• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

BREAKING: Dramatic Escalation in Syria

R

robinfred

Banned
Joined
Oct 29, 2016
Messages
17
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
breaking_syria.png


According to trusted military sources of Inside Syria Media Center source in Syria, after the U.S. Tomahawk strikes on the Shayrat air base on April 7, the Russian side has taken measures to guarantee more security for its military in case the attack is repeated.

Sources have also claimed that two Russian all-purpose jets capable of spotting and intercepting cruise missiles are barraging in the Eastern Mediterranean.

If any attacks on the objects, where the Russian military are located (including the Hmeimim and Tartus bases), take place, the Russians are likely to carry out retaliatory strikes on the ships that launch cruise missiles.

As our source states, Russian military advisors have arrived in the Syrian AA defense system facilities to assist in tackling cruise missiles strikes.
 
Last edited:
You reap what you sow. Personally I think we ought to pull out and let the Russians handle this mess. No American life is worth going to war in Syria or anywhere else in the Middle East for that matter.
 
The Russians won't attack the US over Syria lol. Literally would gain them nothing.
 
Is there any actual reliable sources to your story? Nothing I find reported on it in a brief check, and some of it is just laughable. 2 jets? What exactly is that supposed to do?
 
Higgins86 said:
The Russians won't attack the US over Syria lol. Literally would gain them nothing.
Click to expand...

The U.S. gains nothing in Syria. In fact U.S. actions in Syria are negative value. Russia has a definite strategic interest in Syria while the U.S. does not. Furthermore the U.S. is siding with ISIS/AL-QAEDA/TERRORISTS by trying to overthrow Assad.
 
Higgins86 said:
The Russians won't attack the US over Syria lol. Literally would gain them nothing.
Click to expand...

That's funny since that is what trump told obama about attackong syria yet here we are anyway with the hypocrite in chief.
 
I predicted days ago that Putin would order Assad to knock it off, and in return would put in more ground troops, which he really does not want to do BTW but it is his best option....... Assads military grows weaker by the week..
 
robinfred said:
breaking_syria.png


According to trusted military sources of Inside Syria Media Center source in Syria, after the U.S. Tomahawk strikes on the Shayrat air base on April 7, the Russian side has taken measures to guarantee more security for its military in case the attack is repeated.

Sources have also claimed that two Russian all-purpose jets capable of spotting and intercepting cruise missiles are barraging in the Eastern Mediterranean.

If any attacks on the objects, where the Russian military are located (including the Hmeimim and Tartus bases), take place, the Russians are likely to carry out retaliatory strikes on the ships that launch cruise missiles.

As our source states, Russian military advisors have arrived in the Syrian AA defense system facilities to assist in tackling cruise missiles strikes.
Click to expand...

Then why did the Russians not use their S400 missile system to take out the Tomahawks?
And Russia will not attack US assets. Same applies to US not attacking Russian assets.
 
robinfred said:
breaking_syria.png


According to trusted military sources of Inside Syria Media Center source in Syria, after the U.S. Tomahawk strikes on the Shayrat air base on April 7, the Russian side has taken measures to guarantee more security for its military in case the attack is repeated.

Sources have also claimed that two Russian all-purpose jets capable of spotting and intercepting cruise missiles are barraging in the Eastern Mediterranean.

If any attacks on the objects, where the Russian military are located (including the Hmeimim and Tartus bases), take place, the Russians are likely to carry out retaliatory strikes on the ships that launch cruise missiles.

As our source states, Russian military advisors have arrived in the Syrian AA defense system facilities to assist in tackling cruise missiles strikes.
Click to expand...

Whoever wrote this has a tenuous grasp on English.
 
Praxas said:
That's funny since that is what trump told obama about attackong syria yet here we are anyway with the hypocrite in chief.
Click to expand...

This whole sad episodes wag the dog. It was Trump trying to pretend he could be a contender in the Big Penis contest and he came up way short.
 
JANFU said:
Then why did the Russians not use their S400 missile system to take out the Tomahawks?
And Russia will not attack US assets. Same applies to US not attacking Russian assets.
Click to expand...

I suspect that, historically speaking, predictions about how an adversary would behave immediately preceding the instigation of a failed military action were ultimately inaccurate.
 
robinfred said:
breaking_syria.png


According to trusted military sources of Inside Syria Media Center source in Syria, after the U.S. Tomahawk strikes on the Shayrat air base on April 7, the Russian side has taken measures to guarantee more security for its military in case the attack is repeated.

Sources have also claimed that two Russian all-purpose jets capable of spotting and intercepting cruise missiles are barraging in the Eastern Mediterranean.

If any attacks on the objects, where the Russian military are located (including the Hmeimim and Tartus bases), take place, the Russians are likely to carry out retaliatory strikes on the ships that launch cruise missiles.

As our source states, Russian military advisors have arrived in the Syrian AA defense system facilities to assist in tackling cruise missiles strikes.
Click to expand...

This looks very fake to me.
 
Cardinal said:
I suspect that, historically speaking, predictions about how an adversary would behave immediately preceding the instigation of a failed military action were ultimately inaccurate.
Click to expand...
True, but we have seen this before, during the cold war and the proxy wars supported by the USSR-US
 
JANFU said:
Then why did the Russians not use their S400 missile system to take out the Tomahawks?
And Russia will not attack US assets. Same applies to US not attacking Russian assets.
Click to expand...

46 Tomahawk missiles would have depleted the S300 or 400 missiles and I expect the 400 missiles cost more than the Tomahawk. The value of the items hit are low enough that countering was not worth it.

That and if the missiles did not achieve a high hit rate it would be an embarrassing failure
 
PoS said:
You reap what you sow. Personally I think we ought to pull out and let the Russians handle this mess. No American life is worth going to war in Syria or anywhere else in the Middle East for that matter.
Click to expand...

The Russians are part of the problem. Relying on the Russians would be like relying on ISIS or Al Qaeda.

Hilarious how liberals wanted to retaliate against Putin over them hacking the DNC but aren't willing to do anything meaningful when they are supporting terrorism.
 
PoS said:
You reap what you sow. Personally I think we ought to pull out and let the Russians handle this mess. No American life is worth going to war in Syria or anywhere else in the Middle East for that matter.
Click to expand...

I don't know about the rest of the Middle East, but Syria is definetly a cluster**** we should stay away from. But warmongering nitwits like McCain want us to get more involved. That sad old fool probably had multiple orgasams when he heard Trump launched a Tomahawk strike.
 
Does not look like a mainstream media source. Does not look reliable. Over the top stuff here. The Russians are going to attack our ships? Give me a break.
 
LowDown said:
Does not look like a mainstream media source. Does not look reliable. Over the top stuff here. The Russians are going to attack our ships? Give me a break.
Click to expand...

Attacking a Russian ally and potentially harming or killing Russian military personnel is a very effective means of getting Kh missiles shot at our ships.
 
Bucky said:
The Russians are part of the problem. Relying on the Russians would be like relying on ISIS or Al Qaeda.

Hilarious how liberals wanted to retaliate against Putin over them hacking the DNC but aren't willing to do anything meaningful when they are supporting terrorism.
Click to expand...

You mean the liberals in posts 5, 10 and 17 in this thread who have supported trump on every issue until this action, as well as other cons/libertarians across the board who are opposed to trump on this action ?
 
Roadvirus said:
I don't know about the rest of the Middle East, but Syria is definetly a cluster**** we should stay away from. But warmongering nitwits like McCain want us to get more involved. That sad old fool probably had multiple orgasams when he heard Trump launched a Tomahawk strike.
Click to expand...

Is Rubio a nitwit also?

GOP lawmakers are much more supportive of trump in Syria than they were of Obama in Syria 4 years ago .
 
NIMBY said:
Is Rubio a nitwit also?

GOP lawmakers are much more supportive of trump in Syria than they were of Obama in Syria 4 years ago .
Click to expand...

Obama wanted to go into Syria in order to help install ISIS with his Muslim brothers. Trump has no intention of installing ISIS.

And yes, Rubio is definitely a nitwit.
 
reinoe said:
Obama wanted to go into Syria in order to help install ISIS with his Muslim brothers. Trump has no intention of installing ISIS.

And yes, Rubio is definitely a nitwit.
Click to expand...

Why didn't Obama go into Syria then, by your theory?

You can't possibly believe that Obama wanted to help install ISIL with his Muslim brothers.

And no, Rubio is definitely NOT a nitwit.

On a side note, Rubio is the reason trump won FL and helped McConnell keep the Senate .
 
Lord Tammerlain said:
46 Tomahawk missiles would have depleted the S300 or 400 missiles and I expect the 400 missiles cost more than the Tomahawk. The value of the items hit are low enough that countering was not worth it.

That and if the missiles did not achieve a high hit rate it would be an embarrassing failure
Click to expand...

Or they decided to do nothing, knowing the target from the US and Russia was sending a message to Assad.
 
Praxas said:
That's funny since that is what trump told obama about attackong syria yet here we are anyway with the hypocrite in chief.
Click to expand...

Sure, Trump could just say he negotiated the chemical weapons out of Syria just like Susan Rice and Obama did. I'm guessing you wouldn't believe Trump though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom