The shiny missiles have landed ....

[big fat yorkshire pudding]

Russia says Syrians shot down 71 out of 110 missile fired! Not good value in my view!

They also didn't use chemicals on their ex spy......

Laughable from them this morning.  "Sovereign nations should none attacked".

Ukraine anyone?

[Donnywolf]

Russia says Syrians shot down 71 out of 110 missile fired! Not good value in my view!

And you believe that?

The first casualty of war is truth as we all know

We over here have no idea even what capability "they" have to shoot anything down but imo I doubt if they stopped any inbound missile 

Meanwhile wait for the probably fake pictures of the said Missiles hitting a) Hospitals b) Schools c) civilian areas

This may have happened of course but "we" will deny - as each side in both scenarios - will say the other side is the one lying !

[BillyStubbsTears]

There won’t be any images of missiles hitting civilian targets. That would require a serious retaliation from the Russians and that’s the last thing they want to do.

Everyone gets what they want from this.

Trump can bluster about how this proves he’s not in Putin’s pocket and idiots in the USA will believe him.

Putin can say that Russia is acting in the interest of peace, and idiots in the West will believe him.

Everyone gets what they want. Apart from the poor bas**rds who were gassed last week.

[hoolahoop]

So now ex pats inCypress pooping themselves waiting for retaliation from Syria on RAF Akroutiri!

They will be pinning that badge from Mother Russia on your chest soon Comrade Sproty don't worry- ' pooping themselves inCypress ' indeed .

Where is Cypress btw and are you Carling Rover ?

[bpoolrover]

Bpool.

I’ve set out an alternative above. Which bit of that don’t you agree with?

it is of course possible bst, its like anything else just a opinion as none of us will ever no the truth anyway

[Donny Dub]

Our reaction to this gassing incident together with the ‘spy’ poisoning was, to my mind, too hasty.  We were too quick to pin blame onto Syria and Assad for the chemical weapon outrage and onto Russia for the nerve agent attack with very little proper evidence other than an a general agreement they were the most likely culprits.
Naturally had it been debated and voted on in parliament before the strike that delay would mean any evidence would certainly have been lost and the munitions hidden.

[hoolahoop]

Our reaction to this gassing incident together with the ‘spy’ poisoning was, to my mind, too hasty.  We were too quick to pin blame onto Syria and Assad for the chemical weapon outrage and onto Russia for the nerve agent attack with very little proper evidence other than an a general agreement they were the most likely culprits.
Naturally had it been debated and voted on in parliament before the strike that delay would mean any evidence would certainly have been lost and the munitions hidden.

Sorry Donny Dub but have you been actually listening or reading the events  as they have unfolded ?  I'm just wondering exactly which conspiracy theory you are following at present ?

[Not Now Kato]

Let's look at this logically. If the 'targets' were indeed chemical weapons and storage facilities as claimed then the last thing anyone with even half a brain would want to do is blow them up and scatter those chemicals to the four winds.
 
Just think about it for a few seconds, just think about the problems that would cause for local, innocent, people, all those gasses and nerve agents released into the local atmosphere yesterday.
 
This morning, we see pictures of people at the supposed wrecked chemical weapon sites without gas masks and, apparently, suffering no ill effects.  The same, one supposes, for the camera man taking the video.  Compare that to Salisbury, where a small amount of chemical substance was smeared on one door handle and even now parts of the town are still no-go areas!

This appears to me to be a charade of immense proportion. And if it is, one has to ask the question - WHY?

[BillyStubbsTears]

While we’re talking about Russia and war, this poll shows just how ill-informed we Brits are.

https://mobile.twitter.com/YouGov/status/984832675302330369

[RedRover45]

While I agree BST, the plain answer is that without one of the three main players, the result could have been significantly different. UK, USA and Russia all played a unified part.

[Filo]

If Germany did n't have to fight a war on the Westetn Front I doubt Russia would have drove the Germans back on the Eastern Front

[RedRover45]

Yep, in laymans terms, Hitler bit off more than he could chew and spread his forces too thinly.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Filo

Russia had already turned the tide on the Easten Front with the Battle of Kursk, 12 months before D-Day opened up the Western Front. By the time of D-Day, the Germans were in full-scale retreat in the East.

RR

I agree that it was a common effort. This sums it up neatly.

https://mobile.twitter.com/DuncanWeldon/status/947109803020685312/photo/1

There’s very few people I meet though, who know just how great the Soviet Union’s sacrifice was compared to ours.

[Not Now Kato]

Former head of the British Army gets cut off when he doesn't give the 'right' answer....

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=youtube+former+head+of+british+armed+forces&qs=PF&cvid=b66c57a23f844f18adf3dfaf7e3bc9ef&refig=109dfb550c6f4cb4cf33592210cada30&cc=GB&setlang=en-US&PC=DCTS&ru=%2fsearch%3fq%3dyoutube%2bformer%2bhead%2bof%2bbritish%2barmed%2bforces%26form%3dEDGNTT%26qs%3dPF%26cvid%3db66c57a23f844f18adf3dfaf7e3bc9ef%26refig%3d109dfb550c6f4cb4cf33592210cada30%26cc%3dGB%26setlang%3den-US%26PC%3dDCTS&view=detail&mmscn=vwrc&mid=A24036BAF9E6DF076807A24036BAF9E6DF076807&FORM=WRVORC

[BillyStubbsTears]

I’ll tell you what’s deeply concerning about the retired General’s comments. The fact that he can see no motive for Syria to use chemical weapons when in fact there are blatantly obvious reasons for them to do so.

The French Govt released a declassified intelligence briefing in this issue yesterday. (I’d post a link to it but the report has some very distressing images of children who had been affected by the gas attack and it’s not suitable to post that in here.)

The report noted that use of gas by the Syrian Govt forces in urban fighting had occurred several times before and always with the same motivations: to flush opposition fighters out of their buildings and hence make it safer for the Govt forces to mop them up, and to terrorise the civilian population into evacuating and/or not assisting the opposition. Those tactics meant that the Syrian Govt forces could finish off the opposition with minimal casualties to themselves.

That is so bleeding obvious that it is horrifying that a retired British general would not stop and consider it before spouting off on TV. The logic of why Assad’s forces would use gas is a micro version of the logic of why the USA dropped atom bombs on Japan. America was winning the war. They could have won it without using WMD. They used WMD a)to finish off Japan’s will to fight with minimal casualties to US forces and b) to demonstrate to future enemies that they had the capability and the will to use such weapons. Precisely the same motives can be attributed to Assad.

I hope and trust that our current generals have clearer tactical and strategic brains than this one.

[Sprotyrover]

I’ll tell you what’s deeply concerning about the retired General’s comments. The fact that he can see no motive for Syria to use chemical weapons when in fact there are blatantly obvious reasons for them to do so.

The French Govt released a declassified intelligence briefing in this issue yesterday. (I’d post a link to it but the report has some very distressing images of children who had been affected by the gas attack and it’s not suitable to post that in here.)

The report noted that use of gas by the Syrian Govt forces in urban fighting had occurred several times before and always with the same motivations: to flush opposition fighters out of their buildings and hence make it safer for the Govt forces to mop them up, and to terrorise the civilian population into evacuating and/or not assisting the opposition. Those tactics meant that the Syrian Govt forces could finish off the opposition with minimal casualties to themselves.

That is so bleeding obvious that it is horrifying that a retired British general would not stop and consider it before spouting off on TV. The logic of why Assad’s forces would use gas is a micro version of the logic of why the USA dropped atom bombs on Japan. America was winning the war. They could have won it without using WMD. They used WMD a)to finish off Japan’s will to fight with minimal casualties to US forces and b) to demonstrate to future enemies that they had the capability and the will to use such weapons. Precisely the same motives can be attributed to Assad.

I hope and trust that our current generals have clearer tactical and strategic brains than this one.

I think you are wrong Billy, the Syrians weren't finishing any last group of die hard resistance fighters off, the place had virtually surrendered, how many injured fighters do you see on these videos? Two days after the fighting ended they let a 3 mile long column of coaches leave the place.

[Filo]

If I'm reading what Corbyn is saying right, that every military action needs to be debated in parliament thats me finished with Labour while he is in charge. I'm no fan of the PM, but i do believe that the PM should have the right to decide on such actions without the restraints of having to go to the house, no matter who the PM is 

[BillyStubbsTears]

Sproty.

I know you won’t listen to anything that’s not on RT but just engage brain for a moment.

Last Saturday, when the attack happened, resistance WAS still ongoing in East Gouta. Over the days after the attack, resistance stopped.

[BillyStubbsTears]

On Corbyn’s approach to war, THIS is the best analysis I’ve seen.

https://mobile.twitter.com/daverich1/status/985405910129537024

As someone who was involved with the Far Keft in the 80s, every word of that rings true. The key point is to know your ideological line and be faithful to it. It’s about the concept that there is a scientific analysis of history and politics to study and apply.

It’s b*llocks because it doesn’t take into account the myriad intricacies of the real world. But it seduces people who are looking for certainty and what appears to be a morally good stance.

Most of us grow out of it when we start engaging with the real world. Corbyn never has done.

[selby]

   Billy I know this discussion has progressed quite a bit since my post and your reply, but you should know I don't believe in,  or trust god either.

[Not Now Kato]

I’ll tell you what’s deeply concerning about the retired General’s comments. The fact that he can see no motive for Syria to use chemical weapons when in fact there are blatantly obvious reasons for them to do so.

The French Govt released a declassified intelligence briefing in this issue yesterday. (I’d post a link to it but the report has some very distressing images of children who had been affected by the gas attack and it’s not suitable to post that in here.)

The report noted that use of gas by the Syrian Govt forces in urban fighting had occurred several times before and always with the same motivations: to flush opposition fighters out of their buildings and hence make it safer for the Govt forces to mop them up, and to terrorise the civilian population into evacuating and/or not assisting the opposition. Those tactics meant that the Syrian Govt forces could finish off the opposition with minimal casualties to themselves.

That is so bleeding obvious that it is horrifying that a retired British general would not stop and consider it before spouting off on TV. The logic of why Assad’s forces would use gas is a micro version of the logic of why the USA dropped atom bombs on Japan. America was winning the war. They could have won it without using WMD. They used WMD a)to finish off Japan’s will to fight with minimal casualties to US forces and b) to demonstrate to future enemies that they had the capability and the will to use such weapons. Precisely the same motives can be attributed to Assad.

I hope and trust that our current generals have clearer tactical and strategic brains than this one.

Billy, I suggest you take a look at this link from late last year....
 
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=youtube+robert+stuart+fabrication&view=detail&mid=389DDC34584A09EA6F68389DDC34584A09EA6F68&FORM=VIRE
 
Then look back at what footage the BBC and others showed in this latest 'supposed' chemical attack....
 
Then ask yourself why, if several supposed chemical weapons and storage facilities were subsequently destroyed by rocket attack, no one at all was harmed by the release of chemicals that would have happened at the time and immediately following?
 
So, was the retired General cut off because he was wrong?  Or because his answer didn't fit the 'agenda'?
 
Something, somewhere isn't right!
 

[glosterred]

Thought the targets were chemical weapons infrastructure sites not storage sites, hence no need for protective equipment

[BillyStubbsTears]

NNK

Right. That’s 20 minutes of my life I’m notgetting back. Nothing more than ad hominems, hints, supposition and unsubstantiated allegations.

Regarding collateral casualties from attacking the facilities, I have no idea how close they were to civilian zones. But in any case, sarin isn’t stored as sarin. It’s stored as two safe pre-cursor chemicals. So there wouldn’t be any release of lethal gas.

As for the retired general, if that was some sort of censorship attempt it’s not really been very successful has it, because the Twittersphere is on fire with conspiracy allegations. Me, I gave you my take on the sense of what he was saying. Regarding him getting cut off, it happens frequently when interviewees are rambling and an ad break is impending.

On a wider issue, you DO realise that Putin’s entire approach is based around getting smart people like you to see demons in everything and believe nothing. Then he’s free to commit his crimes and retain plausible deniability. It’s clearly working and it scares the living shite out of me. 

[Not Now Kato]

Thought the targets were chemical weapons infrastructure sites not storage sites, hence no need for protective equipment

Gloster, it depends on which reports you choose to believe.  However, let's take the supposition that they were only chemical weapons infrastructures - would there not be chemical weapons in at least one of them?  And if there were then, ipso facto, there would be chemicals in them?  And those chemicals would be released into the local environment, the ones that people were seen climbing all over this morning with no ill effects?
 
