Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Trump just threw the DOJ and intelligence community under the bus and started ranting about HRC like a loon at a joint press conference with Putin.

I cannot see how any of them don't resign tomorrow from Kelly down.

 Frazzled wrote:
Trump just threw the DOJ and intelligence community under the bus and started ranting about HRC like a loon at a joint press conference with Putin.

I cannot see how any of them don't resign tomorrow from Kelly down.

Just invoke the Holy Trinity! "Fake News, Librul Deep State, Lamestream Media Bias"

 Spinner wrote:


You're talking about a crowd that believes that a reality show con man who decorates his apartment in 'Dictator Chic' and announced his candidacy from a golden escalator is 'one of us' as opposed to those uncaring coastal city-dwelling elites.

Trying to convince them is not worth it. Sticking up for the people they're hurting is.

Well...the thing is...they will be affected too. And they will see everything they lost in comparison to before. Thus they will have a higher motivation to act by themselves and make sure such horrible things are put to an end, one way or the other.

That's why I reluclantly think this could have "positive" consequences in the end...after a whole lot of bad, horrible and terribles things, yes...

 Frazzled wrote:


I cannot see how any of them don't resign tomorrow from Kelly down.

Does Kelly still matter at this point ? I read some articles saying Trump actually try to force Kelly to resign, so that he can put another of his puppets instead.

They've stuck with him through the Muslim travel ban, glad-handing a guy who runs concentration camps, and state-sponsored kidnappings. I don't know why you think this would be the straw that broke the camel's back.

 Sarouan wrote:

 Spinner wrote:


You're talking about a crowd that believes that a reality show con man who decorates his apartment in 'Dictator Chic' and announced his candidacy from a golden escalator is 'one of us' as opposed to those uncaring coastal city-dwelling elites.

Trying to convince them is not worth it. Sticking up for the people they're hurting is.

Well...the thing is...they will be affected too. And they will see everything they lost in comparison to before. Thus they will have a higher motivation to act by themselves and make sure such horrible things are put to an end, one way or the other.

That's why I reluclantly think this could have "positive" consequences in the end...after a whole lot of bad, horrible and terribles things, yes...

I mean, they're already being affected. There's mumbling about 'well, I don't like him doing this, but he Tells It Like It Is/Puts America First/Is Tough On Crime/That's Just How New York People Talk/Lesser Of Two Evils".

There's a lot of capacity to put up with enabling a dangerous criminal moron as long as he's Stigginit, I suppose.

 Spinner wrote:
They've stuck with him through the Muslim travel ban, glad-handing a guy who runs concentration camps, and state-sponsored kidnappings. I don't know why you think this would be the straw that broke the camel's back.

Indeed, I don't know what kind of events could happen with Trump finishing his first mandate and actually winning a second while taking it to the very end. I may shudder at this thought.

What I do know however is that there is always a breaking point for the people and that revolutions never happen out of the blue in one day - they always build over time with continuous frustrations.

Thinking everything will keep being the same even when despicable acts keep piling up is forgetting what happened numerous times during Mankind's history.

 Frazzled wrote:
Trump just threw the DOJ and intelligence community under the bus and started ranting about HRC like a loon at a joint press conference with Putin.

I cannot see how any of them don't resign tomorrow from Kelly down.

I would like to think such a backbone exists, though I've thought as much before and been disappointed. I dont expect we will ultimately see any resignations, they all appear to be ok wirh all this or otherwise booked nonrefundable passage on the Trump Train.

Looking at what we see from the people in Trump's orbit, especially the last few weeks from Pruitt's resignation to Kavanaughs nomination statements and Spicer describing Trump as a rainbow unicorn, the people in Trump's orbit appear to have drunk the Kool Aid willingly.

I think at this point we have to assume anyone continuing to work for this administration is fine with all this.

 Ustrello wrote:


Name one thing we or the Russians would gain by saying they attacked a US military base? It would make the russians look incompetent (which they are) and it would force us to respond in some way that would not create any benefits in Syria.

That is the reason the governments of Russia and the US side step or deny what happened.

Okay, now you sound just like someone propagating conspiracy theories. So Russia and the US, two nations that are anything but on good terms with one another are conspiring now to keep their attacks on each other a secret? In terms of wacky conspiracy theories, that is right up there with the theory that the US government was behind 9/11. It is beyond ridiculous. And Russian soldiers directly attacking a US base, and the US directly targeting Russian soldiers? That goes beyond all tensions we have ever seen, even in the Cold War! Such an event would without doubt set off a full-fledged war between the two countries.
Besides, if the Russians were incompetent then they would not have been able to just practically take over all of Syria. The Russian military is one of the most highly trained militaries in the world. It would never attack a base without air cover or air defenses. And indeed, the area was covered by Russian air defense systems and fighter jets. Russia could have shot down the aircraft that destroyed the attackers at any time. And they would have, had those aircraft targeted Russian soldiers. But they didn't. Instead, the Americans informed the Russians of the attack and the planned airstrikes. The Russians said 'those are not our guys' and did not object to the airstrike. That is all. There is no grand conspiracy or crazy unprecedented attacks.

 Vaktathi wrote:
Spicer describing Trump as a rainbow unicorn

I had to google this. That's hilariously homoerotic. Does the guy not have an editor to check for that kind of thing?

I think at this point we have to assume anyone continuing to work for this administration is fine with all this.

Yeah, it's a depressingly pathetic Cult of Trump over there.

 feeder wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
Spicer describing Trump as a rainbow unicorn

I had to google this. That's hilariously homoerotic. Does the guy not have an editor to check for that kind of thing?

I think at this point we have to assume anyone continuing to work for this administration is fine with all this.

Yeah, it's a depressingly pathetic Cult of Trump over there.

Secretly being a unicorn may explain some of Trump's behaviour though.

 feeder wrote:


Yeah, it's a depressingly pathetic Cult of Trump over there.

Actually, it was to be expected given Trump's personnality/GOP's line. They are perfectly fine with authoritarian behavior. In the end, Democracy is a hinder for them and I'm pretty sure they are actually envious of how Putin and Ertogan handle their countries. After all, they can do whatever they want without small things like "law" going in their way for committing their deeds. Corruption naturally follows in their trails.

 Iron_Captain wrote:

 Ustrello wrote:


Name one thing we or the Russians would gain by saying they attacked a US military base? It would make the russians look incompetent (which they are) and it would force us to respond in some way that would not create any benefits in Syria.

That is the reason the governments of Russia and the US side step or deny what happened.

Okay, now you sound just like someone propagating conspiracy theories. So Russia and the US, two nations that are anything but on good terms with one another are conspiring now to keep their attacks on each other a secret? In terms of wacky conspiracy theories, that is right up there with the theory that the US government was behind 9/11. It is beyond ridiculous. And Russian soldiers directly attacking a US base, and the US directly targeting Russian soldiers? That goes beyond all tensions we have ever seen, even in the Cold War! Such an event would without doubt set off a full-fledged war between the two countries.
Besides, if the Russians were incompetent then they would not have been able to just practically take over all of Syria. The Russian military is one of the most highly trained militaries in the world. It would never attack a base without air cover or air defenses. And indeed, the area was covered by Russian air defense systems and fighter jets. Russia could have shot down the aircraft that destroyed the attackers at any time. And they would have, had those aircraft targeted Russian soldiers. But they didn't. Instead, the Americans informed the Russians of the attack and the planned airstrikes. The Russians said 'those are not our guys' and did not object to the airstrike. That is all. There is no grand conspiracy or crazy unprecedented attacks.

It happened in the Korean war when Soviet pilots were fighting for the North Koreans and shot down American pilots, so no your "description" is blatantly false.

As for taking over most of syria, I would say good job except they people they fight don't have an air force or much of a capability of challenging one. So no it is not that big of an accomplishment.

But hey lets forget that all 200 of those Russian mercenaries that were killed were part of an organization that was run by one of Putins top men

 Frazzled wrote:
Trump just threw the DOJ and intelligence community under the bus and started ranting about HRC like a loon at a joint press conference with Putin.

I cannot see how any of them don't resign tomorrow from Kelly down.

It's quite amazing really that he will consider the arguments of the leader of another nation, the one accused of taking those actions over and above those of his own intelligence operators. Those that are there to protect and serve the nation should in some way be considered as lying or not providing evidence. You'd have to question whether Trump just got shown videos of golden showers for two hours. At this stage it's a bit like watching a murderer kill someone and then police asking that same person whether they think they should be considered guilty of the crime (or not).

I also see that a member of the free press was also forcibily ejected from the press conference. Good to know the freedom of the press is not being impacted by all of this...

 Ustrello wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:

 Ustrello wrote:


Name one thing we or the Russians would gain by saying they attacked a US military base? It would make the russians look incompetent (which they are) and it would force us to respond in some way that would not create any benefits in Syria.

That is the reason the governments of Russia and the US side step or deny what happened.

Okay, now you sound just like someone propagating conspiracy theories. So Russia and the US, two nations that are anything but on good terms with one another are conspiring now to keep their attacks on each other a secret? In terms of wacky conspiracy theories, that is right up there with the theory that the US government was behind 9/11. It is beyond ridiculous. And Russian soldiers directly attacking a US base, and the US directly targeting Russian soldiers? That goes beyond all tensions we have ever seen, even in the Cold War! Such an event would without doubt set off a full-fledged war between the two countries.
Besides, if the Russians were incompetent then they would not have been able to just practically take over all of Syria. The Russian military is one of the most highly trained militaries in the world. It would never attack a base without air cover or air defenses. And indeed, the area was covered by Russian air defense systems and fighter jets. Russia could have shot down the aircraft that destroyed the attackers at any time. And they would have, had those aircraft targeted Russian soldiers. But they didn't. Instead, the Americans informed the Russians of the attack and the planned airstrikes. The Russians said 'those are not our guys' and did not object to the airstrike. That is all. There is no grand conspiracy or crazy unprecedented attacks.

It happened in the Korean war when Soviet pilots were fighting for the North Koreans and shot down American pilots, so no your "description" is blatantly false.

As for taking over most of syria, I would say good job except they people they fight don't have an air force or much of a capability of challenging one. So no it is not that big of an accomplishment.

But hey lets forget that all 200 of those Russian mercenaries that were killed were part of an organization that was run by one of Putins top men

Ultimately it doesn't really matter if they were 200 or 10.

Those mercenaries were there supporting Assad were sent from and ultimately paid by Russia. It's an escalation over bombing Syrians (which are supported by Russia) or supporting Ukraine in the Donbass (where Russia supports the breakaway Eastern regions).

 Ustrello wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:

 Ustrello wrote:


Name one thing we or the Russians would gain by saying they attacked a US military base? It would make the russians look incompetent (which they are) and it would force us to respond in some way that would not create any benefits in Syria.

That is the reason the governments of Russia and the US side step or deny what happened.

Okay, now you sound just like someone propagating conspiracy theories. So Russia and the US, two nations that are anything but on good terms with one another are conspiring now to keep their attacks on each other a secret? In terms of wacky conspiracy theories, that is right up there with the theory that the US government was behind 9/11. It is beyond ridiculous. And Russian soldiers directly attacking a US base, and the US directly targeting Russian soldiers? That goes beyond all tensions we have ever seen, even in the Cold War! Such an event would without doubt set off a full-fledged war between the two countries.
Besides, if the Russians were incompetent then they would not have been able to just practically take over all of Syria. The Russian military is one of the most highly trained militaries in the world. It would never attack a base without air cover or air defenses. And indeed, the area was covered by Russian air defense systems and fighter jets. Russia could have shot down the aircraft that destroyed the attackers at any time. And they would have, had those aircraft targeted Russian soldiers. But they didn't. Instead, the Americans informed the Russians of the attack and the planned airstrikes. The Russians said 'those are not our guys' and did not object to the airstrike. That is all. There is no grand conspiracy or crazy unprecedented attacks.

It happened in the Korean war when Soviet pilots were fighting for the North Koreans and shot down American pilots, so no your "description" is blatantly false.

As for taking over most of syria, I would say good job except they people they fight don't have an air force or much of a capability of challenging one. So no it is not that big of an accomplishment.

The case of Soviet pilots fighting in the Korean war is similar, yes. Sending volunteers to fight for the Chinese or North Korean air force in their war against the US is very different from the Soviet Union directly attacking US military bases in Korea. In the first case, you have a conflict between China and the US, in which some of China's pilots come from the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union is only indirectly involved in facilitating those volunteers who fight for China. The same thing is going on here in Syria, although with people who fight for money rather than for ideological reasons. Russia did not directly attack a US base. Syria did, with its assault force including a number of people who came from Russia but fought for Syria. Russia was indirectly responsible because they allowed those people to travel to Syria and fight for the regime, but they are not directly responsible or involved in the attack. Which is why they did not object to the American strikes.
And hey, the US actually has trouble beating people that don't even have an airforce (Vietnam, Afghanistan). Russia has successfully fought guerilla groups in Chechnya, and is now enjoying quite a bit of success in Syria. I guess having no regard for collateral damage is actually pretty useful when fighting guerillas. While I definitely prefer the American military because they are nice, the Russian military is anything but incompetent. Brutal perhaps, with no regard for human life, but definitely not incompetent.

 Ustrello wrote:
But hey lets forget that all 200 of those Russian mercenaries that were killed were part of an organization that was run by one of Putins top men

Yeah, and let's conveniently forget that the only reason you believe this is because someone told you so without offering even the slightest bit of support for that theory. May I ask whether you always believe every theory people tell you about without actually backing it up?

jouso wrote:

 Ustrello wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:

 Ustrello wrote:


Name one thing we or the Russians would gain by saying they attacked a US military base? It would make the russians look incompetent (which they are) and it would force us to respond in some way that would not create any benefits in Syria.

That is the reason the governments of Russia and the US side step or deny what happened.

Okay, now you sound just like someone propagating conspiracy theories. So Russia and the US, two nations that are anything but on good terms with one another are conspiring now to keep their attacks on each other a secret? In terms of wacky conspiracy theories, that is right up there with the theory that the US government was behind 9/11. It is beyond ridiculous. And Russian soldiers directly attacking a US base, and the US directly targeting Russian soldiers? That goes beyond all tensions we have ever seen, even in the Cold War! Such an event would without doubt set off a full-fledged war between the two countries.
Besides, if the Russians were incompetent then they would not have been able to just practically take over all of Syria. The Russian military is one of the most highly trained militaries in the world. It would never attack a base without air cover or air defenses. And indeed, the area was covered by Russian air defense systems and fighter jets. Russia could have shot down the aircraft that destroyed the attackers at any time. And they would have, had those aircraft targeted Russian soldiers. But they didn't. Instead, the Americans informed the Russians of the attack and the planned airstrikes. The Russians said 'those are not our guys' and did not object to the airstrike. That is all. There is no grand conspiracy or crazy unprecedented attacks.

It happened in the Korean war when Soviet pilots were fighting for the North Koreans and shot down American pilots, so no your "description" is blatantly false.

As for taking over most of syria, I would say good job except they people they fight don't have an air force or much of a capability of challenging one. So no it is not that big of an accomplishment.

But hey lets forget that all 200 of those Russian mercenaries that were killed were part of an organization that was run by one of Putins top men

Ultimately it doesn't really matter if they were 200 or 10.

Those mercenaries were there supporting Assad were sent from and ultimately paid by Russia. It's an escalation over bombing Syrians (which are supported by Russia) or supporting Ukraine in the Donbass (where Russia supports the breakaway Eastern regions).

Only 5 deaths of Russian nationals have been independently and officially confirmed. But you are right. The number is irrelevant. Even if there were 5000 Russian mercenaries there, it does not matter. What does matter is that they were not employed and paid for directly by Russia, but by Syrians. They were not send by Russia, but went there of their own initiative. They may have been employed by this Wagner company, although with like almost every claim in this story there is zero evidence for that, but that too does not say anything. It is a private company that offers mercenaries to (almost) anyone willing to pay for them. In other words, just because someone is Russian, does not immediately mean Putin or the Russian state is involved (seriously, this is going too far. It smells of racism. For the record, Russian people have as much free will as any other people. We are not mindcontrolled by Putin.). Currently, there are people from the US and Western Europe fighting for the Kurds against Turkey. But I hear no one accuse the US of directly attacking Turkey.
These accusations are baseless and ridiculous. Like any conspiracy theory is. But just because "Putin", everyone just loses their ability to reason.

 Iron_Captain wrote:

 Ustrello wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:

 Ustrello wrote:


Name one thing we or the Russians would gain by saying they attacked a US military base? It would make the russians look incompetent (which they are) and it would force us to respond in some way that would not create any benefits in Syria.

That is the reason the governments of Russia and the US side step or deny what happened.

Okay, now you sound just like someone propagating conspiracy theories. So Russia and the US, two nations that are anything but on good terms with one another are conspiring now to keep their attacks on each other a secret? In terms of wacky conspiracy theories, that is right up there with the theory that the US government was behind 9/11. It is beyond ridiculous. And Russian soldiers directly attacking a US base, and the US directly targeting Russian soldiers? That goes beyond all tensions we have ever seen, even in the Cold War! Such an event would without doubt set off a full-fledged war between the two countries.
Besides, if the Russians were incompetent then they would not have been able to just practically take over all of Syria. The Russian military is one of the most highly trained militaries in the world. It would never attack a base without air cover or air defenses. And indeed, the area was covered by Russian air defense systems and fighter jets. Russia could have shot down the aircraft that destroyed the attackers at any time. And they would have, had those aircraft targeted Russian soldiers. But they didn't. Instead, the Americans informed the Russians of the attack and the planned airstrikes. The Russians said 'those are not our guys' and did not object to the airstrike. That is all. There is no grand conspiracy or crazy unprecedented attacks.

It happened in the Korean war when Soviet pilots were fighting for the North Koreans and shot down American pilots, so no your "description" is blatantly false.

As for taking over most of syria, I would say good job except they people they fight don't have an air force or much of a capability of challenging one. So no it is not that big of an accomplishment.

The case of Soviet pilots fighting in the Korean war is similar, yes. Sending volunteers to fight for the Chinese or North Korean air force in their war against the US is very different from the Soviet Union directly attacking US military bases in Korea. In the first case, you have a conflict between China and the US, in which some of China's pilots come from the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union is only indirectly involved in facilitating those volunteers who fight for China. The same thing is going on here in Syria, although with people who fight for money rather than for ideological reasons. Russia did not directly attack a US base. Syria did, with its assault force including a number of people who came from Russia but fought for Syria. Russia was indirectly responsible because they allowed those people to travel to Syria and fight for the regime, but they are not directly responsible or involved in the attack. Which is why they did not object to the American strikes.
And hey, the US actually has trouble beating people that don't even have an airforce (Vietnam, Afghanistan). Russia has successfully fought guerilla groups in Chechnya, and is now enjoying quite a bit of success in Syria. I guess having no regard for collateral damage is actually pretty useful when fighting guerillas. While I definitely prefer the American military because they are nice, the Russian military is anything but incompetent. Brutal perhaps, with no regard for human life, but definitely not incompetent.

