Putin Orders Massive Strike Against Saudi Arabia If West Attacks Syria.....

This message is hidden because Gimmesometruth is on your ignore list.

German guy said:

"Obama derangement syndrome".

Click to expand...

Barack Hussein Osama's no home boi of mine

Do you honestly think if the excrement hit the fan in the middle east the Barry n Kerry show be up to the task? Dude Seriously!

August 28, 2013
Putin’s Silence on Syria Signals Resignation on Attack
By STEVEN LEE MYERS
MOSCOW — Russia has made its opposition to military intervention in Syria vehemently clear. The foreign minister, Sergey V. Lavrov, warns daily about the risk of an escalating conflagration. A deputy prime minister said the West dealt with the Islamic world like “a monkey with a grenade.” A few commentators on the fringe have warned of World War III.

The one voice that has remained silent, though, is the one that matters most.

President Vladimir V. Putin has conspicuously avoided public comment on reports of a chemical weapons attack on civilians outside of Damascus, the Syrian capital, on Aug. 21, which killed hundreds of people. Instead he has carried on, like many ordinary Russians, as if the civil war in Syria had not reached an ominous new phase. In the days after the attack, Mr. Putin attended a ceremony for the restoration of a fountain made famous in World War II, visited a breakaway province of neighboring Georgia and toured a mine and dam in Siberia.

There is no doubt about Mr. Putin’s opposition to retaliatory strikes. Nor about his support of the government of President Bashar al-Assad in a conflict Mr. Assad has repeatedly described as a war against Islamic extremism.

Mr. Putin’s public reticence, though, reflects a calculation that Russia can do little to stop a military intervention if the United States and other countries move ahead without the authorization of the United Nations Security Council – and that he has little to lose at home, at least, if they do.

Mr. Lavrov, in expansive remarks to reporters this week, made it clear that Russia’s reaction to international intervention in Syria would be limited to a war of words – “We, of course, are not planning to go to war with anybody,” he said. That stance could ultimately benefit Mr. Putin.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/29/world/middleeast/putin-on-syria.html?pagewanted=print

MMC said:

Heya SN. :2wave: Actually, I was thinking the Russians might have thrown Up a blockade kinda extend the Cuban favor Right back us. Wouldn't even have to fire a shot.

Who ya likes for the Olympic Hockey. :lol: :2razz

Click to expand...

:

Click to expand...

The Canucks will take it.

P. Kersey said:

This message is hidden because Gimmesometruth is on your ignore list.

Click to expand...

"Where are my smelling salts?!?"

AngryOldGuy said:

Barack Hussein Osama's no home boi of mine

Do you honestly think if the excrement hit the fan in the middle east the Barry n Kerry show be up to the task? Dude Seriously!

Click to expand...

If "the excrement hit the fan", neither Obama nor an American President would make much difference, but they'd both do more or less the same by listening to their advisors. Only difference is the rhetoric ... Republicans want to please the gorilla-level electors at home who are easily impressed by grandstanding and stuffed-out trousers and who think that anything short of bombing towelheads in masses is "appeasement", while Democrats want to rhetorically impress the latte-sipping enlightened intellectuals, peaceniks and college-kids by evoking the impression that they at least try to talk with the bad guys first. In the end, they'll do the same.

Or so is my disillusioned impression after 5 years of Obama.

P. Kersey said:

This message is hidden because Gimmesometruth is on your ignore list.

Click to expand...

Thas alright I can use the space. :lamo


Russia warns of Mideast suffering if U.S. strikes Syria

As U.S. ships and British warplanes neared the shores of its last remaining ally in the Middle East, Russia warned again Tuesday that any military intervention in Syria would have "catastrophic consequences" for the region.

Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman Alexander Lukashevich said that launching a military strike without seeking approval from the United Nations Security Council would cause "new suffering and catastrophic consequences for other countries of the Middle East and North Africa," according to the Russian TV station RT.

