‘US is defending ISIS’: Russia convenes UNSC meeting after US coalition strike on Syrian army

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: TheFlyOnTheWall

More ironic bs from Russia.

Really?

USA bombs Syrian troops during a cease-fire and you consider the outrage as Russian bs?

Where can I get some?

Let's force our shills to ask for new manuals from their supervisors:

[08:04] Bill Neely: Do you welcome American air strikes against ISIS?

[08:07] Bashar Al-Assad: No, because it's not legal, first of all, it's not legal.

[08:10] Bill Neely: It's not legal for Russia to do it, is it?

[08:12] Bashar Al-Assad: No, they are invited legally and formally by the Syrian government. It's the right of any government to invite any other country to help in any issue. So they are legal in Syria, while the American(s) are not legal...

Australian jets involved in US-led air strike which killed dozens of Syrian soldiers
"Australian aircraft were among a number of international aircraft taking part in this Coalition operation," the Defence Department said in a statement.
www.abc.net.au...

a reply to: JedemDasSeine

sooooooooo right....
our politicians have only an red flag in front of there eyes....
making up there mistakes by bigger mistakes....
the fools.......

the world was sold out by the jalta converance in the late 40's...
had the only done wat the generals Patton and Donitsch sugessted....

Australians will be very proud on there troops now..
just as the Dutch are after the NATO betrayal of Sebrenica....
the Dutch troops got it all over them....a reply to: all2human

originally posted by: ressiv
Australians will be very proud on there troops now..
just as the Dutch are after the NATO betrayal of Sebrenica....
the Dutch troops got it all over them....a reply to: all2human

we're far from happy about this.. but still cognitive enough to not blame our soldiers.
We feel like we've been thrown under the bus by the US honestly.

that's the sentiment i could gather a few hours ago.. looking around..

normally that event would be NR1 news item on MSM
luckly the bombs in new york degrated the event to an backside story.....
how convinient.. hihi

a reply to: Xarian6

a reply to: ressiv

On our news (Australia) is was indeed the headline "act"
Followed by the bombings..

I see what you mean though, international news that plays through the night (Al-jaz,BBC) is being very quiet about it and is focusing more on bombing and the more recent Allepo strike.. it's telling.. very telling.. and how we end up with half the world knowing what happened.. and the other half parroting the PR spin that comes hours after the event.

Just another day in paradise apparently..

becouse it were australian bombs...here in holland MSM syria was douwngraded...
a reply to: Xarian6

The strike was carried out just days before an agreement would have Russia/Syria and USA coordinate strikes via Joint Implementation Center.
The airstrike was intended to scuttle this plan and continue non-compliance with the government's of Moscow, Damascus and international law.

a reply to: Nikola014

He's always on threads related to Russia and he is always supporting the US no matter what the issue is.

You do the math.

a reply to: DigitalVigilante420

You can get the bs from Russia.

a reply to: Xcathdra

How about getting bs from you
A member who expects proof all while taking his/her own opinion and parrots it as fact.
knowingly arguing points that are false.
where the opposite is true, you have become a barometer of the truth for me and many others on this site.
Prove me wrong, as I have you.
Russia has every legal right under treaty obligation and request by the Syrian government to intervene, the same cannot be said about the
the US and co.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Operations against ISIS and Al-Nusra were exempt from the cease fire deal, and that is who Syrian forces was confronting before being killed by NATO during an operation. You already know all this though.

What are the key details?

• All sides are to observe a “cessation of hostilities” — a cease-fire — starting at sundown Monday in Damascus. Attacks may continue on Islamic State militants and al-Qaeda’s Syrian affiliate, the Nusra Front.

a reply to: worldstarcountry

NATO is not involved in Syria.

I was not referring to ISIS or Al-Nusra when I talked about Syrian regime forces not adhering to the cease fire.

The moment the US was notified by Russia of the incident bombings stopped immediately.

The US was not the only forces engaging in the bombing. Australia was present as well.

While Russia is bitching about cooperation they failed to note the cooperation agreement has not gone into effect yet.

a reply to: all2human

Speaking of your BS.

US plans to shift military assets to Syria in Russia deal

WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. military will have to shift surveillance aircraft from other regions and increase the number of intelligence analysts to coordinate attacks with Russia under the Syria cease-fire deal partly in order to target militants the U.S. has largely spared, senior officials say.

Senior defense and military officials told The Associated Press that they are sorting out how the U.S.-Russia military partnership will take shape and how that will change where U.S. equipment and people will be deployed. They said, however, that they will need to take assets from other parts of the world, because U.S. military leaders don't want to erode the current U.S.-led coalition campaign against the Islamic State group in Iraq and Syria.

More military planners and targeting experts will be needed to identify and approve airstrikes against the al-Qaida-linked Jabhat Fatah al-Sham. The U.S. has rarely bombed the group, previously known as the Nusra Front, and the targeting is trickier because the militants are often intermingled with other U.S.-backed Syrian rebels.

Making matters more complicated are U.S. military concerns about Russian targeting. Unlike the U.S., which uses precision-guided munitions, Moscow has predominantly used so-called dumb bombs in its airstrikes over Syria.

The Syria cease-fire deal struck by U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry and Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov is designed to pause the civil war so that the superpowers' militaries can be jointly concentrated against the Islamic extremist groups operating within the chaos on the ground. The concerns reflect the U.S. military's broader skepticism about partnering with Russia, which it says it distrusts.

Senior U.S. defense and military officials familiar with the planning spoke on condition of anonymity because they weren't authorized to talk about the matter publicly.

Under the deal, if the cease-fire holds for seven days and humanitarian deliveries are allowed into areas besieged by the Syrian army, the U.S. and Russia would set up a so-called Joint Implementation Center to focus on the militants and share basic targeting data.

Click link for article..

So who is lying then about the US actions being illegal in Syria?


Assad? Russia? You? Or could it be possible Assads comments were meant for domestic consumption?

Since Russia seems to be speaking for Syria, and Russia and the US are cooperating / coordinating strikes on ISIS, and Russia approved the deal...

Is Russia taking action without bothering to inform Syria or is Syria ok with US presence in cooperation with Russia?

Since your so smart why dont you break it down for us an explain how our presence is illegal when Russia signed off on it?

I eagerly await your spin.

Easy
The conditions of the current ceasefire is just more evidence to the mountain that permission via cooperation has not existed between these nations.

"their countries would BEGIN working on military coordination"
CNN,for your reading pleasure: www.cnn.com...

a reply to: JedemDasSeine

So the Americans are conducting combat operations in Syria without permission ?
That speaks volumes and no matter what the Russians are guilty of they are INVITED to be there and its just more evidence that shows western powers are war profiteering. Those bombs just can't just sit on the shelves can they?

a reply to: all2human

The agreement is between the US and Russia. I have not seen Syria involved in it and if it was so illegal why hasn't Syria done anything about it? Why has Iran or Russia not engaged US forces?

Because contrary to your claims Assads comments were meant for a domestic audience. Or do you expect us to believe a Syrian FM would speak on behalf of a dictatorship while making statements that run contrary to Assad? Thats a god way to turn up dead in a dictatorship.

nice try though.

really you must admitt that the whole operation was orchesterd by the US...
still it took them 40 minuts to realize that they were wrong...
could stand at WW2 but not these days....
just an clumpsy action to take out syrian forces... at an seize fire situation...
at least they helped there famous IS....a reply to: Xcathdra