I see you go off on a tangent, when exposed.
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp....tack-syria-us-russia?client=ms-android-h3g-gb
Who did this then?
Give the wrong answer, we could end up flushing to the conspiracy section.
US official says...... end of debate. It is a war zone, **** happens. What the US official wants is to score a political hit against Russia, just as when Russia claims that the US is supporting Islamist pigs.... Did the Russians hit the convoy? Sure, it is possible.. also possible it was the rebels, ISIS, or someone else. Hell it could be the US/NATO that screwed up. We will never know, as the US/NATO has no people on the ground that are reliable, so they can form the narrative as they wish. Remember the Gulf of Tomkin incident.... US officials said that the North Koreans attacked US ships.. not so much as we know today..
Do you have proof the Russians are doing it?
Again do you have proof that the Russians are bombing innocent civilians? Remember.. real proof, not speculation or hearsay from biased sources (aka the opposition and NATO). Could the opposition or ISIS bomb/kill their own people for propaganda purposes? Of course they can, they done it before. Accusing the Assad government of chemical weapons attacks, when they themselves were doing it.. ups!
So spare me the usual bull**** propaganda in this conflict.. US/NATO are no angels in this fight, just as Russia is not and the continuing hostility between the two sides is only making sure the war and death will continue because no side can win, and in the vacuum ISIS or ISIS like groups will spring up and seize power. So it is time for the US/NATO/Russia to figure out if this is really the proxy war they want, or actually solve the Syrian problem... by going full out against ALL Islamists groups and telling the "moderate" opposition to work with Assad to defeat a mutual enemy or be labeled as an Islamist sympathizer.
What even makes you believe that if the US tells the moderate rebels to stop fighting Assad they would stop?
They started rebelling against the tyrant on their own yet you make it appear as if they only act by US orders.
They have a legitimate cause opposing the dictator and as long as the cause is a legitimate one it cannot just be opposed.
It's funny that you say both the Western allies and Russia are wrong here yet you seem to support Russia's "solution".
Yes, actually, we do. Because they've been plastering Aleppo, for instance, and because historically Russia hasn't given two ****s about "collateral damage".
Neither ISIS nor the rebels have an Air Force last time I checked, so your conspiracy theory that they're bombing themselves is laughable.
Nobody's proven that the rebels were behind the chemical attack; even if they were it shows a massive amount of irresponsiblity on the part of the Syrian Army in protecting the chemical weapons.
I dont, but then the west would have its moral high ground.. we all know that the moderate rebels are corrupt as hell, but we have been "forced" to stick with them due to an asinine policy of getting rid of Assad so that the Russians can be denied a naval and air port in the med.
On their own.. yea right. The Arab Spring pushed by Bush Jr and the neo-cons had nothing to do with that.. sure. US money and influence also had nooothing to do with it.. naw of course not.. sureeee.
Of course they do.. maybe. Chances are in fact, all that would have happened was that another tribe would take over and be as brutal and dictator like as Assad. This is tribal war after all. Moderate means nothing other than they have not had their true motive exposed yet.
I support Russia´s solution
So now we have Syria... one side is a known entity of a brutal dictatorship that the west has used previously to torture people they dont like.. versus an unknown fractured entity... come on, it is a no brainer. The only reason that ISIS even is possible (along with Al Nusra) is because of the power vacuum.
Back to the topic: Russian warships: Spain says refuelling request withdrawn - Russian warships: Spain says refuelling request withdrawn - BBC News
They've seen sense and realised their responsibilities to their allies.
It was Russia that withdrew the request. Spain never said they'd responded to NATO. It seems as though Putin's strategy of dividing Europe is working. Spain, being among 11 of the Europe countries hardest hit by U.S. sanctions, is obviously pissed.
Spain faces condemnation as it prepares to refuel Russian battle group heading to bomb Aleppo
I believe that all Nato allies are aware this battle group can be used to conduct air strikes against Aleppo and Syria
Jens Stoltenberg, Nato Secretary General
Spain is facing international anger as it apparently prepares to refuel a flotilla of Russian warships due to step up strikes against the beleaguered city of Aleppo.
Politicians and military figures condemned the support from a Nato member, while the head of the alliance indicated Madrid should rethink the pit stop.
Warships from an eight-strong group led by the carrier Admiral Kuznetsov will take on fuel and supplies from the port of Ceuta, a Spanish enclave in north Africa, after passing through the Straits of Gibraltar on Wednesday morning, Spanish papers reported.
Sir Gerald Howarth MP, a former Defence Minister, said it would be “wholly inappropriate” for a Nato member to refuel the Russian vessels.
He said: “Spain is a member of Nato and Nato is already facing challenges from Russia, not least in the Baltics.
He went on: “The Russians stand accused of indiscriminate bombing in Aleppo and Syria and it would be inappropriate to render them military assistance.”
Lord West, a former head of the Royal Navy, added: “There are sanctions against Russia and it’s an extraordinary thing for a Nato ally to do.”
The United States should withdraw from NATO. We owe those secularist Europeans nothing.
Spain faces condemnation as it prepares to refuel Russian battle group heading to bomb Aleppo
I believe that all Nato allies are aware this battle group can be used to conduct air strikes against Aleppo and Syria
Jens Stoltenberg, Nato Secretary General
Spain is facing international anger as it apparently prepares to refuel a flotilla of Russian warships due to step up strikes against the beleaguered city of Aleppo.
Politicians and military figures condemned the support from a Nato member, while the head of the alliance indicated Madrid should rethink the pit stop.
Warships from an eight-strong group led by the carrier Admiral Kuznetsov will take on fuel and supplies from the port of Ceuta, a Spanish enclave in north Africa, after passing through the Straits of Gibraltar on Wednesday morning, Spanish papers reported.
Sir Gerald Howarth MP, a former Defence Minister, said it would be “wholly inappropriate” for a Nato member to refuel the Russian vessels.
He said: “Spain is a member of Nato and Nato is already facing challenges from Russia, not least in the Baltics.
He went on: “The Russians stand accused of indiscriminate bombing in Aleppo and Syria and it would be inappropriate to render them military assistance.”
Lord West, a former head of the Royal Navy, added: “There are sanctions against Russia and it’s an extraordinary thing for a Nato ally to do.”
Many European countries are lose canons and one finds that they do not at all understand international security. So the harm the whole alliance and you never know, if their actions are ignorant or malign.
Russia withdrew its request to refuel its warships in a Spanish port, and so Moscow and Madrid both found a diplomatic way to get themselves off a difficult hook.
If NATO and Russia are not currently in armed conflict, why is this any thing other then a normal business transaction?
Russia wants fuel, and a port, Spain has both, and needs the money.
Or do like the USSR used to do, and demand payment in gold.That's how I look at it. Hopefully Spain is smart enough to charge the Russians an arm and leg for the fuel.
Indiscriminate bombing means bombing without caring whether you hit civilians or combatants and that's something neither Israel nor the Western allies do and supporting a nation defending itself from terrorists has nothing to do with religion.
If they cared they wouldna been in Iraq in the first place. They killed 100k civilians just to get at the oil. That's as bad as anything the terrorists do
As for Israel, they had *zero* casualties from terrorists after their anti missile system, yet they proceeded to kill thousands of Palestinians in revenge strikes. They were condemned by the UN and rightfully so. Americans are just blinded by this due to religious similarities
If they cared they wouldna been in Iraq in the first place. They killed 100k civilians just to get at the oil. That's as bad as anything the terrorists do
As for Israel, they had *zero* casualties from terrorists after their anti missile system, yet they proceeded to kill thousands of Palestinians in revenge strikes. They were condemned by the UN and rightfully so. Americans are just blinded by this due to religious similarities
Clearly you're a ridiculously ignorant person. What do the reasons for going to war in Iraq have to do with whether or not indiscriminate bombings were done? If you claim indiscriminate bombings were made by the Western allies you should prove it, and not engage in ridiculous attempts to justify this statement. The claim that no Israelis were killed after the anti-missile system was deployed is actually a flat out lie, and even if was true would not mean that the right to self defense is taken from a country just because no one is killed yet when thousands of rockets are launched at cities and people need to take shelter every several minutes. The attacks targeting rocket launchers and terrorists cannot be labeled as revenge attacks as their aim is to neutralize threats from terrorists and save human lives and the UN is an immoral organization controlled by a majority of ill intentioned nations, backwards nations really, so it can hardly be used as an argument that if the UN says something it makes it moral, the other way around is more likely, and again supporting the defending of civilians from terrorists has nothing to do with religion, it's the argument you're making that civilians should be allowed to be attacked without any response that is usually motivated by religion and the like of ISIS and Hamas.
Spain is aware of whom is serious when it comes to taking the fight to terrorists in the M.E. It's not the U.S.You can't make this **** up!
With friends like this who needs enemies...
Hit the Spanish where it hurts...in the pocket book.
They need to be fined, have sanctions against them, or be told to leave NATO for their actions.
Of course, none of this will happen, and things will go right on going on as before.
Such is the way of the world.
The Russians, however, have always admired and liked the Spanish people, and they should get some good liberty there.
The Spanish are great hosts to visiting ships.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?