Russia has vowed to veto any Security Council attempts to approve a military attack on Syria, and it is arming Syria as well, which is why the United States is considering a unilateral attack with the help of the United Kingdom and other nations.

"The Russians are extremely mad and there's sort of pre-war frenzy in Moscow," Cohen said. "I think in reality their options are limited but dangerous."

While the Russians are unlikely to oppose U.S. forces in the fields, Cohen listed other things they can do:

- The Russians could also send Assad their supersonic P800 long-range anti-ship missile, which is capable of sinking NATO ships with a single strike. U.S. officials reported that Israel attempted to destroy such missiles in Latakia during a July 5 air strike, though it was unclear if the strike was successful, according to the Guardian newspaper.

- The Russians could expand sales to Iran of weapons and nuclear technology that has both nuclear and civilian functions. Iran's nuclear program is considered a threat by Iran's rivals Israel and Gulf Arab states.

- Russian could pursue plans to deploy a large permanent naval task force and expand its number of bases in the Mediterranean.

Russia warns of Mideast suffering if U.S. strikes Syria

Sure hope Lukashevich isn't Right.

German guy said:

In the end, they'll do the same

Click to expand...

The situation wouldn't look like is does today if a real Conservative ahd been in office these last five years, you don't have to believe that but it a fact. So as the de facto leader of the EU what would your countries' position be when the shooting started? Prolly kick back like the ChiComs and laugh all the to the Deutsche Bundesbank?

German guy said:

If "the excrement hit the fan", neither Obama nor an American President would make much difference, but they'd both do more or less the same by listening to their advisors. Only difference is the rhetoric ... Republicans want to please the gorilla-level electors at home who are easily impressed by grandstanding and stuffed-out trousers and who think that anything short of bombing towelheads in masses is "appeasement", while Democrats want to rhetorically impress the latte-sipping enlightened intellectuals, peaceniks and college-kids by evoking the impression that they at least try to talk with the bad guys first. In the end, they'll do the same.

Or so is my disillusioned impression after 5 years of Obama.

Click to expand...

Yeah, well its split on both sides. Neo Cons want to go in. So do neo Libs. Palin and Tea partists say stay out. But now Kucinich has spoken out too.

Kucinich: Syria strike would turn US into 'al Qaeda's air force'

Airstrikes on Syria would turn the U.S. military into “al Qaeda's air force,” former Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) told The Hill.

The outspoken anti-war activist said any such action would plunge the United States into another war in the Middle East and embolden Islamist militants fighting Bashar Assad's regime.

“So what, we're about to become Al Qaeda's air force now?” Kucinich said. “This is a very, very serious matter that has broad implications internationally. And to try to minimize it by saying we're just going to have a 'targeted strike' — that's an act of war. It's not anything to be trifled with.”

The comments echo warnings from Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), who voted against legislation to arm the Syrian rebels earlier this year by saying such a move would boost al Qaeda.

“This is being used as a pretext,” he said. “The verdict is in before the facts have been gathered. What does that tell you?”

Read more: Kucinich: Syria strike would turn US into 'al Qaeda's air force' - The Hill's Global Affairs
Follow us: @thehill on Twitter | TheHill on Facebook

MMC said:

The Russians are extremely mad and there's sort of pre-war frenzy in Moscow

Click to expand...

I suppose being a non-player on the world's stage for so long now has bummed them out but what's a mother Russia to do?

MMC said:

Yeah, well its split on both sides. Neo Cons want to go in. So do neo Libs. Palin and Tea partists say stay out. But now Kucinich has spoken out too.

Kucinich: Syria strike would turn US into 'al Qaeda's air force'

Airstrikes on Syria would turn the U.S. military into “al Qaeda's air force,” former Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) told The Hill.

The outspoken anti-war activist said any such action would plunge the United States into another war in the Middle East and embolden Islamist militants fighting Bashar Assad's regime.

