Syria and US aggression

So we have the Russians in Syria legally (invited by Assad) assisting the Syrian military in the fight against CIASIS and Al-Ciada (the Western-Saudi proxy army). The U.S. in coordination with an ISIS advance, recently directly bombed the Syrian military killing almost one hundred, injuring more, and said, "oops." The idiots in Washington are pushing for a no-fly-zone over Syria to which our military has responded, "Well, if you want to start WWIII with Russia, that's what will happen if we try to enforce a no-fly-zone...Is that... is that really what you want to do?" In response, Russia has deployed S-300 and S-400 anti-aircraft missiles in Syria to shoot down US aircraft that might "accidentally" on purpose bomb Syrian or Russian forces or try to enforce a no-fly-zone. Also in response, Russia has abandoned plans to destroy Plutonium weapons stockpiles, and they are telling their population to prepare for total war and conducting 40 million strong emergency drills across the entire nation. They are also conducting simulated bombing runs across Northern Europe.

Thanks Obama and Hillary.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-...-would-lead-war-our-s-300-s-400-defenses-are-
 
Hurmanetar said:
Worth watching:
Click to expand...

I watched most of this today, interesting man.

I can see how people respect and like him, although I'd like to have seen more critical stuff too, to have a more balanced picture. I'd love to know how much to what we hear from in the media is true or made up by both sides. Here in the U.K. we keep hearing about Russian aggression almost daily. But nothing about SaudiArabia/US bombing of Yemen. I honestly think people are so fed up of the bullshit & hypocrisy we all hear that they just zone out.
 
The story regarding Russia it utterly distorted in the West.

1) The Georgia crisis (2008) happened because of the Georgia's aggression towards some pro-Russian villages. The Russians stepped in to stop it.

2) The Ukraine crisis happened after the properly elected president of the Ukraine was deposed by an uprising of Western Ukrainians backed by Western money and the offer of a huge EU loan. Again, the Russians took whatever action they have taken when the Western Ukrainians started attacking the eastern half of the country! Crimea, which was also in fear of a military attack from the western Ukraine voted to join Russia!

3) In Syria, the US gave a lot of arms to 'pro-western' forces, who seem almost indistinguishable from ISIS! Hence Russia's efforts to restore the Assad government to prevent Syria descending into a lawless mess like Lybia.

David
 
Sorry David. Your characterisation of events in Ukraine is misguided. While it is true that the West has played a role, the description you give is highly debatable (and that is putting it politely). There is a longer narrative which extends back at least to the 1930s, and the whole region has a much longer history which still resonates in today's events.
 
Typoz said:
Sorry David. Your characterisation of events in Ukraine is misguided. While it is true that the West has played a role, the description you give is highly debatable (and that is putting it politely). There is a longer narrative which extends back at least to the 1930s, and the whole region has a much longer history which still resonates in today's events.
Click to expand...
Well everywhere has a longer history - but can you be specific as to what I got wrong in my account?

David
 
I'm copying this here from the DT thread since I think it iss relevant.

David Bailey said:
That is very interesting, because looking back on that incident, it seems obvious, particularly in retrospect, that whoever used those chemical weapons it wasn't Assad! Why would he make one small use of the weapons - just enough to invoke Obama's red line? I think it was ISIS or related people who did that to try to pull America in on their side.

Did he discover that information by psychic means - do you have a link?

I have tended to assume that Obama was restraining the US military, but you seem to be saying the opposite.

David
Click to expand...

Pieczenik contends that the CIA has gone downhill since he personally helped dissolve the Soviet Union, and that the CIA is now overrun with amateurish incompetent idiots wreaking havoc around the world (Obama is CIA) and that the DIA and Army has stood up to Obama in key areas including the first major push for a Syria war.

http://pieczenik.blogspot.com/2012/11/the-third-soft-military-coup-general.html


And in regards to the Chemical weapons used in Syria, it wasn't Assad:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/saudi-...l-weapons-provocation-in-syria-source/5352966

Even Wikipedia half-way admits to it:
"In late 2012 Saudi intelligence also began efforts to convince the US that the Assad government was using chemical weapons."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saudi_Arabian_support_to_Syrian_Opposition_in_the_Syrian_Civil_War
 

Proof: US backed "moderate rebels" behead 12yo boy. US state dept spokesman queried: "what does a group have to do to stop receiving US support???"
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Red
A fellow Texan fighting the Western backed Neo-Nazi puppet regime in Ukraine.

BTW, this guy is a self-professing "communist". Don't agree with that ideology, but found him interesting nonetheless.

 
Last edited:
In June it became official NATO policy that a cyber attack could be considered an Article V invasion. This is funny since the U.S. hacks and spies on its own NATO allies (even Merkel's cell phone).

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-06-15/nato-says-it-might-now-have-grounds-attack-russia
"In the context of the June 14th NATO announcement that cyberwar is on the same status as physical war, Obama might declare the U.S. to have been invaded by Russia when former U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s State Department emails were copied by someone in Russia."

In the latest astounding episode of stupidity, the Obama administration publicly discusses the plan to "covertly" conduct cyber-attacks on Russia.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-...ed-insolent-us-cyber-threats-vows-retaliation


Since Cyber-war now equals shooting war in the eyes of NATO and our administration, this is essentially an open declaration of war on Russia.

Cyber warfare is the perfect opportunity for false flag: very few people in the public (or even government) understand how hacking works or what it means to spoof an IP so they will believe whatever the authorities say with no proof.

A false flag attack on the banking system could be used to rob millions of people of their wealth, declare a bank holiday, and convince them to accept a new form of digital currency which will be sold as "unhackable" but will be centrally controlled. And such an attack could be blamed on Russia or any other group without proof leading to the justification of kinetic actions.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Red
Hurmanetar said:
In June it became official NATO policy that a cyber attack could be considered an Article V invasion. This is funny since the U.S. hacks and spies on its own NATO allies (even Merkel's cell phone).

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-06-15/nato-says-it-might-now-have-grounds-attack-russia
"In the context of the June 14th NATO announcement that cyberwar is on the same status as physical war, Obama might declare the U.S. to have been invaded by Russia when former U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s State Department emails were copied by someone in Russia."

In the latest astounding episode of stupidity, the Obama administration publicly discusses the plan to "covertly" conduct cyber-attacks on Russia.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-...ed-insolent-us-cyber-threats-vows-retaliation

Since Cyber-war now equals shooting war in the eyes of NATO and our administration, this is essentially an open declaration of war on Russia.

Cyber warfare is the perfect opportunity for false flag: very few people in the public (or even government) understand how hacking works or what it means to spoof an IP so they will believe whatever the authorities say with no proof.

A false flag attack on the banking system could be used to rob millions of people of their wealth, declare a bank holiday, and convince them to accept a new form of digital currency which will be sold as "unhackable" but will be centrally controlled. And such an attack could be blamed on Russia or any other group without proof leading to the justification of kinetic actions.
Click to expand...

Or in the UK, justification for putting new infrastructure in place to protect the U.K. from cyberattacks from abroad. (A controllable break between us, and the dangerous outside world). With enough disruption, the public will be clamouring for greater controls to be put in place - limiting their own freedom in return for better protection.

TV license charge will be discontinued as no longer relevant in 10 years time, instead you will be charged for a license to access the internet. Government will guarantee a high speed connection for every household. Authorities will be able to identify internet misbehaviour, and thus make the internet safer, be better able to protect the public and national internet infrastructure better.

Somehow they are going to try and exert greater control of people's access to alternative sources of information. It may take 25 years... But it's coming.

That's my Orwellian view anyway... Lol.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top