Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Russia bombing - prelude to Sochi?
Collapse
X
-
is this pay back?
Recall, last August Bandar threatened Putin with terrorism. Bandar wanted Putin to step aside and allow the destruction of Syria.
Putin told Bandar where to shove it -- and two weeks later -- after the staged false flag chemical attack, rose to the occasion.
Putin's leadership forced Obama to back down and may have averted a nuclear showdown over Syria.
But the Saudis were not pleased.
-
Obama, Kerry, both got punked hard by Putin. 20-30 years from now when people study Presidents Obama will be a joke. Putin let Assad weasel his way out because Kerry made an off hand comment about giving up chemical weapons to avoid an attack.
The way they tried to spin it will work with the media in 2013, because they are lap dogs. But come a few decades when no one is invested in Obama he will be a rated one of the worst Presidents we have ever had.
Comment
-
Originally posted by cutthemdown View PostObama, Kerry, both got punked hard by Putin. 20-30 years from now when people study Presidents Obama will be a joke. Putin let Assad weasel his way out because Kerry made an off hand comment about giving up chemical weapons to avoid an attack.
The way they tried to spin it will work with the media in 2013, because they are lap dogs. But come a few decades when no one is invested in Obama he will be a rated one of the worst Presidents we have ever had.
Hitting the sauce a little early tonight, I see.
Comment
-
Putin would never have agreed to the suggestion to disarm his last ME client state, Syria, without the threat of US military action.
The Russians knew exactly the extent and location of the chemical weapons.....they were the main supplier.
They were also alert to the likelihood of those weapons turning up in the hands of Muslim extremists in Russia.
The prospect of a 'nuclear showdown' over Syria is just your wet dream, Gaffney. Not a hope in hell that was going to happen. But keep dreaming.
Comment
-
Originally posted by DenverBrit View PostPutin would never have agreed to the suggestion to disarm his last ME client state, Syria, without the threat of US military action.
The Russians knew exactly the extent and location of the chemical weapons.....they were the main supplier.
They were also alert to the likelihood of those weapons turning up in the hands of Muslim extremists in Russia.
The prospect of a 'nuclear showdown' over Syria is just your wet dream, Gaffney. Not a hope in hell that was going to happen. But keep dreaming.
Here's the story from last August about Bandar's "offer" to Putin. Credit Putin for refusing to go along with the destruction of Syria.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/n...ops-Syria.html
Comment
-
The Russian-Saudi Showdown at Sochi
December 31, 2013
If Putin believes the recent bombing was sponsored by the Saudis as pay back -- will he retaliate?
http://consortiumnews.com/2013/12/31...down-at-sochi/
Comment
-
Originally posted by mhgaffney View PostLeave it to Brit to miss the point.
Here's the story from last August about Bandar's "offer" to Putin. Credit Putin for refusing to go along with the destruction of Syria.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/n...ops-Syria.html
Here, I'll underline the important part of the story from the Telegraph link.
As-Safir, which has Hezbollah links and is hostile to the Saudis.
As-Safir said Prince Bandar pledged to safeguard Russia’s naval base in Syria if the Assad regime is toppled, but he also hinted at Chechen terrorist attacks on Russia’s Winter Olympics in Sochi if there is no accord. “I can give you a guarantee to protect the Winter Olympics next year. The Chechen groups that threaten the security of the games are controlled by us,” he allegedly said.
Iggy still not working?
Comment
-
Originally posted by cutthemdown View PostIt was never Assad that used them. It was the rebels hoping to draw the USA in. Assad didn't need chemical weapons to take them out because they are poorly armed. Shoulder fired missiles help but in the end helicopters and tanks win out over troops with mortars and shoulder fired weapons.
Good to know cut is still cut.
Comment
-
Originally posted by cutthemdown View PostIt was never Assad that used them. It was the rebels hoping to draw the USA in. Assad didn't need chemical weapons to take them out because they are poorly armed. Shoulder fired missiles help but in the end helicopters and tanks win out over troops with mortars and shoulder fired weapons.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Johnykbr View PostI don't believe that is accurate. What surfaced is BOTH sides used chemical weapons and the backlash of when we cherry-picked evidence to try to support intervention is what caused us to jump back like we just touched a hot stove.
Assad was winning the insurrection using conventional weapons. Why would he risk the world's displeasure by using chemical weapons? Whatever Assad is, he is not stupid.
Comment
Comment