The attack on Syria

[GinandTonic]

If only they had got the days of the week right it would be more plausible.

Note to self - When lying, make sure to get the most basic facts are right, especially before releasing stooges taped testimony.

Really, the Russian secret services are supposed to be better than this.

* Im not angry, just disappointed teacher face *

 

[red_elk]

Ok, first reaction from two people is quite the same, emotional denial.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Ok, first reaction from two people is quite the same, emotional denial.

Please point out the "emotional denial"? All I pointed out was that outside of Russia the Russian MoD is not considered a reliable source, which is just a bald statement of fact. I have no opinion on what they actually said, myself, but surely even you recognize that it is true that they have no credibility outside of Russia. You might not like it, but it is true.

 

[red_elk]

I have no opinion on what they actually said, myself, but surely even you recognize that it is true that they have no credibility outside of Russia. You might not like it, but it is true.

You should be more specific about the terms "credibility" and "outside of Russia".
If by outside of Russia you mean USA and Britain, sure, Russian MoD has about as much credibility there as US official statements in Russia.
If you meant BRICS or SCO countries, it's quite another matter.

 

[GinandTonic]

Days of the week?

 

[red_elk]

The OPCW experts are already in Douma. Let's see what they find.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

You should be more specific about the terms "credibility" and "outside of Russia".
If by outside of Russia you mean USA and Britain, sure, Russian MoD has about as much credibility there as US official statements in Russia.
If you meant BRICS or SCO countries, it's quite another matter.

I'd guess that Russian MoD has about as much credibility in, say, India, as US official statements do now, in the era of Trump...ie, very little. Any nation with state run media that can be counted on to swallow anything without question is not going to be treated as a highly reliable source by outside observers.

 

[red_elk]

I'd guess that Russian MoD has about as much credibility in, say, India, as US official statements do now, in the era of Trump...ie, very little.

I'm not sure how we can objectively measure such thing as credibility, but neither India nor China shared Western position in regards to recent Douma events. Both urged to wait for investigation results and didn't blame Syria or Russia. India didn't vote in UNSC, but China supported both Russian draft resolutions and abstained on American one.

 

[innonimatu]

Everyone thought that "the west" should stay out of it, because nothing good came out of the last attempts to get involved. So that is what happened, which led to an endless slaughter between the government and the rebels, putting both at the brink of annihilation, which made it easy for ISIS to waltz in and take over a lot of ground.

This is absolutely and totally false. "the west" is very much involved with fomenting and maintaining the war in Syria. Those anti-tank missiles that prevented the government from quickly winning it are US-made and were recently transfered to Saudi Arabia. The weapons initially used have been traced back to Libya and transfered through Turkey and Jordan. The hands of "the west" are very much over these things. And this without even getting into the thousands of "western" troops operating illegally there. And let's call "the west" by its names: the US, France and the UK. Turkey is also directly involved and was part of the initial effort, but seems to be playing its own game now.

 

[inthesomeday]

Here we go gents

Trump: US launches strikes on Syria https://www.cnn.com/2018/04/13/politics/trump-us-syria/index.html

 

[innonimatu]

The really disheartening bit is still that it is eerily similar to the build up to other wars in history. (Syria, some eerie parallels to Spain in the 1930's...)

Syria is the lesser stake in all that. The real question comes when and how democracy and rule-based international politics might be actively defended, including military means?

What international rule allows for giving weapons to rebels in a civil war? What international rule allows for moving troops and executing air strikes within a country without that country government's consent?

You want to establish any parallels between Syria and the Spanish Civil war? A republican government suffers a well armed rebellion against it, which quickly moves to seize a sizable portion of the country and includes military defectors. Those rebels receive massive support from some countries, in weapons and a few actual combat troops, as well as air cover.

Spain, 1930s. Franco's rebels, whose cry was "viva la muerte". Germany and Italy arming and protecting them while conducting an international campaign to isolate the legitimate government of the country.

Yes, I really do see parallels with Syria. Thanks!

 

[Lemon Merchant]

Here we go gents

Trump: US launches strikes on Syria https://www.cnn.com/2018/04/13/politics/trump-us-syria/index.html

We. Are. Screwed.

 

[innonimatu]

This can end very very badly. Hoping it's another of those limited face-saving attacks, if not...

 

[Arwon]

Hey remember when all those people on here told us Trump was a pacifist and Clinton a dangerous warmonger who wanted to start world war 3 with Russia over Syria.

You actual idiots.

 

[Ajidica]

You should be more specific about the terms "credibility" and "outside of Russia".
If by outside of Russia you mean USA and Britain, sure, Russian MoD has about as much credibility there as US official statements in Russia.
If you meant BRICS or SCO countries, it's quite another matter.

It isn't as if the various Russian ministries and intelligence services have acquitted themselves well lately. I mean, last I checked they were still trying to flog the idea the MH17 was shot down by a rogue Ukrainian warplane despite every available bit of evidence indicates it was brought down by a Buk missile launched by Ukrainian separatists. The Russian government's recent protestations that the alleged chemical weapon attack in Douma was in fact a plot by the United Kingdom is equally laughable. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof, and they provided none.

This can end very very badly. Hoping it's another of those limited face-saving attacks, if not...

Where do you think this ends? Do you think that everything will be wrapped up by Sunday and the civil war will continue to drag out, or do you think this will escalate into something more?

 

[Arwon]

 

[innonimatu]

Where do you think this ends? Do you think that everything will be wrapped up by Sunday and the civil war will continue to drag out, or do you think this will escalate into something more?

Depends on how the russians respond. On the size of the attacks too. If they're small and have been negotiated then we'll survive. There have been diplomatic calls going back and forth for the past two days, since both sides painted themselves into corners.

I believe that the russians and genuinely convinced they're being a victim of a campaign to discredit and continuously attack them. Somewhere they must make a stand and fight back. Trump is frailer, politically, than Putin: under attack in Washington from several sides he desperately needs the distraction of a war, but a short victorious war. Otherwise even if the russians do not retaliate he alienates everyone who voted for him because of being tired of wars. But Putin has been giving ground for a long time, allowing the empire to advance, carry out coups, support civil wars. He can hardly afford to lose face either, even if the declarations about retaliations were made by ambassadors only.

A deal such as strikes now and a full withdrawal of US involvement in Syria afterwards would suit both sides. But can it happen? Having been betrayed in several past deals, are the russians going to trust (they already stated the US could not be trusted) such a deal? If it escalates... it will be the end of an era. And the end of many of us also, probably. It has been a long time since I worried about that

 

[red_elk]

Hey remember when all those people on here told us Trump was a pacifist and Clinton a dangerous warmonger who wanted to start world war 3 with Russia over Syria.

You actual idiots.

Right... they both are dangerous warmongers.

I mean, last I checked they were still trying to flog the idea the MH17 was shot down by a rogue Ukrainian warplane

No, they weren't. Almaz-Antey investigation confirmed Buk version.

 

[innonimatu]

@red_elk, how do you think this is going? Any recent statements within Russia that might compel its government to action in some particular way in response to this attack on Syria?

 

[Ajidica]

No, they weren't. Almaz-Antey investigation confirmed Buk version.

So has the Russian government officially retracted their asinine theory that MH17 was brought down by a Ukrainian warplane/ it was brought down by a Buk fired by Ukrainian separatists? Unless something very significant has happened in Russia, Almaz-Antey is not the government of the Russian Federation.

'Chemical weapon stockpile'
The Ministry of Defence (MoD) said that four RAF Tornado jets were deployed to launch Storm Shadow cruise missiles at a Syrian military facility.

The former missile base was assessed to have been used by the Syrian regime to "keep chemical weapon precursors stockpiled in breach of Syria's obligations under the Chemical Weapons Convention," the MoD said in a statement.

Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson added: "The international community has responded decisively with legal and proportionate military force. Let these united actions send a clear message to the regime - the use of chemical weapons is categorically unacceptable and you will be held to account."

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-43763605

How stupid do they think we are? Either the UK knew about likely chemical weapon stockpiles and never bothered informing the United Nations Security Council or the OPCW that they had solid information indicating that the Syrian Arab Republic had maintained chemical weapon stockpiles and a good idea of where to look, or they are just launching missiles at locations they pulled out of a hat.