“So what, we're about to become Al Qaeda's air force now?” Kucinich said. “This is a very, very serious matter that has broad implications internationally. And to try to minimize it by saying we're just going to have a 'targeted strike' — that's an act of war. It's not anything to be trifled with.”

The comments echo warnings from Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), who voted against legislation to arm the Syrian rebels earlier this year by saying such a move would boost al Qaeda.

“This is being used as a pretext,” he said. “The verdict is in before the facts have been gathered. What does that tell you?”

Read more: Kucinich: Syria strike would turn US into 'al Qaeda's air force' - The Hill's Global Affairs
Follow us: @thehill on Twitter | TheHill on Facebook

Click to expand...

Well, this argument would make sense if the Syrian opposition indeed mainly consists of islamists now.

I don't know what to believe. I've heard different claims in these regards, some saying that most of the fighters are indeed islamists, others pointing out that while there is indeed significant "war tourism" by islamists, the vast majority of the opposition are still just "common people".

So... *shrug*

Gimmesometruth said:

August 28, 2013
Putin’s Silence on Syria Signals Resignation on Attack
By STEVEN LEE MYERS
MOSCOW — Russia has made its opposition to military intervention in Syria vehemently clear. The foreign minister, Sergey V. Lavrov, warns daily about the risk of an escalating conflagration. A deputy prime minister said the West dealt with the Islamic world like “a monkey with a grenade.” A few commentators on the fringe have warned of World War III.

The one voice that has remained silent, though, is the one that matters most.

President Vladimir V. Putin has conspicuously avoided public comment on reports of a chemical weapons attack on civilians outside of Damascus, the Syrian capital, on Aug. 21, which killed hundreds of people. Instead he has carried on, like many ordinary Russians, as if the civil war in Syria had not reached an ominous new phase. In the days after the attack, Mr. Putin attended a ceremony for the restoration of a fountain made famous in World War II, visited a breakaway province of neighboring Georgia and toured a mine and dam in Siberia.

There is no doubt about Mr. Putin’s opposition to retaliatory strikes. Nor about his support of the government of President Bashar al-Assad in a conflict Mr. Assad has repeatedly described as a war against Islamic extremism.

Mr. Putin’s public reticence, though, reflects a calculation that Russia can do little to stop a military intervention if the United States and other countries move ahead without the authorization of the United Nations Security Council – and that he has little to lose at home, at least, if they do.

Mr. Lavrov, in expansive remarks to reporters this week, made it clear that Russia’s reaction to international intervention in Syria would be limited to a war of words – “We, of course, are not planning to go to war with anybody,” he said. That stance could ultimately benefit Mr. Putin.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/29/world/middleeast/putin-on-syria.html?pagewanted=print

Click to expand...

Achem..

shrubnose said:

The Canucks will take it.

Click to expand...

I'm going with the US. since we wont draft any of our hockey players. :lamo

Looks like the Analysts are saying Syrian Retaliation is not an Empty threat.

Syria retaliation threat not empty words, analysts say

Syria's Assad regime and its Iran-backed allies have pledged to retaliate against any U.S. attack, and analysts say weapons and terror networks at their disposal mean the threats should be taken seriously.

"Iran is a huge threat," said Ariel Cohen, a senior research fellow at the Heritage Foundation who specializes in Russia and Central Asia.

Both Iran and Syria have threatened to retaliate against Israel and other U.S. allies in the Middle East in the event of a U.S. attack on Syria over its alleged use of chemical weapons against civilians. Hundreds of Syrians in a region held by rebels were reported killed in the Aug. 21 attack.

If Iran decides to retaliate against U.S. allies to protect Assad it could go after not only Israel but the Arab states allied with the U.S. such as Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Jordan.

Iran could order Hezbollah and its Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps to use their networks around the world to target several countries that support the military strike. Hezbollah has killed hundreds of civilians, including Americans, and it depends on Syria as a transit for weapons and occasional safe haven.

