BREAKING: US enlists Britain's help to stop ship 'carrying Russian attack helicopters' to Syria

Quick update if it has not already been posted.

CNN just announced the insurance company responsible for the Russian vessel has yanked their coverage. Without insurance the vessel cannot enter reputable ports, resulting in the ship setting a course back to Russia.

Russia has dispatched 2 military vessels along with Russian Marines. According to their press release the number of Marines is 300 and are being sent to secure Russian ships in port as well as assist in evacuating any Russian nationals should things go majorly south,

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul

Originally posted by grey580
It is a helicopter isn't it?
Why couldn't they fly it into Syria From Iran.

didn't do much geography at school huh??

Real cute.
Well if you're such a Geography wizard why don't you answer the question?

If Turkey was willing to allow the helicopter to fly over it's airspace.
Assuming the chopper wasn't loaded with ammo. And Russia bribed some officials.
Why couldn't they ship the choppers down the Caspian sea into Iran?
And then from there fly through Iran and then into Turkey around the Iraq border then move into northern Syria.

Originally posted by mkgandhas
reply to post by detachedindividual

 

do you know that a good part of youtube videos are psyops? And the rebels have mortars too..

Do you have any evidence of either?

Sorry, but I don't believe you. I know that people will say absolutely anything on here to try to convince people that every evil in the world is done at the hands of American government, but that is, frankly, BS.

I am the last person to blindly trust any government. I criticize all and doubt the motives of everyone from Obama to Assad, Gaddafi to Putin.
I make my judgments based on actions, evidence, media, report, real journalism... I don't just believe the opinions of a biased person on a forum and adopt that as my own opinion.

reply to post by victor7


As far as internal politics go in Russia, I absolutely agree with you.

Originally posted by grey580

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul

Originally posted by grey580
It is a helicopter isn't it?
Why couldn't they fly it into Syria From Iran.

didn't do much geography at school huh??

Real cute.
Well if you're such a Geography wizard why don't you answer the question?

If Turkey was willing to allow the helicopter to fly over it's airspace.

and there you have your own answer - "IF".....alternatively Iraq is in the way too.

Originally posted by purplemer
reply to post by stanguilles7

 

Putin is likely itching for this conflict as much as the US/UK.

No he is trying to stop a conflict. Syria is in the midsts of a regime change sponsored by the west

"Sponsored" by the West? What does this mean exactly?

If the people of that nation are demanding regime change, why does it make any difference if America, the UK or any other nation supports them?

See, this is what really annoys me. Even people on here preaching rubbish about Obama being responsible for absolutely everything from Assad's murderous regime to Occupy recognize that the people of Syria are protesting, they are demanding change and they are being gunned down in the street.

How can all of you be so idiotic to think that an entire nation of people have become spellbound under the control of the CIA?!

Jeez, this place really winds me up with the level of complete stupidity sometimes.

Deny ignorance, but embrace stupidity. That should be the new motto.

Originally posted by Xcathdra
Quick update if it has not already been posted.

CNN just announced the insurance company responsible for the Russian vessel has yanked their coverage. Without insurance the vessel cannot enter reputable ports, resulting in the ship setting a course back to Russia.

If this is true, then it is but a minor delay. Russia is going to find another way to get the supplies to the destination, even if it is on its own navy transport ship. Now is it more of a matter of principal to get these helicopters to Syria.

As for UK - this stunt is not going to do it any favors in relations with Russia.

Originally posted by Xcathdra
Russia has dispatched 2 military vessels along with Russian Marines. According to their press release the number of Marines is 300 and are being sent to secure Russian ships in port as well as assist in evacuating any Russian nationals should things go majorly south,

The question is will these be sent through the Bosphorous or will they have to take the long route.

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


Yes an IF. But relations between the two countries are strengthening. It's a possibility especially if done stealthily.
And Iraq is not really in the way. Looking at the Google map it's actually a little over 100 miles from iran to syria.
They could probably cross that in an hour or two.

STOPPED:

A Russian ship believed to be carrying helicopters and missiles for Syria has been effectively stopped in its tracks off the coast of Scotland after its insurance was cancelled at the behest of the British government.


www.telegraph.co.uk...

reply to post by CALGARIAN

Yes because no one in Syria wants regime change.

Regardless if people want regime change. The highly publicised atrocities that are occurring there and being funded from outside Sryia.. If you want to belief the hype thats up to you.. The west is systemically toppling middle eastern countries..ie Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya...

If you cannot see the pattern or the motivation.. So be it. You think Gaddafi was a hated man. Think again he was well loved by most of his people and commanded a great respect through Africa..

Originally posted by grey580
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

 

Yes an IF. But relations between the two countries are strengthening. It's a possibility especially if done stealthily.

Relations between Turkey and syria are strengthening?? where do you get that from?

And Iraq is not really in the way. Looking at the Google map it's actually a little over 100 miles from iran to syria.
They could probably cross that in an hour or two.

