Freedom4um

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

World News
See other World News Articles

Title: War With Russia to Defend ISIS? Gee, Okay...
Source: [None]
URL Source: https://www.lewrockwell.com/2015/11 ... -perry/war-russia-defend-isis/
Published: Nov 26, 2015
Author: Jack Perry
Post Date: 2015-11-26 05:24:13 by Ada
Keywords: None
Views: 47
Comments: 7

Hey, remember back in those “good ol’ days” we called the Cold War when we thought World War Three would begin over some penny-ante border skirmish in Europe? You know, a Soviet plane gets close to the border, we panic, it gets shot down. Then the Soviets decide to shoot down the next plane that tries that again. Then it escalates from there. Well, folks, have a look at this.

There. Putin just placed some long-range surface-to-air missiles in Syria. The next Turkish F-16 pilot to play Top Gun is going to get a hotfoot he’ll never forget. Ok, but let’s get back to the Cold War for a second. Can anyone imagine it being 1983 and Reagan giving the okey-dokey to shoot down a Soviet aircraft? Of course not. Not even Reagan was that bonkers. If Turkey had said they were going to do that, they’d have been told in no uncertain terms: Absolutely not. We’d have never allowed a NATO nation to threaten such a thing, much less carry out that threat. They’d have been told to follow the protocols which are to send up planes and escort the aircraft away. That’s what NATO has been doing since they provoked the Russians into resuming Bear bomber excursions close to NATO airspace. They escort the planes away. They don’t shoot them down, no matter how many bloodthirsty whack-jobs were calling for it.

Also, the surviving crewman of the shot-down Russian plane has been recovered. Guess where? Syria! Gee, how’d that happen? If the Russian plane was in Turkey, how comes the Turks didn’t capture the guy? And since the pilot was killed by ground fire coming from al-Qaida, there are only two possibilities there. One, the plane was in Syria, which we can pretty much say is a given. Or, two, the plane was in Turkey and al-Qaida is getting safe haven in Turkey. So, ok, Turkey, which one was it? Was the plane in Syria when your F-16s ambushed it? Or are you harboring al-Qaida?

I bet NATO nations that want to stay out of this are crapping enough bricks to build a pyramid at this point. I hear tell that Turkish F-16s cross into Syria with some regularity. Sooner or later, one will get bagged by a Russian SAM crew. Or the next F-16 to shadow a Russian plane is going to get a supersonic parting gift. “Vanna, tell our contestant what he’s won!” “He’s won a surface-to-air missile and a free trip by parachute into the arms of his air rescue crew!” Turkey goes whining to NATO and demands assistance. There, we’re in World War Three. I tend to think this entire thing has been staged and Turkey was coached in it by those who want to get us into a war by any means necessary. I tend to think that actor is the Pentagon. They probably think the President and Congress aren’t getting us into a war fast enough.

Here’s what’s obviously going down over there. Turkey is, and always has been, supporting al-Qaida and ISIS. Both of them are covertly supported by the United States which is why a year-plus-change-you-can-believe-in’s worth of airstrikes haven’t even cost ISIS a magazine subscription. ISIS and al-Qaida have been using Turkey as a safe haven and that’s the starting point of the ISIS version of the Ho Chi Minh Trail. How come ISIS keeps getting resupply? Because Turkey is where the supply depot is. So, ok, ISIS ends up nuttier than a fruitcake but we still need them to get rid of Assad, so we just kick the can down the road, hoping an international coalition will get rid of ISIS later. But here came the Russians and no one thought that would happen. And it might not have if NATO and the U.S. had minded their own business in Ukraine. So Putin moved up his pieces on the board. But now here was the chance to get the war we wanted to start in Ukraine started in Syria and kill two birds with one stone. So to speak. Hence, Turkey was not challenged and warned off by the U.S. when they said they were going to shoot down Russian planes. In fact, that’s exactly what the Pentagon needed. And now it’s happened.

See, the Pentagon thinks it can win a war with Russia. Seriously. They do. Because even if it goes nuclear, as long as we wipe them out and we’ve got a handful of bureaucrats and generals alive in their fuehrerbunkers, we won! Hooray! Aren’t you all excited and proud to be an American right now? Gee, it’s swell to know we didn’t scrap all those nuclear weapons after the Cold War. We scrapped the air raid sirens so, hey, if you’re in the shower you might not even know the world is going to end before you’re done washing your hair. Don’t worry about drying it, the heat flash will do that for you.

Don’t you just love it? I can’t see any other conclusion that can be arrived at except that we’re about to risk a war with Russia over al-Qaida. Makes you wonder if al-Qaida ever was formally off the CIA payroll.

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

#1. To: Ada (#0)

See, the Pentagon thinks it can win a war with Russia. Seriously. They do. Because even if it goes nuclear, as long as we wipe them out and we’ve got a handful of bureaucrats and generals alive in their fuehrerbunkers, we won!

Throughout history it's been the smart crazies and psychopaths that have power. They are always smart enough to fool 98% of average people that will follow their leaders regardless.

They are the ones in power in the USA now and so what if 300 million Americans die and perhaps 6 billion others. What difference does it make to them as long as they are in control and maintain control.

And in a way they are right. There would be plenty of people remaining so in two generations the world would be repopulated.

DWornock  posted on  2015-11-26   5:43:08 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#2. To: DWornock (#1) (Edited)

And in a way they are right. There would be plenty of people remaining so in two generations the world would be repopulated.

Do you live in a city with more than 3000 people? If so it is a nuclear target. You're not wrong. Their would be enough small towns left to repopulate(if they survive nuclear winter). But that's all they would be doing. And that's how many nukes both sides have. Enough to destroy every city center with a population above 3000

______________________________________

Suspect all media / resist bad propaganda/Learn NLP everyday everyway ;) If you don't control your mind someone else will.

titorite  posted on  2015-11-26   6:22:18 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#3. To: DWornock (#1)

There would be plenty of people remaining so in two generations the world would be repopulated.

I need to sew some wild oats. ;)

"When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one." Edmund Burke

BTP Holdings  posted on  2015-11-26   6:40:15 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#4. To: Ada (#0) (Edited)

we still need them to get rid of Assad

The unofficial policy of this country has been regime change in all situations that the U.S. is not in agreement with the leadership of a particular nation. It was that way with Gadaffi in Libya and it is that way now with Assad in Syria. ;)

"When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one." Edmund Burke

BTP Holdings  posted on  2015-11-26   6:47:38 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#5. To: Ada (#0) (Edited)

ISIS and al-Qaida have been using Turkey as a safe haven and that’s the starting point of the ISIS version of the Ho Chi Minh Trail. How come ISIS keeps getting resupply? Because Turkey is where the supply depot is.

But here came the Russians and no one thought that would happen. And it might not have if NATO and the U.S. had minded their own business in Ukraine.

Parallels with the NATO-superpowered "regime change" coup by so-called "rebel" terrorists in Libya -- i.e. oil-pirate deals, etc. profiteerings and perks for arms suppliers and supporters of the terrorist coup-coalition formed to seize Syria from Assad, who isn't a despot:

China gives its support to Libya's rebels - The National

August 25, 2011

BEIJING // China yesterday signalled it was swinging its weight behind the rebel National Transitional Council (NTC) in Libya, as Beijing looks to shore up its economic interests in the North African country.

Ben Simpfendorfer, managing director of Silk Road Associates, an economic consultancy specialising in China-Arab world ties, said Beijing's opposition to intervention in favour of the rebels "certainly complicates China's position".

"China was unusually receptive to the NTC, even so far as saying it was an important political force in June, but what it didn't do was provide the support the United States and Europe did," he said.

Reuters this week quoted the Libyan rebel oil firm AGOCO information manager Abdeljalil Mayouf as saying there could be "political issues" that would hinder ties with Chinese, Russian and Brazilian interests.

China has developed strong energy ties with Libya, to the extent that it has become its third-largest oil consumer, importing 11 per cent of the North African country's peak daily production of 1.5 million barrels.

In 2009, the then Libyan foreign minister, Moussa Koussa, who fled to the United Kingdom in March this year, said there was "something akin to a Chinese invasion of the African continent".

In March, China abstained on United Nations Security Council Resolution 1973, which authorised military intervention in Libya, and it later criticised Nato's aerial bombing campaign in support of the rebels.

However, in June this year, Mahmoud Jibril, chairman of the NTC's executive board, visited Beijing and the Chinese authorities acknowledged the rebels as "important dialogue partner".

Yesterday a spokesman for the Chinese ministry of commerce said Chinese interests wanted to play a major role in rebuilding Libya.

Wang Suolao, a specialist on China-Arab relations in Peking University's School of International Studies, said China would likely be able to develop strong ties with any new Libyan government, despite its anti-intervention stance.

"Both sides have the intention to make close economic contacts and political contacts," he said.

More news articles + video thereafter at Post #7 of 4um Title: EXCLUSIVE: Syrians In Ghouta Claim Saudi-Supplied Rebels Behind Chemical Attack

1. theaustralian.com.au August 12, 2012: CIA stopping weapons crossing border to aid Syrian rebel forces ...they have approved supplies of AK-47 Kalashnikov rifles,... [web.archive.org partial view]

2. YouTube video Published on Mar 30, 2013 [45 seconds] | From All Comments:

that is a chinese made 12.7mm m99 anti-material rifle and not as some articles say an AS-50 if anyone is wondering

3. foxnews.com April 03, 2013: Video appears to show world's most powerful rifle in hands of Syrian rebels ...Even if the rifle is a cheap knock-off of the AS-50, it has raised questions about who is supplying such devastating hardware. ... The Free Syrian Army has been receiving weapons from Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey - all close allies of the U.S.

4. nytimes.com August 13, 2013: Arms Shipments Seen From Sudan to Syria Rebels ...Western officials and Syrian rebels say, Sudan’s government sold Sudanese-and Chinese-made arms to Qatar, which arranged delivery through Turkey to the rebels. ... Analysts suspect that Sudan has sold several other classes of weapons to the rebels, including Chinese-made antimateriel sniper rifles and antitank missiles, all of which have made debuts in the war this year but whose immediate sources have been uncertain. Two American officials said Ukrainian-flagged aircraft had delivered the shipments. ... Libya’s new leaders have publicly thanked Sudan. Libya has since been a busy supplier of the weapons to rebels in Syria.

Post #7 excerpts: it's clearly discernable that the sniper rifle is a Chinese version. ... we can now make a guesstimate that the probable entry point of such high-powered Chinese weaponry (in defiance of America's security and directorate in the region) was through Sudan, probably transported by Ukranian aircraft. ... In other words: America's personnel have been undermined by the Syrian rebels, our Libyan rebel protégés and other supposed allies in the vicinity who seemingly want our Military might to be on their side but aren't actually on our side.

-------

"They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC

GreyLmist  posted on  2015-11-27   6:02:51 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#6. To: titorite (#2)

We are not going to nuke our own cities so realistically there are enough nukes for cities above 10,000 (not 3,000). However, that is not the major problem as there would not be many areas in which the radiation wasn't high enough to kill most of the people. I believe more would die from radiation, sickness, and starvation than from the blasts.

With 2,000 to 4,000 nukes dropped on the USA, very few people in the USA would survive. However, after 2 weeks the radiation may be low enough for people to live. If not after 7 times that with radiation 10% of what it was after 2 weeks and certainly after 49 times that (2 years) with radiation 1% of what it was after 2 weeks people from other countries could safely move into and live in the area now know as the USA. No doubt millions would so in two or three generations the area would be repopulated. Especially since, with plenty of area (like in the past), women would be averaging 4 or more children.

DWornock  posted on  2015-11-30   14:51:41 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#7. To: DWornock (#6)

Look for DC to bomb these cities and blame Russia China and Hitler before they're through.

NeoconsNailed  posted on  2015-11-30   15:43:33 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest