Syrian Su-22 Was Downed By US Warplane Despite Presence Of Russian Aircraft Western Raqqa – Media

It might be world war three and we could also all be dead for a barely flying jet. You are why people in charge are vetted, to take the violent, stupid aggressors away from the nuclear button.

no world war 3

and for what is the russian army, if can not do anything?

Good question my friend. An interesting and very objective question I fear.

it is like czechoslovakia in 1938. good army (but not as good as german), mobilization in 3 days, and after munich the army was closed out, only stodd and looked at, how occupy germans the country.

Russian army can do much, but it takes much wisdom to do little.

I hope that wisdom be the true and only reason to justify so much Russian inaction before so many provocations and abuses against his ally of the Syrian government.
I hope it is not for another reason more shameful, embarrassing and pathetic my friend.

“The truth stands alone , only lies need government support” . T. Jefferson
Turns out the plane was only air born for 15 minutes , and had dropped nothing .
By allowing time for the truth to come out , people will clearly see America’s two faced lies and mal intent .

I think Putin is a wise man. I wish i had the kind of restraint he has demonstrated in Syria in my own life.

putin is far not wise. ;)
he is soldier. he reformed the army. thats all.
real changes into economy was not able to bring. and in internationalpolitics… loser. he is alone, need to talk with such morons like erdogan, orban. chinais pissing on russia, india, also, soem contracts, but only part of them with britain, south africa, brasil nothing.
wise are chines. they know the art of international poltics, they are not isolated. wise putin would have dozens of really friend countries. but putin lost vietnam, neutral with mongolia, cold with cuba.

from outside the view on your land is like from above, bird perspectivie. lot of things are more visible. ;)

p.s. of course, putin is much better then all soviet and russian leader beginning from chrushchev

You know nothing about the guy, you should watch the documentary, learn something. I do agree with you that Putin is the best Russian leader in a very long.

i know him. unfortunately for you. ;)

Haha, sure you do.

yes my dear. i was also in politics ;)

Well Said my friend. Retaliation is the easy way out, with unforseen conséquences, but most important, Russia would lose the initiative, thats why US keeps taking pot Shots once in a while, because they aint got shit else they can Do without massive domestic backlash.

it is beautiful, how creative are you when you want to cover russian cowerds :DDD inother posts are large and full mouth, how superior are russian weapons, how are you able to shot down american tridents :)) you should unite the things in your heads :P

This guy can’t even compare Syrian war maps of 2014 and 2017. If he can’t comprehand such simple things than there’s little hope left for this lost soul :)

thsi is bullshit russian propaganda. i knew the soviet army, a know lot of about russian army. you are weak, you shold respect this fact. after syria russia will stand completely aklone in the world. no friends, no allies. you will see. one day remember my word. and dont come wit eurasia, brics and other fake things.

Hahaha, many shekels for your works today

so, you are also primitive russian :))))

I am not

if you come with shekels, you are primitive

That’s fine Solomon, and what you are doing to stop it ? What other country is doing anything ? That’s why no one.

it is not my role to stop it :)

i refer only about realstic view

Just like I told someone before you.
So, it started the world war three for defying North Korea to the United States a few weeks ago, my friend?
If I understand you well, the fear of a nuclear war it’s just a matter of Russia and not of the United States, so the Americans can do everything they want and Russia should not do anything about, to avoid a global nuclear war?
The fear of any type of retaliation is only things of coward incapable of defending himself for lack of courage and self-esteem my friend.
So the Russian nuclear weapons are toys and no one is afraid of a Russian nuclear retaliation enough to not challenge him and respect him enough?
Let’s be logical, please.

I think the fact that russians have nukes, doesnt mean that they should resort to their use. Russia has some incredibly deadly weapons, but their use would preclude future diplomacy and likely end the world. It is clear to intelligent people that the US government is suffering from a problem of a rogue military and a weak president. From a military strategy point of view, let us assume that Russia could fend of american attack over syria by killing americans. Should this happen trivially, just because some imbecile at level of colonel gave an order to take down a syrian jet? A serious discussion requires a thought out next move after the opponent responds. Russian lack of response to this provocation does several things. First, it buys trump time to clean house, while a dialogue is continues behind the scenes to get the military under control. Second, it allows room for diplomacy, generally to work. Third, it gives Russia ability to act aggressively in other theaters because from the Russian point of view, Syria is not the end all of all conflicts, its just one area where SAA, Iran and Russia are winning, why change that? Now say that the hawks won the day in moscow, and russia felt a pressure to kill some americans, even just the savages responsible for the attack on the syrian jet. Russia would be killing plebs, irrelevants who’s death would be idealized and used as justification for a larger conflict in syria, perhaps a no fly zone, such an event could substantially turn the american public opinion and possibly allow for an intervention, a result desired by those who orchestrated khan sheykhon and these recent incidents. If the destruction of a single f18 is your goal to teach those americans a lesson, you might be missing the bigger picture.