 Ustrello wrote:
But hey lets forget that all 200 of those Russian mercenaries that were killed were part of an organization that was run by one of Putins top men

Yeah, and let's conveniently forget that the only reason you believe this is because someone told you so without offering even the slightest bit of support for that theory. May I ask whether you always believe every theory people tell you about without actually backing it up?

Besides the fact that I and dozens of others posted proof about it when it happened?

 Whirlwind wrote:

I also see that a member of the free press was also forcibily ejected from the press conference. Good to know the freedom of the press is not being impacted by all of this...

I heard he was ejected for holding up a sign protesting against nuclear weapons. That puts quite another spin on it.

 Iron_Captain wrote:
But they didn't. Instead, the Americans informed the Russians of the attack and the planned airstrikes. The Russians said 'those are not our guys' and did not object to the airstrike.

Right, just like the little green men in Ukraine were volunteers on vacation. What world do you live in?

They could not object because that would mean they were indeed directly supporting the mercenaries who were advancing on US positions. Never mind that the Russians are supplying them with arms and information, as well as being managed by a guy reporting right to Putin. They had to deny they were theirs or the US would have followed up with a far more aggressive response if they said otherwise.

Lay off the RT. Its 100% trash.

 Ustrello wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:

 Ustrello wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:

 Ustrello wrote:


Name one thing we or the Russians would gain by saying they attacked a US military base? It would make the russians look incompetent (which they are) and it would force us to respond in some way that would not create any benefits in Syria.

That is the reason the governments of Russia and the US side step or deny what happened.

Okay, now you sound just like someone propagating conspiracy theories. So Russia and the US, two nations that are anything but on good terms with one another are conspiring now to keep their attacks on each other a secret? In terms of wacky conspiracy theories, that is right up there with the theory that the US government was behind 9/11. It is beyond ridiculous. And Russian soldiers directly attacking a US base, and the US directly targeting Russian soldiers? That goes beyond all tensions we have ever seen, even in the Cold War! Such an event would without doubt set off a full-fledged war between the two countries.
Besides, if the Russians were incompetent then they would not have been able to just practically take over all of Syria. The Russian military is one of the most highly trained militaries in the world. It would never attack a base without air cover or air defenses. And indeed, the area was covered by Russian air defense systems and fighter jets. Russia could have shot down the aircraft that destroyed the attackers at any time. And they would have, had those aircraft targeted Russian soldiers. But they didn't. Instead, the Americans informed the Russians of the attack and the planned airstrikes. The Russians said 'those are not our guys' and did not object to the airstrike. That is all. There is no grand conspiracy or crazy unprecedented attacks.

It happened in the Korean war when Soviet pilots were fighting for the North Koreans and shot down American pilots, so no your "description" is blatantly false.

As for taking over most of syria, I would say good job except they people they fight don't have an air force or much of a capability of challenging one. So no it is not that big of an accomplishment.

The case of Soviet pilots fighting in the Korean war is similar, yes. Sending volunteers to fight for the Chinese or North Korean air force in their war against the US is very different from the Soviet Union directly attacking US military bases in Korea. In the first case, you have a conflict between China and the US, in which some of China's pilots come from the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union is only indirectly involved in facilitating those volunteers who fight for China. The same thing is going on here in Syria, although with people who fight for money rather than for ideological reasons. Russia did not directly attack a US base. Syria did, with its assault force including a number of people who came from Russia but fought for Syria. Russia was indirectly responsible because they allowed those people to travel to Syria and fight for the regime, but they are not directly responsible or involved in the attack. Which is why they did not object to the American strikes.
And hey, the US actually has trouble beating people that don't even have an airforce (Vietnam, Afghanistan). Russia has successfully fought guerilla groups in Chechnya, and is now enjoying quite a bit of success in Syria. I guess having no regard for collateral damage is actually pretty useful when fighting guerillas. While I definitely prefer the American military because they are nice, the Russian military is anything but incompetent. Brutal perhaps, with no regard for human life, but definitely not incompetent.

 Ustrello wrote:
But hey lets forget that all 200 of those Russian mercenaries that were killed were part of an organization that was run by one of Putins top men

Yeah, and let's conveniently forget that the only reason you believe this is because someone told you so without offering even the slightest bit of support for that theory. May I ask whether you always believe every theory people tell you about without actually backing it up?

Besides the fact that I and dozens of others posted proof about it when it happened?

You did not. You could not. Because such proof does not exist. I spent hours scouring the internet and social media to find even the slightest shred of proof. But there is nothing except "anonymous sources", aka "we don't have any proof at all".

 KTG17 wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:
But they didn't. Instead, the Americans informed the Russians of the attack and the planned airstrikes. The Russians said 'those are not our guys' and did not object to the airstrike.

Right, just like the little green men in Ukraine were volunteers on vacation. What world do you live in?

They could not object because that would mean they were indeed directly supporting the mercenaries who were advancing on US positions. Never mind that the Russians are supplying them with arms and information, as well as being managed by a guy reporting right to Putin. They had to deny they were theirs or the US would have followed up with a far more aggressive response if they said otherwise.

Lay off the RT. Its 100% trash.

The little green men in Crimea were Russian soldiers wearing Russian uniforms using Russian vehicles and wielding Russian weapons. It was obvious they were Russian soldiers, controlled by the Russian state. But those little green men were a world apart from the mercenaries we see in Syria, who are not Russian soldiers. It is a completely different scenario.

Also, they are not managed by a guy reporting directly to Putin. Do you understand anything of chains of command at all? Do you understand that not every individual in Russia is part of some kind of chain of command that leads to Putin?
Firstly, the rumour that the mercenaries involved in the Syrian attack were employed by the Wagner company is completely unsubstantiated. Secondly, even if they were, the Wagner company is not controlled directly by Putin or the Russian state. Its founder is a businessman with links to Putin, yes, but virtually all businessmen in Russia have such links. That is simply the way business in a corrupt country like Russia works. It does not mean however that they take orders from Putin.

Sascha Baron Cohen is back. Jeebus. Talking about low hanging fruit. These guys are fething fools.

If I was on the right I would be going out of the way to ensure these idiots are not representing my interests.

"A toddler is pure, untainted by fake news or homosexuality"

We probably want to take the details of the battle of Deir al-Zor to another thread.

 Iron_Captain wrote:

 Ustrello wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:

 Ustrello wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:

 Ustrello wrote:


Name one thing we or the Russians would gain by saying they attacked a US military base? It would make the russians look incompetent (which they are) and it would force us to respond in some way that would not create any benefits in Syria.

That is the reason the governments of Russia and the US side step or deny what happened.

Okay, now you sound just like someone propagating conspiracy theories. So Russia and the US, two nations that are anything but on good terms with one another are conspiring now to keep their attacks on each other a secret? In terms of wacky conspiracy theories, that is right up there with the theory that the US government was behind 9/11. It is beyond ridiculous. And Russian soldiers directly attacking a US base, and the US directly targeting Russian soldiers? That goes beyond all tensions we have ever seen, even in the Cold War! Such an event would without doubt set off a full-fledged war between the two countries.
Besides, if the Russians were incompetent then they would not have been able to just practically take over all of Syria. The Russian military is one of the most highly trained militaries in the world. It would never attack a base without air cover or air defenses. And indeed, the area was covered by Russian air defense systems and fighter jets. Russia could have shot down the aircraft that destroyed the attackers at any time. And they would have, had those aircraft targeted Russian soldiers. But they didn't. Instead, the Americans informed the Russians of the attack and the planned airstrikes. The Russians said 'those are not our guys' and did not object to the airstrike. That is all. There is no grand conspiracy or crazy unprecedented attacks.

It happened in the Korean war when Soviet pilots were fighting for the North Koreans and shot down American pilots, so no your "description" is blatantly false.

As for taking over most of syria, I would say good job except they people they fight don't have an air force or much of a capability of challenging one. So no it is not that big of an accomplishment.

The case of Soviet pilots fighting in the Korean war is similar, yes. Sending volunteers to fight for the Chinese or North Korean air force in their war against the US is very different from the Soviet Union directly attacking US military bases in Korea. In the first case, you have a conflict between China and the US, in which some of China's pilots come from the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union is only indirectly involved in facilitating those volunteers who fight for China. The same thing is going on here in Syria, although with people who fight for money rather than for ideological reasons. Russia did not directly attack a US base. Syria did, with its assault force including a number of people who came from Russia but fought for Syria. Russia was indirectly responsible because they allowed those people to travel to Syria and fight for the regime, but they are not directly responsible or involved in the attack. Which is why they did not object to the American strikes.
And hey, the US actually has trouble beating people that don't even have an airforce (Vietnam, Afghanistan). Russia has successfully fought guerilla groups in Chechnya, and is now enjoying quite a bit of success in Syria. I guess having no regard for collateral damage is actually pretty useful when fighting guerillas. While I definitely prefer the American military because they are nice, the Russian military is anything but incompetent. Brutal perhaps, with no regard for human life, but definitely not incompetent.

 Ustrello wrote:
But hey lets forget that all 200 of those Russian mercenaries that were killed were part of an organization that was run by one of Putins top men

Yeah, and let's conveniently forget that the only reason you believe this is because someone told you so without offering even the slightest bit of support for that theory. May I ask whether you always believe every theory people tell you about without actually backing it up?

Besides the fact that I and dozens of others posted proof about it when it happened?

You did not. You could not. Because such proof does not exist. I spent hours scouring the internet and social media to find even the slightest shred of proof. But there is nothing except "anonymous sources", aka "we don't have any proof at all".

Hey man keep drinking that "Russia is stronk" koolaid, you all fethed up and got a bunch of your countrymen killed and we, along with your government, were smart enough not to make a big deal out of it and make a already messy situation in syria worse


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Vaktathi wrote:
We probably want to take the details of the battle of Deir al-Zor to another thread.

It fits in with the US politics, but fair enough I will drop it

 Frazzled wrote:
Trump just threw the DOJ and intelligence community under the bus and started ranting about HRC like a loon at a joint press conference with Putin.

I cannot see how any of them don't resign tomorrow from Kelly down.

TFW you appeal to the morality and honor of guys who came up with a widespread policy of ripping babes in arms from mothers.

Kelly and Mattis aren't the adults in the room, they are his accomplices.

 Ustrello wrote:

Hey man keep drinking that "Russia is stronk" koolaid, you all fethed up and got a bunch of your countrymen killed and we, along with your government, were smart enough not to make a big deal out of it and make a already messy situation in syria worse


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Vaktathi wrote:
We probably want to take the details of the battle of Deir al-Zor to another thread.

It fits in with the US politics, but fair enough I will drop it

Oh hey. That is comedy gold. You run out of arguments and then instead of continuing the discussion in a civil manner or admitting you were wrong, you decide to accuse me of being high on patriotism (right after I talk gak about the Russian military, but whatever). Okay, that is fair I guess, an ad hominem is a disreputable but commonly used debating tactic. But then you immediately proceed to go on a nationalism trip yourself? That is funny.
Well, then, have fun with your conspiracy theories. No wonder Russian intelligence services find it so incredibly easy to spread disinformation, with people like you just believing in every weird theory and rumour they are told. I think it is better to drop it at this point, yes.

 Iron_Captain wrote:

 Ustrello wrote:

Hey man keep drinking that "Russia is stronk" koolaid, you all fethed up and got a bunch of your countrymen killed and we, along with your government, were smart enough not to make a big deal out of it and make a already messy situation in syria worse


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Vaktathi wrote:
We probably want to take the details of the battle of Deir al-Zor to another thread.

It fits in with the US politics, but fair enough I will drop it

Oh hey. That is comedy gold. You run out of arguments and then instead of continuing the discussion in a civil manner or admitting you were wrong, you decide to accuse me of being high on patriotism (right after I talk gak about the Russian military, but whatever). Okay, that is fair I guess, an ad hominem is a disreputable but commonly used debating tactic. But then you immediately proceed to go on a nationalism trip yourself? That is funny.
Well, then, have fun with your conspiracy theories. No wonder Russian intelligence services find it so incredibly easy to spread disinformation, with people like you just believing in every weird theory and rumour they are told. I think it is better to drop it at this point, yes.

Heavily implying I ran out of arguments, or it could be that we ran through this charade a while back and I got the same exact answers from you and I decided you weren't worth it this go around

So when are they going to start handing out Make Russia Great Again hats to the trumpers?

 Iron_Captain wrote:
Firstly, the rumour that the mercenaries involved in the Syrian attack were employed by the Wagner company is completely unsubstantiated. Secondly, even if they were, the Wagner company is not controlled directly by Putin or the Russian state. Its founder is a businessman with links to Putin, yes, but virtually all businessmen in Russia have such links. That is simply the way business in a corrupt country like Russia works. It does not mean however that they take orders from Putin.

But on the other hand, isn't it actually illegal (under Russian law) to go off as a mercenary? So whoever these guys are, if they are Russian citizen they break the laws of Russia.

They do seem to conveniently fight for groups Russia isn't bombing, so maybe they are at least being ignored by Russian authorities?

 Whirlwind wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
Trump just threw the DOJ and intelligence community under the bus and started ranting about HRC like a loon at a joint press conference with Putin.

I cannot see how any of them don't resign tomorrow from Kelly down.

It's quite amazing really that he will consider the arguments of the leader of another nation, the one accused of taking those actions over and above those of his own intelligence operators. Those that are there to protect and serve the nation should in some way be considered as lying or not providing evidence. You'd have to question whether Trump just got shown videos of golden showers for two hours. At this stage it's a bit like watching a murderer kill someone and then police asking that same person whether they think they should be considered guilty of the crime (or not).

I also see that a member of the free press was also forcibily ejected from the press conference. Good to know the freedom of the press is not being impacted by all of this...

To be fair to Trump, his campaign is accused of collusion with Russian Intelligence to bias the election, and criminal charges gave been filed, so it's entirely fair and righteous that he should personally validate Russian Intelligence's statement that there was no collusion between Trump's campaign and Russian Intelligence to bias the election.

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 Sarouan wrote:
It's weird, but I wonder if that wouldn't be better if Trump got a second mandate and Republicans keep majority in both chambers. Because the long term effects of his presidency and administration won't really show at the end of the first mandate and will be more clear with the second. He then would be cornered by the consequences of his own actions revealed to everyone, and the GOP propaganda will really be in trouble to make an alternative narrative to counter reality.

If the Democrats win instead, you can be sure the GOP will blame everything on them and dismiss the "Trump Accident" even more swiftly.

That's how you catch liars and delusive people. By giving them absolute no chance to escape with their lies and delusions.

But I agree, a lot of people, innocents included, will suffer that way. It will be certainly horrible. Well, unfortunately, some people would never understand another way. The more right you are, the harder is the fall.

The danger is that six more years of Trumpism will install an unbreakably far right wing system of federal judges at all levels,

We don't want judges to push an ideological agenda or wet their finger based on current sentiments... we want them to simply adjudicate laws as written. Trump's 2 pick does that.

as well as damage the international rules-based order beyond repair.

Things were said in every administration for $500 Alex.

Spetulhu wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:
Firstly, the rumour that the mercenaries involved in the Syrian attack were employed by the Wagner company is completely unsubstantiated. Secondly, even if they were, the Wagner company is not controlled directly by Putin or the Russian state. Its founder is a businessman with links to Putin, yes, but virtually all businessmen in Russia have such links. That is simply the way business in a corrupt country like Russia works. It does not mean however that they take orders from Putin.

But on the other hand, isn't it actually illegal (under Russian law) to go off as a mercenary? So whoever these guys are, if they are Russian citizen they break the laws of Russia.

They do seem to conveniently fight for groups Russia isn't bombing, so maybe they are at least being ignored by Russian authorities?

It very well may be. I think it is, but I don't know for certain. They are definitely being conveniently ignored by Russian authorities. But of course that is hardly a surprise since by fighting for Syria they are mostly beneficial to Russia's cause. Which I expect is the main reason (apart from misplaced patriotism maybe) they only fight for groups that the Russian government likes. If they would fight for a group the Russian government doesn't like, they'd be arrested really quickly.
It is the implication that Russia (or even better, Putin himself) is directly controlling them and is conspiring with the US to keep their existence a secret that is ridiculous.

 Ustrello wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:

 Ustrello wrote:

Hey man keep drinking that "Russia is stronk" koolaid, you all fethed up and got a bunch of your countrymen killed and we, along with your government, were smart enough not to make a big deal out of it and make a already messy situation in syria worse


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Vaktathi wrote:
We probably want to take the details of the battle of Deir al-Zor to another thread.

It fits in with the US politics, but fair enough I will drop it

Oh hey. That is comedy gold. You run out of arguments and then instead of continuing the discussion in a civil manner or admitting you were wrong, you decide to accuse me of being high on patriotism (right after I talk gak about the Russian military, but whatever). Okay, that is fair I guess, an ad hominem is a disreputable but commonly used debating tactic. But then you immediately proceed to go on a nationalism trip yourself? That is funny.
Well, then, have fun with your conspiracy theories. No wonder Russian intelligence services find it so incredibly easy to spread disinformation, with people like you just believing in every weird theory and rumour they are told. I think it is better to drop it at this point, yes.

Heavily implying I ran out of arguments, or it could be that we ran through this charade a while back and I got the same exact answers from you and I decided you weren't worth it this go around

Yeah, and you don't have any more arguments than you had last time (in other words, none at all). You said you had posted proof, yet I am still waiting for it. That is what I was referring to.

 Iron_Captain wrote:

The little green men in Crimea were Russian soldiers wearing Russian uniforms using Russian vehicles and wielding Russian weapons. It was obvious they were Russian soldiers, controlled by the Russian state. But those little green men were a world apart from the mercenaries we see in Syria, who are not Russian soldiers. It is a completely different scenario.

Also, they are not managed by a guy reporting directly to Putin. Do you understand anything of chains of command at all? Do you understand that not every individual in Russia is part of some kind of chain of command that leads to Putin?
Firstly, the rumour that the mercenaries involved in the Syrian attack were employed by the Wagner company is completely unsubstantiated. Secondly, even if they were, the Wagner company is not controlled directly by Putin or the Russian state. Its founder is a businessman with links to Putin, yes, but virtually all businessmen in Russia have such links. That is simply the way business in a corrupt country like Russia works. It does not mean however that they take orders from Putin.

Again, I have to ask if you are on the same planet as the rest of us.

The official Kremlin statement regarding Crimea and even eastern Ukraine was that they were not there officially, but you say its obvious they were controlled by the state, now what proof do you have of that? And here we have other green men of a different type serving Russian interests in Syria but this time they aren't being controlled by the state? Yes they are Wagner, and yes if Putin is going to sign off with approval or not depending on what they are doing to do. 200 Russians got whacked biting off more than they can chew. The state abandoned them because it feared escalation.