Here we go. Bombs Away.
- Thread starter Musburger1
- Start date
Musburger1
2,500+ Posts
What Russian analysts think.
https://sputniknews.com/middleeast/201804091063350117-syrian-airbase-rocket-attack/
Listening to Russian experts (short report about the mood on Russian prime time TV)
159 Views April 08, 2018 No Comments
I just spend about 2 hour listening to a TV debate of Russian experts about what to do about the USA. Here are a few interesting interesting points.
1) They all agreed that the AngloZionist (of course, they used the words “USA” or “Western countries”) was only going to further escalate and that the only way to stop this is to deliberately bring the world right up to the point were a full-scale US-Russian war was imminent or even locally started. They said that it was fundamentally wrong for Russia to reply with just words against Western actions.
2) Interestingly, there also was a consensus that even a full-scale US attack on Syria would be too late to change the situation on the ground, that it was way too late for that.
3) Another interesting conclusion was that the only really question for Russia is whether Russia would be better off delaying this maximal crisis or accelerating the events and making everything happen sooner. There was no consensus on that.
4) Next, there was an consensus view that pleading, reasoning, asking for fairness or justice, or even for common sense, was futile. The Russian view is simple: the West is ruled by a gang of thugs supported by an infinitely lying and hypocritical media while the general public in the West has been hopelessly zombified. The authority of the so-called “western values” (democracy, rule of law, human rights, etc.) in Russia is now roadkill.
5) There was also a broad consensus that the US elites are not taking Russia seriously and that the current Russian diplomatic efforts are futile (especially towards the UK). The only way to change that would be with very harsh measures, including diplomatic and military ones. Everybody agreed that talking with Boris Johnson would be not only a total waste of time, but a huge mistake.
6) To my amazement, the notion that Russia might have to sink a few USN ships or use Kalibers on US forces in the Middle-East was viewed as a real, maybe inevitable, option. Really – nobody objected.
Reach your own conclusions. I will just say that none of the “experts” was representing, or working for, the Russian government. Government experts not only have better info, they also know that the lives of millions of people depend on their decisions, which is not the case for the so-called “experts”. Still, the words of these experts do reflect, I think, a growing popular consensus.
The Saker
https://sputniknews.com/middleeast/201804091063350117-syrian-airbase-rocket-attack/
Listening to Russian experts (short report about the mood on Russian prime time TV)
159 Views April 08, 2018 No Comments
I just spend about 2 hour listening to a TV debate of Russian experts about what to do about the USA. Here are a few interesting interesting points.
1) They all agreed that the AngloZionist (of course, they used the words “USA” or “Western countries”) was only going to further escalate and that the only way to stop this is to deliberately bring the world right up to the point were a full-scale US-Russian war was imminent or even locally started. They said that it was fundamentally wrong for Russia to reply with just words against Western actions.
2) Interestingly, there also was a consensus that even a full-scale US attack on Syria would be too late to change the situation on the ground, that it was way too late for that.
3) Another interesting conclusion was that the only really question for Russia is whether Russia would be better off delaying this maximal crisis or accelerating the events and making everything happen sooner. There was no consensus on that.
4) Next, there was an consensus view that pleading, reasoning, asking for fairness or justice, or even for common sense, was futile. The Russian view is simple: the West is ruled by a gang of thugs supported by an infinitely lying and hypocritical media while the general public in the West has been hopelessly zombified. The authority of the so-called “western values” (democracy, rule of law, human rights, etc.) in Russia is now roadkill.
5) There was also a broad consensus that the US elites are not taking Russia seriously and that the current Russian diplomatic efforts are futile (especially towards the UK). The only way to change that would be with very harsh measures, including diplomatic and military ones. Everybody agreed that talking with Boris Johnson would be not only a total waste of time, but a huge mistake.
6) To my amazement, the notion that Russia might have to sink a few USN ships or use Kalibers on US forces in the Middle-East was viewed as a real, maybe inevitable, option. Really – nobody objected.
Reach your own conclusions. I will just say that none of the “experts” was representing, or working for, the Russian government. Government experts not only have better info, they also know that the lives of millions of people depend on their decisions, which is not the case for the so-called “experts”. Still, the words of these experts do reflect, I think, a growing popular consensus.