Both you and I only we guess and in the end we know nothing of what happens in the wars offices of Russian and American .
Even when I respect what you think, reality contradicts you completely my friend.
Not only in Syria do Americans what they want without Russia doing anything about and at that rate, is only a question of time for Russia to completely disappear from the international theater without doing him nothing to avoid it and without defending itself with all his destructive and powerful arsenals that he possesses as it happened, happens and will continue happening in Syria and all that for some obscure and incomprehensible reasons of which you comment.
If you have doubts, get a look at all the achievements of NATO against Russia from 10 years ago to this day, and the facts speak for themselves without need of more conjectures of yours and mine my dear friend.
And if things went backwards, do you think the Americans would be left with crushed hands while Russia urinated and shit quietly at the entrance of their house just like they do with Russia today?
Let’s be objective please.

Most analysis is conjecture, such is the nature of the field. Those who know need not analyze and those who analyze never really know. You made an allegation that reality contradicts me completely, this is a blanket assertion and you have not specified how I am contradicted. I think i stated pretty clearly that america suffers from a problem of a pirate, rogue military that is not accountable to the POTUS or congress. If you are challenging my assessment that the Syrians are winning the war, i think you are mistaken. Russia’s presence in Syria limits US action to b!tch moves, back stabbing activity, few artillery pieces hitting some syrians, an occasional sneak attack by a jet here and there, but substantively, the SAA is capturing vast parts of Syria from ISIS, so much so that SDF had to turn around and head south to cut them off, leading to this recent escalation. Your arguments about NATO expansion are complicated. It is not so much driven by military success of the alliance, but by willingness of former soviet republics to wh0re themselves out to the west, in order to receive economic subsidy in form of useless base construction. As a price these countries place their citizens in jeopardy of preemptive nuclear strike just to have some Americans living there, exporting polish women, and constructing a few donut shops. Nato itself is weakened by these nations, as they acquire new defensive obligation without matching military capability. The size of the alliance creates new possibilities for missile interceptors and radars, but these facilities would be destroyed on day one. Perfect example of this is Norway, a nation that has had peace with Russia for years, but now is a target for Russian nuclear and conventional deterrent. I think you assessment is not objective at all.

I don’t know your definition of objectivity because you write a lot of stuffs defending exaggeratedly several points that have nothing to do with my previous comment and neither with the title of the news that we all comment here but I still respect your way of thinking and we only have to wait to see the supposed results and benefits of the russian policy of inaction at long-term while we continue to witness the American hegemony in all its splendor in day-to-day reality.
Because with Russian inaction no matter what the Syrian government has achieved on the ground, only a few Tomawac missiles will be enough to undo all that has been achieved to return the entire country to the will of the dirty interests of the Americans.
The question is what pretext will they use that time as a perfect excuse for this purpose, knowing them before hand that Russia will do nothing to avoid it, like always?

Again, I am not sure what is the purpose of these, um defeateist anti russian posts you promulgate. Objectivity is based on willingness to accept information you may not like if the analysis takes you there. You seem to be starting with a ready doom and gloom conclusion. I do not see the world like this. I am not sure what you are waiting for as you have made no predictions nor produced analysis that could lead one to predict. The mainstay of your argument is that Syria is lost, which i consider psych ops propaganda, which very well maybe your purpose. The notion that the US can undo Syrian progress with a few tomahwks is devoid of reality. Some syrians could die, some battle lines could shift, but the fact is that ISIS has been all but destroyed. Six month ago they were able to muster 5k soldiers to force Syrians out of Palmyra, today, ISIS would be lucky to hold on to Raqqa for two more weeks. Americans are not dirty. They are good people. Unfortunately their military has been hijacked by corrupt insiders who do not represent their interests. I think you have a tendency to jump from russian light political spanking based on actions of some low level US Pentagon operatives, vs a response to a general attack on syrian forces where Russians would die. Those situations are like day and night. Good luck with your analysis and future endeavors.

