27 AM

From whom?
Does it matter where it comes from if it's true?

They're (the media) not tame, they are bored shitless.
I'm sure you have a cite for that. Or some solid evidence. Or something other than your own - yanno - go se.

The president of the most powerful country on the planet says - during a state of the union address no less - that there are WMDs in Iraq, and you think the press ISN"T GOING TO COVER IT???
Like good little stenos, you mean? But the press in OTHER parts of the world did some digging later on and found all sorts of interesting things. For example, that the supposed yellowcake deal was a forgery. Now, why couldn't the US press do that, I wonder? Don't you?
Naw. Of course not. That would require you break free of the propaganda, which, I guarantee, you will NEVER do.

SAGAN: We are releasing vast quantities of carbon dioxide, increasing the greenhouse effect. It may not take much to destabilize the Earth's climate, to convert this heaven, our only home in the cosmos, into a kind of hell.

SIGNYM

Wednesday, December 30, 2015 7:53 PM

Quote:
You DO want to defeat ISIL, don't you?- SIGNY

You promised Russia was going to do that so I'm confident that's going to happen. Right?- G

Yep. Another way to not answer the question. It used to be called a "Yankee answer" - answering a question with another question. It seems to me that you can't even provide a clean answer to what should be a simple question, so I'll ask it again: You DO want to defeat ISIL, don't you? A simple "yes" or "no" will do. When you've managed to choke out an answer to my question, I'll answer yours.

Quote:
HAHAHAHA! I know how "The Press" works, especially in national issues: Unlike you, I actually watch them. They sit like good little boys and girls at the WH/State/Pentagon/NATO/CIA press briefing, taking assiduous notes, and nervous that if they ask impertinent questions they'll be relegated to the back row, never chosen to ask questions, or "dis-invited" altogether. The only person that I've EVER seen giving anyone a hard time is the CNN reporter grilling whoever the State Department tosses up on the podium that day. Other than that, they're a really tame bunch. - SIGNY

HAHAHAHA! You just confirmed what a dupe you are. The WH beat is not exactly coveted by senior press -

Yes, it is.

Quote:
it's dullsville. And for godssake, do you really expect any of those venues to come out say something of major value? "President Bush is going to say something about WMD, but it's crap."

You're confused. First you say that it's dull and nothing of major value ever comes out of the WH beat, then you say that the President uses these press briefings to announce items of major value, like Saddam has WMD.

Quote:
They're not tame, they are bored shitless.= G

They would be LESS "bored shitless" if THEY ASKED IMPORTANT QUESTIONS. IS that not THEIR JOB? Then why don't they do it?

Here is the State Department, outright refusing to identify WHICH "hospitals" Russia supposedly bombed. The only two reporters asking for that information are from RT and CNN.

Now, maybe those reporters have been stonewalled so often that they don't expect to get answers anymore, but that doesn't excuse them from asking questions to the point of getting REFUSALS to answer. One would think that was their job!

Quote:
If you really think that The Press is so freewheeling and independent, the riddle me this: How do you suppose the Saddam has WMD/ Qaddafi is killing his people hoaxes got such major play?= SIGNY

I am speechless at your total lack of understanding. The president of the most powerful country on the planet says - during a state of the union address no less - that there are WMDs in Iraq, and you think the press ISN"T GOING TO COVER IT???

What... wha??? Didn't you JUST POST not three paras up that the WH beat is BORING and nothing important ever comes of it?? OF COURSE they're going to cover it. But they shouldn't just take notes and then pass those on to their editor.

Quote:
You think they aren't going to turn over every rock they can to find out if it's true or not?

They should, but THEY DON'T. Here are some major failures of the mainstream press with that whole shoddy exercise in WH propaganda:

There were several major stories that the WH foisted off on the public, via the "bored" press, who should have been much, much more on top of this.

One was that Saddam had tried to purchase yellow cake (uranium oxide) from Niger as the basic starting material for nuclear bombs. As evidence, the WH came up with a signed agreement between Saddam and various officials. A simple inspection and a basic google search - really, nothing more- would have revealed that signatures were misspelled, that some officials who had "signed" the document

SIGNYM

Wednesday, December 30, 2015 8:40 PM

Enter the Chinese???

Much has been made of the Sunday passage of "anti-terror" legislation by the Chinese parliament. Western governments are most concerned with the cybersecurity aspects of the law which can affect western businesses operating in China. http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/27/asia/china-terror-law-approved/ But another aspect of the new law allows China to send forces overseas in "anti-terror" operations. Some speculate that this will allow China to send troops to Syria, as opposed to simply providing munitions to the Syrian government, or playing a humanitarian role in the Yemen war. Some sources go further than that, claiming that China has already sent troops to Syria, with comments:

Pentagon Stunned As Thousands Of Chinese Troops Enter ISIS War

Quote:
The Kremlin have announced

No such announcement has appeared in western-aimed Russian press

Quote:
that China are to send 5,000 of its most elite military forces into the Levant War Zone to help Russia in the fight against ISIS, which has left the Obama administration and the Pentagon “horrified”.

It's doubtful that ANYONE knows how the Pentagon, the CIA/State Department, or the WH really feels.

Quote:
The “Siberian Tiger” Special Forces and “Night Tiger” Special Forces Units were given authorization to be deployed by China’s People’s Congress (NPC) on Sunday, after China passed its first anti-terrorism law allowing their army to take part in anti-terror missions abroad.

There are such units as Siberian Tiger and Night Tiger Special Forces, at least, according to wiki
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People%27s_Liberation_Army_Special_Opera
tions_Forces

http://beforeitsnews.com/alternative/2015/12/pentagon-stunned-as-thous
ands-of-chinese-troops-enter-isis-war-3266740.html

--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.

There is a difference between THUGR is a genius., and THUGR is a "genius". And everyone knows it except THUGR, who is a "genius".

PREV PAGE 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 NEXT PAGE