Iran could also try to close the Straits of Hormuz, the narrow Persian Gulf passage for about 20% of the world's petroleum supply, Cohen says.

"When we keep an eye on Syria we need to keep an eye on the security of shipping, especially the shipping of oil in the straits," Cohen says.....snip~

Syria retaliation threat not empty words, analysts say

German guy said:

Well, this argument would make sense if the Syrian opposition indeed mainly consists of islamists now.

I don't know what to believe. I've heard different claims in these regards, some saying that most of the fighters are indeed islamists, others pointing out that while there is indeed significant "war tourism" by islamists, the vast majority of the opposition are still just "common people".

So... *shrug*

Click to expand...

Heya German Guy. :2wave: The Syrian Rebels are backed by the MB and the Salfists. Then there is AQ. Then there is Al Nusra and then there is the Islamic Kurds. That we know of. We do know that 29 Opposition groups and civilian committees are backing al Nusra. Who has come out and stated they do not Recogonize the FSA and Idris and the TNC. That there will be no democracy. That Syria will be under Sharia law.

Which is why I said Obama should wait. Let Syria divide up into its 3 regions and see who rises to the top. Then we will know who is backing who and who is where.

This is the same coalition formed over the Amash amendment, NSA and the traitor in Russia.

If this is true as reported, the Saudis have lost their ****ing minds. Who the hell did he think he was talking to?

CanadaJohn said:

Does anyone doubt that this whole state of affairs is a ruse to sanction the destruction of the Iranian nuclear program either by the Israelis or the Americans? Iran is playing directly into the hands of those who oppose it by claiming they will attack Israel if any action is taken against Syria - it would not surprise me in the least if a preemptive strike against Iran and its nuclear facilities by both Israel and America took place even before any serious action in Syria.

Click to expand...

The US has been working on the bunker busters like crazy for some time.

CanadaJohn said:

Does anyone doubt that this whole state of affairs is a ruse to sanction the destruction of the Iranian nuclear program either by the Israelis or the Americans? Iran is playing directly into the hands of those who oppose it by claiming they will attack Israel if any action is taken against Syria - it would not surprise me in the least if a preemptive strike against Iran and its nuclear facilities by both Israel and America took place even before any serious action in Syria.

Click to expand...

Meanwhile . . .

Iran has significantly expanded its uranium enrichment capacity at one nuclear plant, installing around 1,000 advanced centrifuges that are set to undergo testing, a new U.N. watchdog report says.

The International Atomic Energy Agency's quarterly report also says Iran has started making fuel assemblies for a nuclear reactor that Western powers fear could yield bomb material, according to Reuters.

The confidential report was released Wednesday to the agency's 35 board member nations and the U.N. Security Council. It said Iran had installed about 300 more of its advanced centrifuges since the last report in May, for a total of 1,008, and had put all of them under vacuum.

Such a move is normally one of the last steps before the machines start spinning uranium gas into the material that can be used either as reactor fuel or as the core of nuclear warheads, depending on its enrichment level.


Read more: Iran significantly expands uranium enrichment capacity at nuclear plant, UN watchdog says | Fox News

Click to expand...

MaggieD said:

Meanwhile . . .

Click to expand...

On tv, some expert said that a Western attack on Syria would probably make a peaceful solution of the Iran nuclear business much more difficult, if not impossible. Their new moderate president had been sending signals in the past weeks that he'd seek cooperation with the West, but in case of such an attack on Syria, it would be impossible for him to get anything through against the people's opposition and the mullahs. He'd immediately branded as "appeaser" or pro-American by them.

German guy said:

On tv, some expert said that a Western attack on Syria would probably make a peaceful solution of the Iran nuclear business much more difficult, if not impossible. Their new moderate president had been sending signals in the past weeks that he'd seek cooperation with the West, but in case of such an attack on Syria, it would be impossible for him to get anything through against the people's opposition and the mullahs. He'd immediately branded as "appeaser" or pro-American by them.