Okey my friend. Whatever you want to say or convince with so many words is fine for me now.
What do you think if we both waited better to see what would follow!
Time time time will always be the most accurate commentators of all of us, writing a lot of objective or not stuff here.

Basically the summary of our conversation is that you are unhappy the russians haven’t started a world war, so you hop around from topic to topic to topic. When I press you on anything meaningful you tell me lets see what happens. LOL. Alright, let us see what happens and how many people you and solomon try to convince that the russians are evil or cowardly for showing patience and restraint to save Syrian lives and possibly the world.

I do not want you to feel bad, but I do not want to pursue an argument with you because you remind me a lot of, an angry latin wife.
You write a lot of things and in the end you do not say anything at all.
An example of this is the following:
In the thousands of words you wrote before I barely read that you think I hate Russia because he did not start the Third World War when I actually love Russia even though I dislike his infinite patience to make himself respected and feared as much as Its counterpart American does the same.
I know that you will not understand me but I do not lose anything trying to explain you what I think about you without you misunderstanding me my dear friend.

Thanks for your thoughts on the subject, I will not waste your time. Having reviewed your past comments, they all carry a soft anti russian undertone. I do not know your purpose nor do I care. Sorry you felt offended by words, we will not interact again, but i will continue to read your posts, with the understand of your likely motivation as soft psychops, friend.

I really like your opinion and reaction in your last comment.
I am very sure that in the end we will agree on many points.
I wish you well, my friend. See you soon

he is brainwashed russian, probably young and never saw the world. he has no idea, he repeats the same bullshits that i heard during socialism. and nicely ussr lost the cold war, and also ussr. now the seme kremlin propaganda. the really painful thing is, the russians are not able to learn from own mistakes. they are not the best, but 70% of enrgy give for buidlig of potemkin pictores, they are the strogest, wisest, biggest, bestest :)
if the would focus on really important thinks, stop the celptocracy and oligardch, could be create betetr world for themselves and for the whole word. but first thing is understand and accept, the glory of ussr gas gone. for good.

Please, do not mix up the images and myths, created by the official Putin’s propaganda, with the real opinion of the whole Russian people. Brainwashed idiots exist in every nation, and not in Russia only.
While I agree with you that those who never seen the real world are subject to propagandistic attitudes and myths to a large extent. They are elderly TV viewers mostly, as we practically do not have any independent TV channels in Russia, but states-owned only. But well-educated people practically do not watch TV, and youngsters are totally involved into the internet as a main source of information.

OK, i wrote about hom, nobody else.

no, unhappy, that putin lied, is coward an russia is extremely weak.

I couldn’t place your source, but it makes total sense, Israeli.

i am not israeli.

and source? you can find lot of sources. you are sitting before PC, connected to internet, lot of time…

be not lasy.

these are NOT antirusian posts, only real confrontation of russian propaganda with reality.
terence is right, you completely not.

it is enoughto check rt, sf and putins speeches from 2015

No, you are a real russophile, you can link me to some posts you made about russian success in syria, unless you ‘objectively’ think that are not any.

probaly i read more russian poets and writers then you :P

It is possible, anything is possible, in Israel.

well, obviously you haven’t read more English writers than me ;)

maybe. only 20-30

but you are veeeery educated, you are better :)

you see to know a lot about me…

Terense, there’s big difference between Russia and those snakeheads that rule over you. Russia actually cares about human race, realising that they are a part of it. Your snakehead masters, don’t give a hoot about it and hope that they can survive in their caves.

So what? I have to repeat it to you as well: “Stop being such a feeble-minded shitbag!”
Indeed, there might be “World War III”

But what you fail to understand is that any appeasement toward the United States of Aggression will not avert it, but rather precipitate it.

If the United States of Aggression wish to start a world war III for a flying jet, then Russia will be unable to avert the world war anyway—if that is the only thing that you are concerned about.

If you are only concerned about starting a world war for a flying jet, then, indeed, Russia can avoid that. But it will only hasten the world war for a rocket launcher… or some other pretext.

Your absurd stance is why people in charge are vetted.

I think your analysis is completely devoid of reason. Yes, if the most powerful country on earth decides to end the world, the only thing Russia will be able to do is to make sure no one in the US survives, but it is unlikely that this is the American Calculus or the Pentagon calculus. Rather, these are planned escalations, that could be dealt with with intelligent response and willingness to use limited deadly force where appropriate.