The Saker
Musburger1
2,500+ Posts
http://www.eurasiafuture.com/2018/04/08/tick-tock-times-up-what-will-syria-do/
Interesting perspective on what Assad wants, what Russia wants, and what the West wants.
Assad wants the whole country back and is hesitant to kick out Iran and Hezbollah.
Russia wants Assad to compromise but he won’t.
The West wants Iran and Hezbollah completely out of Syria.
Interesting perspective on what Assad wants, what Russia wants, and what the West wants.
Assad wants the whole country back and is hesitant to kick out Iran and Hezbollah.
Russia wants Assad to compromise but he won’t.
The West wants Iran and Hezbollah completely out of Syria.
Musburger1
2,500+ Posts
Morning Update.
Elijah J. Magnier, currently in Syria, relates information about the attack on the T4 airbase in Syria a few hours ago:
Elijah J. Magnier, currently in Syria, relates information about the attack on the T4 airbase in Syria a few hours ago:
- 8 missiles launched against the T4 could be #Israeli attack. Jet heard over the Lebanese city of Baalbek. #Damascus said the missiles came from the south. Syrian air defence managed to intercept 3 missiles. #ISIS advanced towards Sabaa-Byar simultaneously with the missile attack.
- The information coming from #Syria T4 military base report at least 6 killed and 12 wounded by the 8 #Tomahawk missiles launched in the last hours.
- The T4 military airport is situated in the heart of al-Badiya and serves to deal mainly with #ISIS pocket
- In my [April 1] article I said Israel won't accept the ROE despite #Israel Chief of State - I would say tactical - denial: Israel won’t leave the Syrian sky alone and Damascus is ready for confrontation
- The number/type of missiles launched against the military airport called T4 situated in rural #Homs and the count of casualties need to be confirmed. In few hours, #Damascus will issue a communiqué offering its version in details.
- Many #Syrians celebrate #Israel attack against their own country. This is what #Assad #Iran and #Hezbollah are mainly fighting along with takfiree.
- T4 military airport supports Deir-Ezzour & al-Badiyah battle against #ISIS. It is unrelated to "#Hezbollah supply of weapons". The attack is directly related to #Israel unwilling to see the end of the war in #Syria. Israel supports Jihadists in the south.
- Because #USA #UK #France can't look weak and not bomb the #Syrian army in response to the "chemical attack" claim/staged in #Ghouta... Because #Russia can't look weak and not respond... Maybe the T4 #Isrtaeli attack is a compromise to halt a wider war?
Musburger1
2,500+ Posts
Trump, his advisers, and most of DC are crazy.
https://sputniknews.com/us/201804091063372414-trump-syria-major-decisions/
This is simply a US war of aggression based on lies.
https://sputniknews.com/us/201804091063372414-trump-syria-major-decisions/
This is simply a US war of aggression based on lies.
Musburger1
2,500+ Posts
I love how Garmel doesn’t realize the MSM channels Americans watch or propaganda channels for the MIC.
Wake up dude.
OMG! It's the military industrial complex! They own everything! I'm awake and smart enough to stay away from Russian propaganda. I wish I could say the same for you.
Yep. Sputnik and RT are totally free and honest media outlets, and the press of the entire Western world is rigged by the "deep state."
You got it! I loathe our liberal mainstream media but they are not even comparable to the crap that come out of Russia (and Musberger's yap).
Musburger1
2,500+ Posts
What networks such as RT provide is a platform for dissenting points of view which have been barred by MSM. What you characterize as Russian propaganda is simply the viewpoints of Americans (as well as non-Americans) who put forth arguments in opposition to the status quo.
I’ve provided links to analysis representing multiple opinions you won’t get on MSM. It’s easier for however to simply accept the mush fed to you like this.
How about the FOX host.
““Could this [chemical weapons attack] be a play by them [Assad, Putin and Iran] to provoke or test President Trump?”
Good grief.
I’ve provided links to analysis representing multiple opinions you won’t get on MSM. It’s easier for however to simply accept the mush fed to you like this.
How about the FOX host.
““Could this [chemical weapons attack] be a play by them [Assad, Putin and Iran] to provoke or test President Trump?”
Good grief.
Joe Fan
10,000+ Posts
I dont really want to take Boris' side but I tend to agree that there are alot of questions and coincidences still outstanding regarding this chemical weapons attack. I hope we are certain about the source because I have trouble making sense of why Assad/Syria/Russians would do this at this time.