Yes they probably could - but it would not be able to be done stealthily - and most governments take great exception to military equipment flying over their airspace without prior agreement.

Could it be done - certainly. will it be done - no - it is not realistic in the current political climate.

Originally posted by detachedindividual
See, this is what really annoys me. Even people on here preaching rubbish about Obama being responsible for absolutely everything from Assad's murderous regime to Occupy recognize that the people of Syria are protesting, they are demanding change and they are being gunned down in the street.

So in your opinion the "people of Syria" are a single homogenic group who have only one wish - get Assad out and replace him with God knows what?

You do realize that a substantial number of Syrians want Assad to stay, and are more afraid of what may replace him? The country's population is divided among multiple factions, each with its own goals and priorities. That is why it is on a verge of Civil War. It would be easy to dismiss the entire thing as "Dictator vs people" wouldn't it? Well it is slightly more complex than that.

You know what happens during a typical Civil War? Both sides butcher each other and plenty of civilians along the way.

Originally posted by detachedindividual
How can all of you be so idiotic to think that an entire nation of people have become spellbound under the control of the CIA?!.

One can say that the "Arab Spring" is a completely organic and self-sustaining phenomenon. Well, people who have observed politics and wars for a long time tend to be skeptical about organic foundation of such multi-national replicating movement. Someone's agenda is in major play here - more than likely multiple agendas. Whose agenda? Well one way to determine that is to see who is most vocal about it and calling the most attention to it.

As for CIA influencing the whole country? Well there is no need for that. You only need to ignite a potential powder keg, and keep adding powder to it.

reply to post by maloy


Good questions.....

From the talking heads on the tv they keep going back to Tartus. What is becoming clear, at least imo, is Russia is only concerned about keep a presence in the Med by extension of the Syrian port. I think thats the only reason they "back" assad because if he goes, the next government most likely will not allow them to remain simply because of their support for Assad.

The port allows Russia direct access to the Middle East nad better allows them to support their interests in the region.

In the end, Russias concern and only concern is access to the port and nothing more. I am curious what the Russians would do if they were told they would be able to keep their access to that port post Assad regime.

reply to post by detachedindividual

How can all of you be so idiotic to think that an entire nation of people have become spellbound under the control of the CIA?!

How is it an entire nation.. It is not there and areas of violence. Really do you think it is the Sryian forces that are going around cutting the throats of children and then letting those children be viewed by western media..

Wise up it a publcity stunt and you have bought it hook line and sinker. What would you do send western forces over to bomb them back to the stone age like they did in Afganistan and Iraq. Call it freedom and democracy, install a puppet government and then charge them to rebuild the country..

I have not once gone on about Obama... However it is evidently obvious that the US is no more than a business owned by the banking empire. The army is there to be used to consolidate the last few remaining peices on the board..


Want to know what the wars are about. In 2000 there were seven countries without Rothschild-owned Central Bank: Afghanistan, Iraq, Sudan, Libya, Cuba, North Korea, Iran. Now there are jst Cuba, North Korea, Iran.

Sryia and Iran have military packs.. Syria must be taken out first before Iran is attacked... So what exactly are you defending..

reply to post by Xcathdra


In addition to the port, Russia also have several billions of trade interests in Syria plus there are 100K Russians in Syria in various capacities.

Roughly $100B of Russian money is deposited in the UK banks. Most of this is black money to which Russian government does not have any authority over. Russia needs to pay UK in some other move for cancelling this shipment of Helos to Syria. UK action is outright poking politics into everyday trade matters.

Originally posted by Xcathdra
Good questions.....

From the talking heads on the tv they keep going back to Tartus. What is becoming clear, at least imo, is Russia is only concerned about keep a presence in the Med by extension of the Syrian port. I think thats the only reason they "bacl" assad because if he goes, the next government most likely will not allow them to remain simply because of their support for Assad.

Honestly, I do not think Tartus is that critical for Russia, nor a primary concern here. Tartus was never seen as a major military installation or a forward operating base for the Russian navy (like the US stategy with Carrier fleets). It is too small to be a permanent staging area like Sevastopol. Tartus is merely a convenient refueling point and a safe parking lot if you will. If Russia was seriously concerned about having its navy in the Mediterranean they would be heavily focused right now to build up their Black Sea fleet, or the Baltic fleet as a second alternative (especially the submarines). Neither of these fleets is seeing much modernization however. In fact Russia is mostly focused on the Northern fleet and Pacific fleet.

I think the more important priorities for Russia are business (trade with Assad), and geopolitical stand-off with US. The later mainly means that Russia does not want to see US's influence and control in the Middle East to increase any further. Tartus is a bonus, and if things go smooth for Assad (or any Baathist in Syria for that matter), Russia may be further rewarded for sticking with him. In case things sour and Russia is ready to abandon ship so to speak, then they can still use Syria as a bargaining chip with the US (like they did with Lybia).

Originally posted by Xcathdra
The port allows Russia direct access to the Middle East nad better allows them to support their interests in the region.