It is your analysis that is completely devoid of reason.

So, if that is not “the American / the Pentagon calculus”, then where is the threat of the world war?

You are simply contradicting yourself.

Indeed, these are planned and calculated escalations. These calculate with precisely such shitbaggery as you promote here.

Now, pray tell us, how could they be dealt with “with intelligent response”? Because so far you have demonstrated only colossal stupidity.

So, what is your idea of “intelligent response”? Never-ending cowardly appeasement and further encouragement of the aggressor to cross all the lines beyond the point of no return?

What I described is not only perfectly reasonable, but it is actually the only reasonable thing to do: enforcing the well-established and widely-recognized framework of rules.

What you are promoting is dismantling and destroying the framework of rules.

How will this bring about your goals? The latest aggravation and the current accelerating escalation is precisely the result of months and months of your “intelligent responses”.

Besides, shooting down a U.S. aircraft would be a perfect example of “limited response”

There is no contradiction, you are just talking like a child about this happens then that happens without asking yourself what are the interests of people involved, as though dying just doesnt matter. I appreciate our interaction, but based on the offensive nature of your post and lack of reason I see no reason to continue our dialogue. I have never advocated shooting down a US aircraft, as it would pose a threat of escalation that is not in the interests of Russia. If forced to do so to defend their people, I could see such a scenario developing assuming americans were mad enough to kill russians. I believe that Russian retaliation should come in the form of exterminating all american proxies in Syria in response to attacks on Syrians. My belief is matched by reality as the FSA is running for the hills in Daraa. They will die as a lesson.

So you suggest that Russia should bomb the SDF—who have not attacked Russia or Russia’s allies?

Is that your example of “intelligent response”?

How should the Russians “exterminate all American proxies”?

It the Russians do not make good on their threats, they will have shame… and then they will have war.

SDF arent the only proxies around, there is also FSA, which primarily consists of Al nusra and friends. You may view SDF as something special but I view it as another armed group in Syria that has a sugar daddy(US) and has been making overtures to Saudi Arabia, a state sponsor of terrorism in Syria. Russians have many way of exterminating the SDF. By denying US air support to SDF, they could be run over by the SAA, very quickly. With respect to the more dug in jihadists, today SAA 4th division split the southern pocket in half for a while. Exterminating american proxies is a general approach for Russia to respond to attack on the Syrian armed forces and friends.

How U.S. air support to the SDF should be denied, if not with shooting down a U.S. aircraft—as I have always argued? :-)
It does not matter who does it—the Russians, the Syrians, the Iranians,… the Valar or the Guild Navigators—but it must be done—U.S. aircraft must be shot down—as I have always argued.

And how should U.S. air support to the SDF be denied, if not by shooting down U.S. aircraft—as I have always argued?

(And only Russia has this capability because Russia is such a jealous crook…)

In the event US was attacking syrian, turkish, iranian and iraqi assets, such conflict would be unavoidable. Russia has the s400 umbrella, syria has older versions of similar systems, so does iran. I simply do not believe the US would risk casulties and world war 3 for the kurds.

So, after 5 rounds of dodging the questions, you have finally arrived at the same conclusion, which I have been asserting all along, that the U.S. must be shot down…? :-D

Because the U.S.A. has already attacked Syrian assets, and not just once but several times.
And with increased frequency.
Russia’s leniency in this matter has essentially provoked it. In you name of “non-escalation”, it has actually escalated—as I have been asserting all along.

Thus, the only way out of this mess, in accordance with international law and U.N.S.C. resolutions, is to shoot down the infringing and tension-escalating U.S. aircraft.

Even you yourself do not believe the U.S.A. would risk casualties and a world war for the Kurds.

You have a problem with reading comprehension.

Hostilities after a series of escalations could possibly lead to a scenario where a US air craft is shot down. There are many steps between that and the current situation.

Instead of repeating all of our conversation, which you are welcome to reread. I maintain that everything possible must be done to avoid shooting down or otherwise engaging the US.

At some point, there will be a reckoning between the Kurds and their neighbors, the situation must be planned carefully, so as not to escalate the situation in ways that would lead to a significant change of American doctrine in Syria. At the moment there are serious debates in the United States about the legality of US actions and presence of American soldiers in Syria.