Click to expand...

Here is when Al Nusra pledged to AQ.

Syrian rebels pledge loyalty to al-Qaeda

A Syrian rebel group's April pledge of allegiance to al-Qaeda's replacement for Osama bin Laden suggests that the terrorist group's influence is not waning and that it may take a greater role in the Western-backed fight to topple Syrian President Bashar Assad.

The pledge of allegiance by Syrian Jabhat al Nusra Front chief Abou Mohamad al-Joulani to al-Qaeda leader Sheik Ayman al-Zawahri was coupled with an announcement by the al-Qaeda affiliate in Iraq, the Islamic State of Iraq, that it would work with al Nusra as well.

Lebanese Sheik Omar Bakri, a Salafist who says states must be governed by Muslim religious law, says al-Qaeda has assisted al Nusra for some time.

"They provided them early on with technical, military and financial support , especially when it came to setting up networks of foreign jihadis who were brought into Syria," Bakri says. "There will certainly be greater coordination between the two groups."

The United States, which supports the overthrow of Assad, designated al Nusra a terrorist entity in December. The Obama administration has said it wants to support only those insurgent groups that are not terrorist organizations......snip~


Syrian rebels pledge loyalty to al-Qaeda

AngryOldGuy said:

The situation wouldn't look like is does today if a real Conservative ahd been in office these last five years, you don't have to believe that but it a fact. So as the de facto leader of the EU what would your countries' position be when the shooting started? Prolly kick back like the ChiComs and laugh all the to the Deutsche Bundesbank?

Click to expand...

I'd even go this far...The situation wouldn't look like it does today if a real American PATRIOT had been in office these last 5 years....

P. Kersey said:

I'd even go this far...The situation wouldn't look like it does today if a real American PATRIOT had been in office these last 5 years....

Click to expand...

anyone in particular?

Unitedwestand13 said:

anyone in particular?

Click to expand...

Hitler?

Sorry, this godwinning was too quick.

It is an odd series of blogs and op-eds with no real source cited. To think Saudi Arabia would think to threaten with terrorists , that A) they can't control in general and B) the chechens in particular C) use the world stage of the Olympics as the blood bath site.

That the USSR would attack the key OPEC member in the Middle East and set the entire world firmly against them is absurd. I figure there is a rather self important set of 'analysts' in such places like the Heritage Institute that want to sound the clarion call for more military and bigger DoD budgets. (and did some acid)

Then without skipping a beat the 'threat' turns to the Middle East 'abandoning' USofA support for huge Russian arms sales. (did love the hint the Russia military equipment would somehow be superior to ours when the big Con outrage with Afghanistan buying Russian helicopters turns out it was because the Russian machines were far cheaper and simpler than the USofA aircraft.) That for some rather ignorant reason the Saudis would give the store away to the Russians in exchange for Ivan not interfering with the ouster of Assad.

Arms sales of weapons that are much cheaper and simpler to maintain. Not for fighting Western nations but for keeping 'brother' nations at bay. Certainly not for attacking Israel.

The title to this thread say Putin has made a statement- I have seen no such quote, just blogger 'sources'. Putin isn't shy, he isn't afraid to speak for himself on the world stage. Difficult to believe he would be so 'enraged' to threaten 'massive' strikes and not comment publicly.

In many ways it seems our analysts are trying to fit Putin into Saddam Hussien's shoes. High rhetoric that carries little strength.

Now on our 'friends' in the region and President Obama... nations are never friends but rivals who have a temporary common interest.

Unitedwestand13 said:

anyone in particular?

Click to expand...

Nope. I've been around long enough to know all politicians are liars.I've seen them all from LBJ on....but at least most respect and share the values, culture and heritage of this country.
I despise obama..I make up for that by having despised bush also.