But then, lets suppose that they were manufacturing bases for chemical weapons but with no chemicals there, unlikely - but let's go with that for a moment.  If this is the case then the Asad regime still has chemical weapons stored somewhere, so what was gained by this exercise?
 
The whole issue is 'wrong' on so many levels.

[BillyStubbsTears]

NNK

As I said. Sarin and most other nerve agents are stored as non-toxic pre-cursor chemicals.

[selby]

  Billy I once read an article (whether true or not I don't know) a few years ago, but put the theory forward that Saddam's nerve agents and mustard gas had been moved to Syria, before the inspectors arrived in Iraq.

[Not Now Kato]

NNK

Right. That’s 20 minutes of my life I’m notgetting back. Nothing more than ad hominems, hints, supposition and unsubstantiated allegations.

Regarding collateral casualties from attacking the facilities, I have no idea how close they were to civilian zones. But in any case, sarin isn’t stored as sarin. It’s stored as two safe pre-cursor chemicals. So there wouldn’t be any release of lethal gas.

As for the retired general, if that was some sort of censorship attempt it’s not really been very successful has it, because the Twittersphere is on fire with conspiracy allegations. Me, I gave you my take on the sense of what he was saying. Regarding him getting cut off, it happens frequently when interviewees are rambling and an ad break is impending.

On a wider issue, you DO realise that Putin’s entire approach is based around getting smart people like you to see demons in everything and believe nothing. Then he’s free to commit his crimes and retain plausible deniability. It’s clearly working and it scares the living shite out of me.

Billy, I'm sorry if you got nothing at all from those 20 minutes and that it did not in any way get you to question the whole issue.
 
You're quite correct in respect of Sarin, however there's currently no proof that that was what, if anything, was used here.  People out there have been saying that they could smell chlorine for starters and I'm sure that if the Asad regime has chemical weapons they will have a multitude of options to choose from.  It seems unlikely to me that we could bomb any chemical weapons location without release of at least something toxic into the atmosphere, your mileage may vary.
 
On the wider issue.  Following the lies propagated by our media - Hilsborogh, Orgreave, Brexit etc etc - do you not think it at all reasoable to challenge what the media tells us?  I don't look for deamons, I look for truth. I was taught to question anything that didn't meet the 'duck' principle; and what's happening in Syria right now doesn't walk like a duck, nor does it quack like a duck, to me at least.
 

 

[BillyStubbsTears]

NNK

Seems to me you are making a lot of assumptions in one direction, with very little proof.

In situations like this, where the facts are blurred, my take is to look at the track records.

There have been numerous chemical weapons incidents in Syria, as confirmed by the OPCW. Whilst the OPCW does not have the mandate to apportion blame,there are numerous independent witnesses who have spoken out giving evidence of how it could only have been the Assad regime who carried out those attacks previously.

Meanwhile, you have the track records of Putin and Assad. Putin made his reputation by flattening Grozny. An utterly barbaric campaign against militants, which deliberately terrorised civilians into abandoning support for the Chechen rebels. Putin and Assad have applied that lesson in the way they have flattened large sections of Aleppo.

Both of them have previous form as war criminals who have shown flagrant disregard for the norms of combat, or for their responsibilities for civilians. You HAVE to look through that lens. Those are the people we are dealing with here.

But there’s an overwhelming fact that demolishes all the conspiracy theories about Douma. We COUKD find out who was responsible if the OPCW were given the remit if establishing blame as well as the fact of the existence of an attack. Britain, France and the USA proposed doing exactly that at the UN last week. Russia vetoed that idea.

That trumps everything. The rest is all bullshit. That one veto rendered it impossible to actually determine the truth. And then the bots from the Internet Research Agency and their useful idiots in the West fill the void with plausible conspiracies.

This is a vital issue. Step away from the conspiracy theories for a moment and look at the big picture. And ask yourself which side you are prepared to give the benefit of the doubt to.

[Iberian Red]

Good to see a PM with balls and who is not an appeaser

Is that why she never had children?

[hoolahoop]

While we’re talking about Russia and war, this poll shows just how ill-informed we Brits are.

https://mobile.twitter.com/YouGov/status/984832675302330369

Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear .....there is no hope for u going backwards.