See https://youtu.be/uX7grm4CVJE

It would be silly to kill a bunch of Americans, because that will create pressure on people who are asking legitimate questions within the US and force them to be silent in the name of another war and patriotism. This is complicated stuff, and you should understand how American process works and who are the players.

In addition, you have to consider the interests of the Deep State. How they will exponentially grow if you feed them.

The concept of denying Kurds air cover, is a strategy to be considered after ISIS is destroyed and US has no more pretext to be present in Syria. This strategy will require the cooperation of Turkey, Syria, Iraq, Iran and likely Russia. The goal of this strategy is not to take down US jets, but of course if a no fly zone is declared for American planes, that could be a possible scenario that needs to be considered.

The goal will be to limit US options in Syria to the Kurdish/Sunni proxies which are over reliant of US air assets in Syria, then exploit the Kurdish animosity with their neighbor to destroy the proxies, by denying the US access to the Kurdish area, thereby resolving several problems simultaneously. This strategy could require at some later date, the use of Syrian, or Russian system against American air assets.

The difference between my discussion and your discussion is that mine is based in analysis which merely considers a possible option, while yours advocates for what amounts to a suicidal course of action, at this juncture.

Also, I would appreciate it, if you did not misrepresent my arguments or positions.

Have a blessed day

Indeed, instead of repeating your incoherent nonsense ad nauseam, you ought re-read the conversation and answer the questions.

If anything must be done, then it is enforcing the rules.

As for the “serious debates in the United States about the legality of US actions and presence of American soldiers in Syria”—there are actually only 2 senators opposing it. There are no “serious debates” on this topic… these are rather isolated outcries ones that have been going on for decades.

Questions have been asked, of course, but, likewise, have never been answered. (It should come as no surprise to you because you seem to are an expert that field field too).

It would not be silly to kill a bunch of Americans, not at all.

Precisely because I know how the system works. The people will never really question what the Americans are doing there, until some of them get killed.

Yet I never even suggested killing Americans, I only advocated shooting down their aircraft.

You seem to be the only one having a reading comprehension problem.

So, the question is (again and again): “How should your strategy of denying air cover to the SDF be developed?”
Or, alternatively (which I ask previously: ” How should U.S. air support to the SDF be denied?”

By waiting until they have run out of pretexts and willingly packed up and left? :-o
Is that what you call a “strategy”??! :-D
Because that will never happen, of course!
As they have been fairly potent at manufacturing pretexts of one way or another—they have been doing it in Syria for 71 years already.

All you need to do is answer that simple question of “how to deny the U.S. air support to warring factions in Syria”.
Because there are only 2 ways:
1. destroying all the take-off and landing strips within the flying ranges of U.S. aircraft extended by the their aerial refuellng range, including those on aircraft carriers,
or
2. shooting down U.S. aircraft over Syria.

I advocated the latter. When you opposed the latter, were you in support of the former?
Because that has some merit, of course, namely, eliminating further threats of U.S. air strikes.
That would also be consistent with the U.S. “understanding” of international law.

(All the U.S. forces in the region could as well be neutered with cruise missiles and air strikes.)

Thus, I merely advocated taking “the steps between”, as you argued.

The U.S.A. and its military has no legal basis for operations within the Syrian airspace on on the Syrian territory, not even the fight against the Islamic state of Iraq and the Levant, which is pursuant to the United Nations Security Council Resolution 2170, which reaffirms “the independence, sovereignty, unity, territorial integrity of the Republic of Iraq and Syrian Arab Republic, and reaffirming further the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations” and also reaffirms that “Member States must ensure that any measures taken to combat terrorism, including while implementing the resolution, comply with all their obligations under international law,…”

Do you understand it?

It means that Russia MUST ENSURE under international law that all such infringing U.S. aircraft “be put out of service”, to put it mildly.

Also, I would appreciate if you refrained from straying from the subject.

Have a blessed day.

The reason you keep returning with these long winded posts that are just repeating the same thing, a straw men position is because you continuously ignore the words on your screen that follow my name. I am perfectly willing to admit that there could be an escalation after an escalation that leads Russia to take down a US aircraft, however this is unwise until ISIS is destroyed. In the eyes of the american people, ISIS is scary, because people identified with ISIS kill americans, thus in their view, international law, domestic law, is less important than the general feeling that ISIS is being fought. If american planes are destroyed or soldiers are killed, in the pursuit of this noble mission, there will be popular support for a more forceful approach to Syria. This is a far more dangerous situation then an off artillery attack or aircraft attack on Syrian assets.

After ISIS is destroyed, the important issue for both negotiating purpose and future agreements will be the state of Syrian Army, and how much land they control. If the Syrian army is destroyed by US assets, the entire venture will have been for nothing. A deep state dream, that you are clearly here to advocate for. Should I call you Mr. Smith?

Once ISIS is gone, there will be several steps that must happen. First ,US will be denied the use of their bases in Turkey, and possibly denied Turkish air space. Second, the Syrians will assert control over their air space, when they are able to assert control over the ground and deploy continues air coverage over their area, Third, the Syrian air force will be rebuilt with newer generation planes(but this is a long term project)

Should the US persist to attack targets in Syria, after failed UN resolution, condemnation in the UN, destruction of ISIS, and various escalation steps, Syria and Russian assets in Syria would eventually have to stand up the the US, and any time this happens there is a possibility of death and escalation.

You argument about 2 senators is disingenuous. There are always few people on top asking questions in committee. Not all 100 senators work on every issue. Furthermore, how many senators hold a view on this depends on the question you are asking. If the question is do we not sell guns to SA? 2, Do we fight in Syria without asking congress? Do we overthrow Assad? Do we want to send Americans to Syria to protect a Kurdish state?

At this juncture, Russia is using politics to deal with belligerence because many people in Washington are amateurs are their job. They are familiar with talking tough and using the military. If Russia was to respond in the fashion you suggest, to every American provocation, we would all be dead. There may come a US moves, that so limits Russians options that they will have no choice but to deploy all of their tools to stop the trumpian menace, but this time has not come, nor gone.

Whatever goon department you work for, no one here has any effect on Russian policy, and thus the deep state can not get its way by insulting people on SF.

I know you are going to respond with a page long list of repetitive insults so lets summarize.

1. There is no need to attack US air assets as it is a counterproductive strategy while US has the impression that they are there to fight ISIS.

2. At a later date and with the right set of circumstance, a situation could arise whereby russian objectives could be obtained or protected by destruction of US aircraft.

3. International law, and its enforcement is not the duty, nor objective of the russian federation.

4. Taking on the US by the Syrian air defenses is not only factually impossible but would lead to a likely destruction of the syrian army.

5. Russia could take on the US forces in the region, depending on domestic commitment and willingness to suffer loses

6. While US is acting against ISIS, domestic support for the US strategy will be maintained

7. There are voices in various committees that are demanding explanation from the Deep State about their strategy in Syria.

8. Striking US aircraft in Syria, on large scale is an error, and a trap that mostly benefits the Deep State.

9. You are either a deep state operative, or a fool.

Terense, your yesterdays comment didn’t contain any common sense so I simply ignored it. One would need to try much harder to invoke sadness on my side :) Things like you (I actually accept that you’re a human being) that choose the dark side should not even bother to make me sad by posting on internet.
When I say that you should stop lying about your loving to Russia… I can stick your lies into your face – loving something/someone and calling it names is impossible because it destroys the meaning of the word LOVE. But I do realise that real love is something that you’re not yet able to comprehand and I don’t blame you. When (if) your personal level of awarness will rise than I would not have to explane such basic things.

If you call me liar than would you be so kind tprovide an example?

How do you feel now my dear and favorite liar Tudor Miron.
I fear that you are still very sad and depressed by my previous comments
Super sad because you still use the same resource,
” Pure insults for lack of solid arguments. ”
As long as you feel better and start to behave like a thinking human being (assuming you are a human being)
I wish the best to my very beloved Russia with all my heart and soul.

“Hello my favorite liar.”

you made my day! :))

“First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out – because I was not a communist;

Then they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out – because I was not a socialist;

Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out – because I was not a trade unionist;

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out – because I was not a Jew;

Then they came for me – and there was no one left to speak out for me.”

Martin Niemöller

My friend you need God in your life. Your mouth is full of dirt. ~185 000 Jehovah Witnesses are citizens of RU and have right to worship according to their conscience guarantied by RU constitution regardless of opinions about their religious believes by those like you. Your understanding about religious liberty and tolerance is no better than that of Wahabi death cult. You better come to your senses before is too late and you are called to give an account before God who is the creator of all. You will never be counted worthy of life unless you learn to appreciate the lives of others.

You attitude is no better than the one of the followers of Wahabi death cult. You are as much of a bigot as them. You have no conception of religious liberty and the freedom of conscience. ~185 000 Jehovah Witnesses are all citizens of RU Federation and they have the right to practice their religion according to the law irrespective of your opinions and opinions of others about their religious believes which is guarantied by RU constitution. This decision of RU Duma is unconstitutional period. You better come to your senses before it’s too late and you are called to give an account to God who is the creator of all. Those who haven’t learned to appreciate lives of others will not be counted worthy of life.

Are you Jehovah witness? Are you Russian sitizen?
May be we should also allow Takfiri, Salafi or something similar in the sake of religious liberty? Why don’t we? Same reasons that you listed apply to them as well. Something wrong (in your opinion) with their God?
In Russian Federation that so called Jehova witness is considered a totalitarian sect by the low. I completely agree with this rule. I saw kids from Jehova witness families – absolutely terrible life. They didn’t even know how to lough!

There is no comparison between peaceful law abiding Jehovah Witnesses and throat cutting head chopping Takfiri and Salafi terrorists. You are trying to distort reality in order to prove your point. Yet another sign that you need God in your life. First of all you need to be a honest human being and then you can judge whether somebody’s religion is a cult or not. Your bias towards religious liberty makes you less than human just like Takfiris and Salafis. There is no ideological differences between you and them.

Not answering you, because there’s no sense in debating with someone who knows that he’s lying but if there are people on this board that want to know more about those “peaceful law abiding jehovah witnesses” I can share more info. In short – it’s just another “export” version of jeudaism made for consumption of goyems to make it easier to be ruled by jew’s who themself don’t realise that they are victims of let’s call it Global Predictor. I personally prefer to call it Global Parasite :). But YW sect that was implanted (legilised in Russia) in 1991 is especially weird – money making machine that is brutally enslaving its victims. Nothings new here – nice words and ugly deeds.
Russia doesn’t allow such anti human organisations doing business (that’s what it actually boils down to) on its territory. You can warship your version of God but we would not let you rob our sitizens :)

YW tells me that I need God in my life? Do you even understand what you’re saying? God is everywhere my friend. It’s the creator of everything that you see and can’t see. All That IS. Even if you think that it’s up to you (to allow or not allow God into your/my life) it doesn’t change much other than you’re blinding yourself. But even that is up to All That IS :)

Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts, And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation. For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished: But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men. 2Peter 3:3-7

He will come as surely as He has predicted with pin pointing accuracy almost 2000 years ago about people like you today.

There is no comparison between peaceful law abiding Jehovah Witnesses and throat cutting head chopping Takfiri and Salafi terrorists. You are trying to distort reality in order to prove your point. Yet another sign that you need God in your life. First of all you need to be a honest human being and then you can judge whether is somebody’s religion cult or not. Your bias towards religious liberty makes you less than human just like Takfiris and Salafis.

There are many fronts in Syria, i think tiger forces, or Battle group north as i like to think of them should concentrate on isolating the kurdish terrorists and securing the west bank of the Euphrates. Battle group center(palmyra) need to forcefully push to deir ezzor. I would like to see the 5th corps redeployed to resafa to continue a push to deir ezzor. I would like to see battle group south(liwa, iranian militia and hezbollah) advance along the border to t2. and then make a break for deir ezzor. I think these strategies would have a higher chance of success and help SAA achieve multiple objectives simultaneously.

huh, they follow my suggested strategy first take t2? :))

so, i am not so uncompetent as you, miron, jesis pzijv and other s wrote? :P

Your hacking is impressive… wonna guess my favorite porn?

IMOA yes and no :D
Tigers in N need to secure road 42 and their flanks. they have held back SDF from the main routes and can continue. 5TH corps can continue from Arak and
T3 to Deir Ezzor. If T2 can be taken, this would be icing on the cake.
You make many good points and know how to make a stand. :)

Not really.

A push along the Euphrates would be better and more feasible.

I am arguing that should be the strategy for Tiger forces as it would force the SDF to surround ISIS in raqqa to prevent SAA access to the area. When you say more feasible, more feasible than what? The feasibility of any specific route to Deir Ezzor depends on the ISIS resistance in the area, thus it is vital to force the SDF to fight ISIS rather than to allow isis to escape which would make the attack to liberate deir ezzor more difficult and harasment from isis in the SAA rear would increase.