I don't have a problem with that. However, when you get your info from Sputnik or RT and parade around as if it provides truthful unbiased info, there's a problem.
I don't have a problem with that. However, when you get your info from Sputnik or RT and parade around as if they provide truthful unbiased info, there's a problem.
Musburger1
2,500+ Posts
Maybe Sputnik and RT should be banned. That way, their guests which aren't allowed on other news channels won't be able to brainwash honest American citizens with fake news. After all, if the appropriate filters aren't in place, there's no telling how the country can be subverted.
Musburger1
2,500+ Posts
We don't need no stinkin' UN blessing.
https://www.rt.com/usa/423639-haley-un-syria-chemical/
Haley and her ilk are the real monsters.
https://www.rt.com/usa/423639-haley-un-syria-chemical/
Haley and her ilk are the real monsters.
Musburger1
2,500+ Posts
If I were in Putin's place, I would consider ending his policy of responding symmetrically to each of the US provocations, and instead get in the first blow. I doubt Putin will follow this course of action and I have no idea what information the Russians have. But given that it's apparent the US will stop at no means making provocations, it make sense to get in the first lick if you have prepared to do so. Folks, it's time to put down the Nintendo and consider what is at stake. I'd be nervous if I were on an air craft carrier in the Mediterranean.
Here's Trump
https://sputniknews.com/news/201804101063382221-trump-alleged-syria-attack-forcefully/
"We're making a decision tonight or shortly thereafter as to the horrible attack that was made near Damascus. We have a lot of options militarily on Syria," he said.
Here's Trump
https://sputniknews.com/news/201804101063382221-trump-alleged-syria-attack-forcefully/
"We're making a decision tonight or shortly thereafter as to the horrible attack that was made near Damascus. We have a lot of options militarily on Syria," he said.
Garmel, he's a lost cause. Today, it's Sputnik and RT. Tomorrow, it'll be tin foil hats and horoscopes. It's too bad, because he's not an idiot. There's real brain there. It's just in outer space most of the time, especially in recent weeks. He's really going off the deep end.
Musburger1
2,500+ Posts
The Duran is not a state run publication. But since it's not a corporate owned shill for the status quo, I'm sure you'd consider any of the oped pieces more "Russian propaganda."
Deez, Garmel, and most likely everyone other than myself who visits this sites will believe anything presented to them by the flag-waving authorities. No matter how many times you are lied to - WMD in Iraq, Ghadafi killing his own people, Skripral poisoned with military grade Novichok, etc - you will always believe the next whopper.
Try this article on for size. It's speculation as to motive, but at least its based on logic, unlike the lunatic rationale that passes for logic given by US leadership.
http://theduran.com/russia-controls-douma-guarantees-impartial-investigation-us-attack-more-likely/
Russia controls Douma, guarantees impartial investigation; that makes US attack MORE likely
US likely to launch strike because with Russia controlling Douma it risks losing control of the narrative
Amidst all the fury about the alleged chemical attack on Douma on Sunday, it is impossible to hold on to one single vital fact.
There have been two previous occasions when chemical weapons attacks had resulted in actual or threatened US military action. The first was in 2013 in East Ghouta, the second was in 2017 in Khan Sheikhoun.
On both those occasions the Jihadis after the alleged attacks retained control of the alleged crime scene, ie. of the place where the chemical weapons attack was supposed to have happened.
In the case of the alleged crime scene in Douma the situation is however different.
As a result of the total surrender of the Jihadis previously in control of Douma on Sunday, it is the Russian military who this time are in control of the alleged crime scene.
This has put the Russians in a position where for the first time they are able both to invite the OPCW inspectors to attend the crime scene and to provide them with protection if they are there, whilst at the same time monitoring and supervising their work.
If the chemical attack on Douma really is fictitious – as the Russians insist it is – then for the first time their control of the crime scene puts the Russians in a strong position to prove it.
The point was made forcefully by Russia’s UN ambassador Vassily Nebenzia at the UN Security Council session today, and it also received indirect backing from the UN Secretariat, who admitted that they could not confirm that a chemical weapons attack had happened, and who called upon all sides to show restraint until a proper investigation of the incident had taken place.