Not all of Middle East - only Syria as far as it matters. Other than that, and perhaps Serbia, Russia has few initiatives around the Mediterranean. It can still accomplish all it needs by sending the Baltic fleet or Black sea fleet on a long journey, with the only minus being time to deploy. But as I said, Tartus is not really large enough to serve as a staging area for any sizeable fleet. It is of course useful for Russian navy ships on the way to a further destinations south of the Suez. Russia maintains that the main point of the base is to support the anti-piracy operations near Africa.

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul


From looking online. Seems that turkey and russia are making it easier for it's countries citizens to travel to and from each country.

They wouldn't do that if relations weren't strengthening.

And I was just talking aloud. You never know what sort of craziness could happen.

Originally posted by victor7
reply to post by Xcathdra

 

In addition to the port, Russia also have several billions of trade interests in Syria plus there are 100K Russians in Syria in various capacities.

Roughly $100B of Russian money is deposited in the UK banks. Most of this is black money to which Russian government does not have any authority over. Russia needs to pay UK in some other move for cancelling this shipment of Helos to Syria. UK action is outright poking politics into everyday trade matters.

Lets be clear about this - The Government of the UK did not yank the insurance, the company the ship owners decided to go with yanked it. Maybe Russia companies should insure their own vessels?

Possibly -

Setting aside the typical blame the US the company, The Standard Club, initially refused to just go forward with the drop. They stated they wanted tpo look into the matter first, and then decide, which is why there was a delay in the action.

The most recent development is coverage has now been dropped for all 8 vessels being operated by FEMCO.

Secondly this is not the first incident of this type. Back in January another Russian vessel bound for Syria with arms was stopped in Cyprus. The vessel was released with the promise it would head back to its original port, however it continued to the Syrian port and dropping its cargo before returning.

As far as retaliation goes Russia just needs to get over it and deal with the fact that there are some things that Putin can't control through fear and intimidation.

Originally posted by Xcathdra
Lets be clear about this - The Government of the UK did not yank the insurance, the company the ship owners decided to go with yanked it. Maybe Russia companies should insure their own vessels?

Do you seriously think that UK and US governments' opposition to arms shipments to Syria had no influence over this incident? The timing is far too suspect, as does US issuing orders to UK, which appears only too eager to play the puppet role. Why drop the coverage when it already was agreed upon and went into effect?

And Russia can and will take business elsewhere. The upgrade and shipment of these helicopters was handled by a private company - next time the Russian navy may take responsibility. As I said, it is a but a short delay for the shipment.

Originally posted by Xcathdra
Secondly this is not the first incident of this type. Back in January another Russian vessel bound for Syria with arms was stopped in Cyprus. The vessel was released with the promise it would head back to its original port, however it continued to the Syrian port and dropping its cargo before returning.

I do not know the details of that case, but what jurisdiction does Cyprus have over a Russian vessel to issue such orders that it cannot go to Syria?

I understand US can wave EU-mandated sanctions in front of EU companies and tell them they can't do business around these shipments. I hope no doubts US is influencing these events. But it that is where its control over these shipments stops. There is no question that they will be delivered.

Originally posted by Xcathdra
As far as retaliation goes Russia just needs to get over it and deal with the fact that there are some things that Putin can't control through fear and intimidation.

You don't need fear and intimidation to get what you need in politics - you simply need to have something that the other sides wants or needs and will be forced to make a deal with you. Russia did it with US - by consolidating under its control the main supply routes to Afghanistan to sustain the US forces there. Right now Russia may not seem to hold anything over UK, but that may quickly change.



And Russia does have its own maritime insurance companies, such as IngosStakh. They may as well provide necessary coverage for this ship without much delay, allowing it to continue and to dock in any EU port it wants onthe way.

reply to post by maloy


Sure since it prompted the company to review the policy. The company opted to drop coverage because of the cargo. Last I check a private business can do business with whomever they choose yes?

Secondly the 2nd incident occured because it was an arms shipment to the government of Syria in violation of the UN arms embargo. So Cyprus was within its jurisdiction since the vessel was in their port at the time.

3rd Russia wont retaliate against a country for a business decision. This mindset people have that Russia is going to let slip the dogs of war to save Syria are sorely mistaken. Russia interest lies with the port and by extension access to the ME and the Med. If Russia really supported Assad he would not send 300 marines toi protect their military assets. They would have gone en masse to support the government - something they have not done.

Trying to link this to Afghanistan is shortsided. What you fail to take into account is the common issues both countries face with that country. Russia knows what we are up against and they have stated on numerous occasions that its in their best interest / national security to assist the US to create a stable enviornment in that country. What occurs in Afghanistan affects Russia a whole lot more than the US based solely on proximity.

Russia is concerned about protecting their interest - the port in Syria and access to their Black Sea fleet to the med from it. Why is that important? Currently Turkey is not friendly towards Iran or Syria because of whats going on, and by extension Russia.