Putin explains who is supporting ISIL

a reply to: FlySolo

But...but....

He's da DEVIL!!!

Putin wants to protect Assad and keep the flow of resources coming in from the region. If Putin does somehow win this conflict in the region, guess who the U.S. will be fighting next for those natural resources?

a reply to: intrptr

The UN mandate and no fly was led by France, Lebanon and the UK, NOT the US.

UNSCR 1973

Russia and China both abstained.

We get that you hate the US however would it be possible for you to use facts instead of just making crap up?

originally posted by: 0bserver1
I've heard that he wants the US out of the Syrian airspace and that according to US Intel he now bombs the rebels instead of IS?

He wants the US out of the airspace to reduce the potential for America to construct another Gulf of Tonkin incident, trying to find the incident needed to get the majority of Congress to support an all out war. If America's planes aren't there, America can't claim "Russia shot at us."

a reply to: burdman30ott6

they want the US out because the US stated they would allow air assistance to Syrian rebels who come under attack. Since Putin and Assad are now labeling any group opposed to Assad as ISIS... well we see where its going.


I'm curious how long it will take for the coalition side to label all who support Assad as ISIS.

a reply to: Xcathdra

I would say he wants them out because they're doing a crap job
www.globalresearch.ca...

eta

The Islamic State is not only protected by the US and its allies, it is trained and financed by US-NATO, with the support of Israel and Washington’s Persian Gulf allies.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
I'm curious how long it will take for the coalition side to label all who support Assad as ISIS.

www.zerohedge.com...

That may all have changed now when a declassified secret US government document obtained by the public interest law firm, Judicial Watch, shows that Western governments deliberately allied with al-Qaeda and other Islamist extremist groups to topple Syrian dictator Bashir al-Assad.

The coalition side won't have to put much effort into making that label stick, IMO.

a reply to: FlySolo

Globalresearch uses false misleading and erroneous information so use as a source at your own risk.

Secondly the strikes against ISIS has killed over 8k ISIS members to date. Russian actions against ISIS are not even comparable since they are not attacking ISIS.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: FlySolo

Globalresearch uses false misleading and erroneous information so use as a source at your own risk.

...have you seen America's track record in regards to the quality of information it uses to justify military actions over the last 70 years? At least Globalresearch is an independent organization with little obvious benefit to regurgitating propaganda. The same can certainly not be said about any source which cites "US authorities say" in their reports.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Globalresearch uses false misleading and erroneous information so use as a source at your own risk.

Well, they seem to have a rather impressive bio.

Global Research Authors

Since 2001, Global Research has established an international network of authors, scholars and investigative journalists. Global Research counts among its regular contributors a number of prominent writers, researchers and academics as well as several promising young authors. The underlying concept is the “democratization” of research and media reporting, while maintaining high standards of investigation and analysis.

Many Global Research authors have developed their own blog sites. Our focus has been to acknowledge and support our authors’ blog sites, while also promoting several partner alternative media websites. In turn, Global Research articles are widely cross-posted by the independent online media.

Emphasis has been placed on establishing a comprehensive archive of Global Research articles and audio-visual material.

The Global Research archive (2001-2014) includes more than 40,000 articles and news reports. The Mondialisation.ca archive contains more than 12,000 articles in French.

More than 8000 authors have contributed to Global Research.

Since the launching of GRTV, we have developed an archive of videos, classified by theme and geographic region.

In 2008, Global Research and Professor Chossudovsky were awarded The First National Prize of the Mexican Press Club, for the “Best Research Website” at the international level.

In the course of the last few years, several Global Research authors have received awards for their writings.

www.globalresearch.ca...

Based out of Montreal and having multiple radio shows much like our beloved CBC, and knowing they're fellow Canadian non-profit journalists, it lends to some credibility us Canucks have come to depend on in regards to Canadian journalism. Is there anything specific which would warrant speculation?

originally posted by: burdman30ott6

originally posted by: 0bserver1
I've heard that he wants the US out of the Syrian airspace and that according to US Intel he now bombs the rebels instead of IS?

He wants the US out of the airspace to reduce the potential for America to construct another Gulf of Tonkin incident, trying to find the incident needed to get the majority of Congress to support an all out war. If America's planes aren't there, America can't claim "Russia shot at us."

I dunno about that.

Between all the US airspace violations made by Russian aircraft over the past seven years.

Just might be something Putin doesn't want the US to see.

IMO

a reply to: burdman30ott6

no really its not.

a reply to: FlySolo

7 years of liberalism at the helm has brought us to this point. Yes it could be argued even before, but the majority is obama's fault on this.

a reply to: burdman30ott6

The photo shows that the good guys one minute are the bad guys the next. Nobody can keep up with it anymore.
Whatever suits the U.S. at the moment.

a reply to: FlySolo

One can make the same argument using the CIA website.

Globalresearch is not as independent as one would expect and often times they have an agenda instead of presenting complete and factual information.