Well, but that is precisely why it would not work.

The SDF wants the Islamic state to escape Raqqah at least as much as it wants to take the city.

Thus, the SDF would not surround the Islamic state…

They would if the SAA continue to advance north east, as has been the SDF strategy to keep SAA from Raqqa, it would happen naturally.

No.

That would squeeze them between two fronts of the Islamic state.

Then the SAA would reach raqqa from the south east, and prevent ISIS escape, which is a perfectly acceptable result.

tha arrows are fantasy novel ;)

Washington Post… main MSM propoganda machine. Yeah, now this is a truely credible source or is it?

Tudor Miron
“…Yeah, now this is a truely credible source or is it?…”

Trusting the Russian MOD has resulted in no Air Defence of Syrian Military or Air Force against the Israel controlled US led “Terror Axis” countries.

Having your juvenile teen style tantrum is not going to change anything, the US “Pentagon” claims they informed the Russians, etc.

Washington Post published the details.

But Washington Post has not corroborated anything.

Regardless of your childish reaction, Tudor Miron is right: Washington Post is a propaganda machine, which means that they will reprint each and every pentagon lie without batting an eyelid, much less checking it for consistency.

Did you at least take the time to read it yourself?

It is simply full of bullshit.
Namely:
=====
… that U.S. aircraft nearby tried to hail the Syrian jet after it had dropped its bombs.
After the hailing attempts, a U.S. F/A-18 shot down the Syrian aircraft “in accordance with rules of engagement and in collective self-defense of coalition partnered forces,”
=====
That is just semantic nonsense. They claim that they “hailed the Syrian jet after it had dropped its bombs” and “after hailing attempts, they shot it down in self-defence”.

That is as absurd as a claim that the Holocaust was a humanitarian operation to save the Germans.

Antikapitalista
The Washington Post article may as well be Pentagon fake news.
The Syrian jet has been shot down, time cannot be reversed..

Thanks for providing the source. WaPo is however a near US Pentagon proxy.

The language of “Before it downed the Syrian plane, the U.S. military used a
“deconfliction” channel to communicate with Russia, Syria’s main ally,
to prevent the situation from escalating, the Pentagon said.” sounds pretty manipulative. There is just one channel so talking about “a channel” seems the kind of obfuscation those US military spokesmen routinely engage in.

Trying to stop the Su22 after it dropped its bombs sounds pretty weird. Shooting down after bomb release seems superfluous. Not explicitly mentioned is whether the F18 used the Guard channel.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aircraft_emergency_frequency

What isn’t mentioned is that the US using the Kurds to split Syria and in line with that simply tried to prevent the SAA gaining control over the Resafa crossing thus blocking the Kurds from further south west expansion and creating another path towards Deir Azzor. This issue has been decided now by the SAA controlling the Resafa crossing.
http://militarymaps.info/

Trying to depict this navy F18 ambushing a Su22 as normal application of ‘rules of engagement’ is simply beyond disingenuous given the illegal presence of the US in Syria. The US is engaging in a crime of aggression and violating Syrian Sovereignty. Clinton’s leaked e-mails have clarified the US position and role in the Saudi/Turkey financed proxy war in Syria with the US regime change objective.

The same issue caused the US to attack the SAA near Tanf at the Iraq-Syria border. US troops probably inserted from Jordan backing FSA ‘moderates’ were trying to prevent the SAA and Iraqi PMU from joining up. So the US attacked the SAA, but SAA and PMU circumvented the US presence creating a path from Baghdad to Damascus.

Given the despicable track record of US military spokesmen I personally prefer the straight forward Russian counterparts when looking for truth.

JPH
Russia conducts the Syrian conflict in slow motion which have consequences, the Neoconservatives are always steps ahead.

The Neoconservative controlled west, US, UK, France, Canada, Australia, etc have no respect other than ridiculing Putin who calls them “Our Partners”.

If Russia had stepped in from the early days of the Syrian “Conflict” starting 2010 instead of October 2015, things would be different today.

The untenable position of the US:
http://buchanan.org/blog/isis-war-us-russia-collision-127244

JPH
Have to say Pat Buchanan is an All American guy, they don’t make many like him these days.

Good article, the US Russia collision.

Unfortunately Russia has a proven history of making threats which are not following through and then backtracking which Neoconservatives view as weakness.