Nebenzia followed this up by inviting OPCW inspectors to the scene as early as tomorrow Tuesday.
By now it should surprise no-one that the fact that the Russians are in control of the crime scene and may on this occasion be able to prove conclusively that no chemical weapons attack happened in Douma, instead of deterring a US attack, is actually making it more likely.
This is because the credibility of the various ‘witnesses’ to the Douma attack – who are of course the same witnesses who were previously ‘witnesses’ to the 2013 East Ghouta and the 2017 Khan Sheikhoun attacks – is now on the line, as is the credibility of those Western governments – first and foremost the US government – who believed or who pretended to believe them.
I would add that not only is the credibility of the US government and of other Western governments on the line. So is the credibility of Western journalists who also believed or pretended to believe the ‘witnesses’.
That more than anything else explains the hysteria of the last 24 hours, with the extraordinary warlike statements from Donald Trump and Nikki Haley, and from certain Western journalists.
On any logic, since what actually happened in Douma is unconfirmed and disputed, and since the conditions for an objective investigation this time are there, the correct and proper thing to do is for no action to be taken until that investigation has taken place.
The reason that logic is not being followed, and why against all reason a military strike is likely, is because those who want a military strike do not want an objective investigation to take place, which might expose them as having acted previously on a false basis.
In other words, the military strike is not intended to punish the perpetrators of the alleged chemical strike in Douma. It is intended to make an objective investigation impossible.
There is something genuinely bizarre about the latest threatened military strike.
The Battle of East Ghouta is over. The Jihadis there – following their capitulation in Douma – have lost. A military strike now really would be a case of closing the closing the stable door after the horse has bolted, and its military rationale appears to be non-existent. Moreover Donald Trump – the man who is supposed to be the President of the United States – was only a few days ago saying that US troops would be withdrawn from Syria “very soon”.
Yet the US looks likely to launch a military strike – one which the Russians are warning risks dangerous escalation – not because it has any clear policy which requires such a strike, but because it is alarmed by a possible loss of face.
When a nuclear powered superpower launches military strikes for such frivolous reasons the situation in the world has become very bad and dangerous indeed.
US likely to launch strike because with Russia controlling Douma it risks losing control of the narrative
Amidst all the fury about the alleged chemical attack on Douma on Sunday, it is impossible to hold on to one single vital fact.
There have been two previous occasions when chemical weapons attacks had resulted in actual or threatened US military action. The first was in 2013 in East Ghouta, the second was in 2017 in Khan Sheikhoun.
On both those occasions the Jihadis after the alleged attacks retained control of the alleged crime scene, ie. of the place where the chemical weapons attack was supposed to have happened.
In the case of the alleged crime scene in Douma the situation is however different.
As a result of the total surrender of the Jihadis previously in control of Douma on Sunday, it is the Russian military who this time are in control of the alleged crime scene.
This has put the Russians in a position where for the first time they are able both to invite the OPCW inspectors to attend the crime scene and to provide them with protection if they are there, whilst at the same time monitoring and supervising their work.
If the chemical attack on Douma really is fictitious – as the Russians insist it is – then for the first time their control of the crime scene puts the Russians in a strong position to prove it.
The point was made forcefully by Russia’s UN ambassador Vassily Nebenzia at the UN Security Council session today, and it also received indirect backing from the UN Secretariat, who admitted that they could not confirm that a chemical weapons attack had happened, and who called upon all sides to show restraint until a proper investigation of the incident had taken place.
Nebenzia followed this up by inviting OPCW inspectors to the scene as early as tomorrow Tuesday.
By now it should surprise no-one that the fact that the Russians are in control of the crime scene and may on this occasion be able to prove conclusively that no chemical weapons attack happened in Douma, instead of deterring a US attack, is actually making it more likely.
This is because the credibility of the various ‘witnesses’ to the Douma attack – who are of course the same witnesses who were previously ‘witnesses’ to the 2013 East Ghouta and the 2017 Khan Sheikhoun attacks – is now on the line, as is the credibility of those Western governments – first and foremost the US government – who believed or who pretended to believe them.
I would add that not only is the credibility of the US government and of other Western governments on the line. So is the credibility of Western journalists who also believed or pretended to believe the ‘witnesses’.
That more than anything else explains the hysteria of the last 24 hours, with the extraordinary warlike statements from Donald Trump and Nikki Haley, and from certain Western journalists.
On any logic, since what actually happened in Douma is unconfirmed and disputed, and since the conditions for an objective investigation this time are there, the correct and proper thing to do is for no action to be taken until that investigation has taken place.
The reason that logic is not being followed, and why against all reason a military strike is likely, is because those who want a military strike do not want an objective investigation to take place, which might expose them as having acted previously on a false basis.
In other words, the military strike is not intended to punish the perpetrators of the alleged chemical strike in Douma. It is intended to make an objective investigation impossible.
There is something genuinely bizarre about the latest threatened military strike.
The Battle of East Ghouta is over. The Jihadis there – following their capitulation in Douma – have lost. A military strike now really would be a case of closing the closing the stable door after the horse has bolted, and its military rationale appears to be non-existent. Moreover Donald Trump – the man who is supposed to be the President of the United States – was only a few days ago saying that US troops would be withdrawn from Syria “very soon”.
Yet the US looks likely to launch a military strike – one which the Russians are warning risks dangerous escalation – not because it has any clear policy which requires such a strike, but because it is alarmed by a possible loss of face.
When a nuclear powered superpower launches military strikes for such frivolous reasons the situation in the world has become very bad and dangerous indeed.
Mus, you remind me a little of the 4Chan trolls who went after Shia Labeof's anti-Trump flag. It took a tremendous amount of work, persistence, and brainpower to pull off what they did. If those guys applied those talents to something worthwhile, there'd be no stopping them.
Not being state run doesn't make it not propaganda. Shills who spread the propaganda of foreign powers thrive in the United States, because the law allows them to do it, unlike in most nations.
Actually, most of us are skeptical of what the government tells us and are extremely skeptical of what the media (whatever that means - we don't have a centraized media) tells us. The problem with your view is that you basically accept that the US and the West are always wrong and always bad and that Vladimir Putin is always right and always good. That is the theme of 99 percent of what you say and what you cite to. Frankly, that's why your stuff gets accused of being propaganda. It looks, acts, and smells like it. You'd be more convincing if you didn't approach things like that, but true propagandists can't tolerate dissent or even second-guessing. They rely on the absolute deference of their subjects.
Most people know that this isn't a Satan v. Jesus Christ matchup in which one guy is absolutely bad and the other is absolutely good. Guys like Vladimir Putin, Donald Trump, Barack Obama, George Bush, etc. are human beings who are imperfect and have character flaws. Like every other human being who has walked the earth, sometimes they're right, and sometimes they're wrong. Sometimes they're honest, and sometimes they aren't. That's how human beings are. That's how governments are, because they're run by human beings. Anybody who frames issues or conflicts any other way is probably shilling for one side.
The key word is "speculation." And yes, there is a "logic" to it. The logic is that Russia is always honest, and the West always lies. Within that warped framework, it makes good sense.
Not being state run doesn't make it not propaganda. Shills who spread the propaganda of foreign powers thrive in the United States, because the law allows them to do it, unlike in most nations.
Actually, most of us are skeptical of what the government tells us and are extremely skeptical of what the media (whatever that means - we don't have a centraized media) tells us. The problem with your view is that you basically accept that the US and the West are always wrong and always bad and that Vladimir Putin is always right and always good. That is the theme of 99 percent of what you say and what you cite to. Frankly, that's why your stuff gets accused of being propaganda. It looks, acts, and smells like it. You'd be more convincing if you didn't approach things like that, but true propagandists can't tolerate dissent or even second-guessing. They rely on the absolute deference of their subjects.
Most people know that this isn't a Satan v. Jesus Christ matchup in which one guy is absolutely bad and the other is absolutely good. Guys like Vladimir Putin, Donald Trump, Barack Obama, George Bush, etc. are human beings who are imperfect and have character flaws. Like every other human being who has walked the earth, sometimes they're right, and sometimes they're wrong. Sometimes they're honest, and sometimes they aren't. That's how human beings are. That's how governments are, because they're run by human beings. Anybody who frames issues or conflicts any other way is probably shilling for one side.
The key word is "speculation." And yes, there is a "logic" to it. The logic is that Russia is always honest, and the West always lies. Within that warped framework, it makes good sense.