Research the background of some of their contributors.

As I stated they have been known to use misleading / erroneous information and to use at your own risk.


Rationalwiki - GlobalResearch

Despite presenting itself as a source of scholarly analysis, Global Research mostly consists of polemicists, many of whom accept (and use) conspiracy theories, pseudoscience and propaganda. The prevalent conspiracist strand relates to global power-elites (primarily governments and corporations) and their New World Order.[4] Specific featured conspiracy theories include those addressing 9/11,[5] vaccines,[6] genetic modification,[7] Zionism,[8][9] HAARP,[10] global warming denialism,[11][12] Bosnian genocide denialism[13] chemtrails,[14] and David Kelly.[15]

Globalresearch contributors are happy to source information from anyone who seems vaguely aligned with their ideology; during the 2011 Libyan civil war the site was an apologist for Muammar al-Gaddafi,[16] reproducing his propaganda and painting him as a paragon of a modern leader. In the 2014 Ukrainian crisis the site is taking the standard "anti-globalisation" stance against the Western side and falling into the ranks of imperial Russian propaganda instead.

Globalresearch also has published numerous articles written by contributors to New Eastern Outlook, a Moscow-based Russian Government propaganda site. It has published the same articles on the same day as Oriental Review, a Moscow-based site that is also almost certainly a Russian Government site.

It's no surprise then that the site has long become a magnet for radicals, fringe figures and whacko elements from the left in general.

If you are interested take some time and research the contributors to GlobalResearch's site, specifically in the area of global politics.


My personal favorite right from Globalresearch website - Can be found under the "about" section -

Since 2004, Global Research has provided detailed analysis and coverage of US-NATO-Israel preparations to wage a pre-emptive nuclear attack on Iran. Starting in 2011, GR has developed dossiers on the US-NATO led wars on Libya and Syria, the Arab Protest movement, the environmental impacts of the Fukushima disaster, the ongoing crisis in Ukraine, the Saudi-US led war on Yemen, the militarization of the African continent, the development of the police state in North America and Western Europe, the devastating impacts of biotechnology among other important topics.

US-NATO-Israeli Pre-emptive nuclear strike on Iran?
NATO preemptive nuclear strike on Iran?
US-NATO led wars on Libya? France/Lebanon/UK introduced and pushed for action on Libya. NATO was not involved in the manner being implied.
US-NATO led war on Syria? again no NATO involvement.
Saudi-US led war in Yemen? No US forces are involved in hostilities and Saudi Arabia is not the only gulf nation involved.
Police state in N. America and western Europe?

Professor Michel Chossudovsky- Founder of globalresearch

Centre for Research on Globalization[edit]

In 2001, Chossudovsky founded the Centre for Research on Globalization, becoming its editor and director. Located in Montreal, Canada, it describes itself as an "independent research and media organization" that provides "analysis on issues which are barely covered by the mainstream media".[10] It maintains websites in several languages, including the English-language GlobalResearch.ca, which are critical of United States foreign policy and NATO as well as the official explanation of the September 11 attacks in 2001 and the war on terror. In a January 2012 article, he characterized the Free Syrian Army as "a de facto paramilitary creation of NATO."[11] Syrian president Bashar al-Assad e-mailed his father-in-law, Fawaz Akhras, to inquire how true Chossudovsky's claims were.[12] Chossudovsky claimed that deaths of protesters during the Euromaidan demonstrations in Ukraine were "triggered by Neo-Nazi elements", used "to break the legitimacy of a duly elected government."[13]

yup.. no agenda there...

Like I said.. use at your own risk.

But French Defense Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian told lawmakers in Paris: "Curiously, they didn't hit Islamic State. I will let you draw a certain number of conclusions yourselves."

apnews.myway.com...

Oh yeah Putin sure is a 'winner'.

If the Russians aren't hitting ISIL ?

Are they taking a play from Johnson during Vietnam, and just bombing empty fields ?

a reply to: neo96

Like I said before Russia and Assad are doing this nifty trick and labeling any group that doesn't support Assad as ISIS.

a reply to: FlySolo

IMHO Putin is far more clever than Goebbels was in spreading propaganda. And the propaganda is remarkably similar.
Hosts of Western anti-establishment sites fell to it like Chossudowsky, globalresearch.ca and others.
He employs over 200,000 people just to write on English language forums... sometimes eight to twelve hours a day, a dissident Russian whistleblower said who was full of it and quit.
The fifth column anyone?

Putin is still a dictator regadless of what He says.However He is telling the truth about this crap going on in Syria.

He is not a crazy out of control guy like Hitler.However Putin is still helping Assad and making Assad more powerful and will help Iran.So no one wins in this situation.Madmen playing war games and money and power and Obama policies have been terrible over seas.
Putin and Assad pretending to attack ISIS.

a reply to: grandmakdw

Great input in this thread.

Glad ats still has some sanity and honesty left in it

Putin, love him or hate him, he's legit, and has balls like no other leader.