Russia: The use of force without the approval of the UN is a very grave violation of int'l law

So 1300 were most likely killed in a chemical attack of which no proof has been found that Assad and his army did it, and now in retaliation probably another 100.000 will die to take out Assad.. Logical

A very grave violation of int'l law?? Signed, the citizens of Georgia....

Originally posted by AndyMayhew
reply to post by kozmo

 

Humans are capable of great crimes and incompetence without the assistance of the USA

Be that as it may, it is inapplicable here. Look up "False flag" on Google for more insight into the matter.

Ugly, ugly ugly.

This will not be a cake walk, there will be a Russian presence. They are already there patrolling the shores, and protecting their naval bases. I'm not sure they are going to take likely to NATO intervention with out UN clearance. I'm not even sure they will like it if the UN does give the go ahead.

IF the US waits for, and receives UN clearance I imagine Russia will enforce strict Dead zones, around their naval bases. NO FLY, NO SHIPS, NO GROUND TROOPS, and I'm sure any infringement of those zones will be met by utter destruction.

I've heard they are sending more ships to the area as well, and I can't imagine it will be nice to rub shoulders with them attempting to set up no fly zones, drones, or cruise missile strikes with them there.

The Bear is very likely to flex some very unexpected muscle if this kicks off.

Originally posted by thesaneone
reply to post by Senduko

 

And not one reporter looked interested it seems odd too me.

They've already had their evening copy written for them by the regime. Why pay attention when the propaganda machine is churning out the news?

Jesse's i Wonder how long Deputy Spokesperson Marie Harf will be a deputy spokesperson. She is a joke.
Kerry is got to get rid of her. She is making the US agenda towards Syria look like a giant mess.

Originally posted by Hijinx
Ugly, ugly ugly.

This will not be a cake walk, there will be a Russian presence. They are already there patrolling the shores, and protecting their naval bases. I'm not sure they are going to take likely to NATO intervention with out UN clearance. I'm not even sure they will like it if the UN does give the go ahead.

IF the US waits for, and receives UN clearance I imagine Russia will enforce strict Dead zones, around their naval bases. NO FLY, NO SHIPS, NO GROUND TROOPS, and I'm sure any infringement of those zones will be met by utter destruction.

I've heard they are sending more ships to the area as well, and I can't imagine it will be nice to rub shoulders with them attempting to set up no fly zones, drones, or cruise missile strikes with them there.

The Bear is very likely to flex some very unexpected muscle if this kicks off.

The Russian "naval bases" you speak of are two piers (of which one has been broken for years) and a maintenance shack they lease that when staffed has 4 people. The pier is to small for any warship larger than a patrol boat. Russia has no ability to enforce anything. If the entire Black Sea fleet sailed out it would consist of 1 cruiser, 2 destroyers, and 3 frigates all old, some landing craft and 1 old diesel sub. Lets stop tossing around words like bases and fleets to try and make things sound exciting.

Originally posted by AndyMayhew
No it's not.

And if you are walking down the street and see an old lady being mugged, it's none of you business either.


Personally, I think it's the business of everyone on the planet and we should be ashamed that we have sat back an watched mass murder of innocents simply because there was no financial benefit in us intervening.

And it's not just Syria.

The fact that we cocked it up in Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya is not a reason not to keep trying. Though I accept that there is little confidence in those idiots we have elected to be in charge (whose fault is that though - if you vote, you are to blame. IMO)

The issue of Syria is a mess. By getting involved in the past I think we've committed ourselves to getting involved now. The only way out of this that I see is making an agreement with Syria/Russia. We will back off in exchange for Syrias entire supply of chemical weapons (actually, in exchange for Russia taking control of them would be acceptable too I think). They're allowed to make more if they want (they didn't sign the ban), but we can't abide them being used, and we certainly can't tolerate the rebels getting and using them with their terrorist connections. I don't think that's going to happen though.

We're going to make the rebels fight to the last man, weaken Syria, then come in with our own troops, secure the weapons, and install a puppet government... in theory. In reality this has all the makings of a very messy, very bloody war. All out war with Iran/Russia (and probably China joining in as well) is not off the table because they won't let Assad fall.

On the subject that Assad is a bad guy, you're right that he is. The terrorists are too. There is no good guy in this fight and because of Russia/Iran we can't put in a good guy as a puppet.

reply to post by MrSpad


A quick google search puts their fleet at; 1 operational aircraft carrier, 1 operational heavy missile cruiser, 4 operational Cruisers, 13 active destroyers, 11 Ballistic missile subs, 6 cruise missile subs, 14 nuclear attack subs, 18 conventional attack subs, 4 frigates, 74 corvettes, 34 minesweepers, 2 missile hovercrafts, 19 landing ships, 2 special purpose subs, and a whole mess of logistical vessels.

IN RESERVES they have;

3 heavy missile cruisers, 5 destroyers, 2 ballistic missile subs, 2 cruise missile subs, 5 nuclear attack subs, 2 conventional attack submarines, 1 special purpose sub,

Their in the process of acquiring a bunch of new vessels too. Not, that I can find anything about funding or commission but they are working on a whole bunch of new angry bear face wreckers.

That's hardly what you made them out to be.

en.wikipedia.org...

EDIT TO ADD: I completely skipped the whole Black Sea fleet and just pissed all over myself. I'll leave it up though, as I'm no coward.

Greatest Speech Ever Made Charlie Chaplin The Great Dictator

This video should be spread all over world because it somewhat reflects whats happening in this world

People have the power and should unite to stop this

www.youtube.com...

reply to post by Aazadan


Since when is it the US's job to decide who is good or bad, or who should be leading which country??

This is why Terrorists attack the US, and American troops die every day.

Iran is the final target , how we quickly forget

www.youtube.com...
So, if they don't allow inspections, they are hiding something. If they do allow inspections, it's all cleaned up?
were on the highway to hell people, smok'em if you got em.

For those following along...

Official Tells CNN US Could Strike Within Hours; Russia Warns Against Attack

WAR DRUMS: An official tells @CNN The U.S. could strike #Syria within hours

BREAKING NEWS: @RepPeteKing 'I BELIEVE THE PRESIDENT CAN TAKE ACTION WITHOUT AUTHORIZATION OF CONGRESS.'

TURKEY BLOCKS NORTH KOREA WEAPON SHIPMENT TO SYRIA, SANKEI SAYS

www.zerohedge.com...

Israelis scramble for gas masks- @TimesofIsrael

www.timesofisrael.com...

Families of Syrian brass ‘fleeing’ ahead of feared US strike

www.timesofisrael.com...

Warplanes spotted in Cyprus as tensions rise in Damascus. Signs of advanced readiness at likely hub of air campaign

www.theguardian.com...

China's Internet hit by biggest cyberattack in its history

money.cnn.com...

There is no good guy in this fight and because of Russia/Iran we can't put in a good guy as a puppet

The track record of the US installing 'good guy puppets' isn't very good. At least from the point of the people being governed by those leaders.

Originally posted by Hijinx
reply to post by Aazadan

 

Since when is it the US's job to decide who is good or bad, or who should be leading which country??

This is why Terrorists attack the US, and American troops die every day.

Honestly, I'm not sure if going into Syria is right or not. Our previous meddling with the rebels has created a bloody civil war... this was no doubt wrong but it brings us to the bigger issue because we have seriously destabilized that country. It's our responsibility now to make sure their chemical weapons don't fall into the hands of the rebels. If that means sending our own people in to secure them, then that's what it means. The rebels are essentially Al Qaeda and letting them have access to a stockpile of chemical weapons is a massive failure of our defense department. It would have been best if we left the country alone, but it's too late for that.

The situation now is a giant cluster**** that we are responsible for. We shouldn't have gotten involved in the first place, but now that we are the right thing to do may be to finish it. After this Assad can't be trusted with chemical weapons, and we already know the rebels can't.

Make no mistake, I want to see those in the US government that have pushed things to this point hang for what they've done, I just don't think we can simply back out now though, things have escalated too much and going in may be the least bad option.

Originally posted by earthling42
So 1300 were most likely killed in a chemical attack of which no proof has been found that Assad and his army did it, and now in retaliation probably another 100.000 will die to take out Assad.. Logical

Who else has a chemical weapons stockpile with that type of ability to strike? What's logical is Assad's regime launched the weapons against the rebels.

reply to post by CaptainNemo


The rebels & terrorist also have rockets, tanks, & all of the above, besides air warfare, chemcial weapons not withstanding. Al Nursa, formally the FSA most destructive branch, has chemcial weapons. Al Qaeda has chemcial weapons. What doesn't make sense is Assad inviting the UN for inspection & then launching chemical strikes against civilians.

Sounds more like Al Qaeda to me. Assad has everything to lose using those weapons and Everyone knows it.

reply to post by Swills


Same "international Law" that Russia and Georgia both broke?

The pot is black, Russia.

You know, after the flat out proven lies of the Iraq invasion and the somehow
related but not related invasion of Afghanistan, well i just don't believe i can
trust our government to do the right thing when it comes to war.

There is a very, VERY good reason a president is not suppose to have
the power to declare war all on his own, and as we have seen this past
decade it was a huge mistake to allow the so called policing actions......

I bet you not a single one of them sees jail time for this one either,
i don't have the answers to if there was a chem attack or who was
responsible but i do know that our economy already teetering
on edge and the idea of Vietnam number 35 makes me sick.