Musburger1
2,500+ Posts
Speculation is what “thinking” people do in order to make sense of events and prepare. But initiating and condoning war based on speculation is what non-thinking people do.
Your diatribe is that of a fool.
Kudos to Tucker Carlson and surprisingly to Fox News for letting his piece air.
Nobody's condoning anything.
Actually believing in another human being's perfection is foolish. You sound like a Jim Bakker follower when talking about Putin.
If what you say about the media was true, then Tucker would be dead or in jail right now.
Musburger1
2,500+ Posts
The majority of the country, Congress, and the Trump war cabinet (that is what it is) is condoning an attack. If you witness a rape and don’t lift a hand to stop it, isn’t that condoning the crime?
Have I mentioned Putin other than what action he might take in response to the false accusations and threats? This is about the US. You keep trying to make this about Putin. This is about US policy under Neocon influence and control dating back to Iraq, Libya, Kiev, and Syria. For now, focus on that.
Musburger1
2,500+ Posts
One more for you. This post is by some free lancer out of San Francisco (no doubt a Putin plant). It puts the current bogus charge into perspective.
http://theduran.com/us-in-syria-taking-the-world-to-the-brink-of-annihilation/
http://theduran.com/us-in-syria-taking-the-world-to-the-brink-of-annihilation/
Again, everything is framed under the assumption that we're all liars and frauds and that the Russian government is completely honest. If you start with a wild assumption like that, you can make anything make sense of seem justifiable. Hell, if we assume that every black person is no more human than a horse or a mule, slavery becomes pretty defensible.
Musburger1
2,500+ Posts
Let me ask you a straight forward question.
At this time, is military action based on the allegations of a chemical attack which clearly is unproven as to what happened and who is responsible justified?
Can you answer that yes or no? I can. No. Hell no.
TaylorTRoom
1,000+ Posts
Of course we know who made the poison gas attack. Who has poison gas? Assad, under the purview of Russia. The rebels don’t have poison gas. The US doesn’t have poison gas. ISIS doesn’t have poison gas. Israel doesn’t have poison gas. You don’t buy poison gas from Grainger!
I think what is happening is that Russia is applying pressure. They know the US really doesn’t want to go to war. The sanctions on the oligarchs are hurting. They’re trying to show that they can hurt us, too.
I think what is happening is that Russia is applying pressure. They know the US really doesn’t want to go to war. The sanctions on the oligarchs are hurting. They’re trying to show that they can hurt us, too.
Musburger1
2,500+ Posts
Musburger1
2,500+ Posts
Wrong again.
https://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/cbwprolif
THE UNITED STATES
Biological Weapons
State declaration: The United States unilaterally gave up its biological weapons program in 1969. The destruction of all offensive BW agents occurred between 1971 and 1973. The United States currently conducts research as part of its biodefense program.
Allegations: According to a compliance report published by the Russian government in August 2010, the United States is undertaking research on Smallpox which is prohibited by the World Health Organization. Russia also accused the United States of undertaking BW research in order to improve defenses against bio-terror attacks which is “especially questionable from the standpoint of Article I of the BTWC.”
Chemical Weapons
State declaration: The United States declared a large chemical arsenal of 27,770 metric tons to the OPCW after the CWC came into force in 1997. Along with Russia, the United States received an extension when it was unable to complete destruction of its chemical stockpiles by 2012. A 2016 OPCW report declared that the United States had destroyed approximately 90 percent of the chemical weapons stockpile it had declared as the CWC entered into force; nearly 25,000 metric tons of the declared total of 27,770. The United States has destroyed all of Category 2 and Category 3 weapons and is projected to complete destruction of its Category 1 weapons by 2023.
Allegations: A 2010 Russian report alleged that the United States has legislation which could inhibit inspections and investigations of U.S. chemical facilities. Russia has also accused the United States of not fully reporting chemical agents removed from Iraq between 2003 and 2008 and sent to the United States for testing and subsequent destruction.
TaylorTRoom
1,000+ Posts
Weekly Prediction Contest
* Predict HORNS-AGGIES *
Sat, Nov 30 • 6:30 PM on ABC
Recent Threads
-
The Media Industry
- Started by texas_ex2000
- Replies: 8K
- West Mall
-
President Biden Accountability Thread
- Started by 2003TexasGrad
- Replies: 4K
- West Mall
Prediction Results Threads
