Russian Warplanes Reportedly Bombed US Base in Syria

[Xeones]

If this actually happened it should be an immediate declaration of war involving all of NATO.

[Ulmita]

If this actually happened it should be an immediate declaration of war involving all of NATO.

Care to explain this a little bit further?

Its not the first time Russia is bombing US trained "rebels". I mean by now they specialize on doing so. You should ask Skroe more about it

[Independent voter]

We don't have a base in Syria.

[Deleted]

We need some Skroe in the thread, stat!

[Deleted]

If this actually happened it should be an immediate declaration of war involving all of NATO.

haha scared and needs help

[Medusa Cascade]

You know what that means

[zmp]

US base or a CIA base used to train "Freedom fighters"? Unclear at this moment.. Waiting on World News™ for confirmation.

[Xeones]

Care to explain this a little bit further?

Its not the first time Russia is bombing US trained "rebels". I mean by now they specialize on doing so. You should ask Skroe more about it

The article didn't say it was proxy soldiers, it said it was US and UK soldiers stationed there.

[Ulmita]

The article didn't say it was proxy soldiers, it said it was US and UK soldiers stationed there.

Nah it was terrorists there. No information about western soldiers dying at least.
The matter of the thing is that USA nor UK should be in Syria though.

[Marcellus1986]

Ulmita really reaching for something to make Russia seem relevant. He keeps getting laughed out of his NATO/Russia thread.

[Ulmita]

Ulmita really reaching for something to make Russia seem relevant. He keeps getting laughed out of his NATO/Russia thread.

I understand Marcellus. I would be butthurt AF too if my government trained terrorists got bombed several times by my "existential threat" and we didn't do anything about it despite saying how irrelevant Russian army is and how powerful we are - aka we just barked and barked and barked.

[Deleted]

US base or a CIA base used to train "Freedom fighters"? Unclear at this moment.. Waiting on World News™ for confirmation.

more than likely it was a place where spec ops trained rebels, which is why it was bombed, presumably after Russia telegraphed it's intentions clearly, to make sure there were no US or UK casualties.

[Skroe]

We need some Skroe in the thread, stat!

Middle of the work day but I'll say this:

The Obama Administration is on their way out the door in 109 days.

For the past two months they've been utterly desperate... DESPERATE... to engage in a deal with Russia in Syria to share targeting, flight and intelligence information. They have attempted to do this despite the overwhelming disapproval and disagreement of the Pentagon, the State Department and the CIA. Basically yet again, Susan Rice and Ben Rhodes whisper in Barry Obama's ear, and Barry ignores the dozens of people telling him "this is a horrible idea". Don't be surprised. This is the recurring theme of the last 4 years. Obama, being a terrible manager of his staff, tells different people different things, and in the final calculation, always goes with what the people down the hall (Rice, etc.) want to do and not what the people across town (State, Defense) think.

Obama lives in a bubble within his own administration. It's really pathetic.

The administration wants the deal because they know ISIS is now part of Obama's legacy, and they want to clean it up.

I'll look into this story later at sites more reputable than Fox News. But turning the other cheek, even in a situation like this, totally fits the Obama Administration M.O. There is no changing it at this point. All we can do is keep score of how many brain dead moves the moron in charge and his true believer squadron makes before he stops hurting the West in his obscene quest to be an internationally popular citizen of the world.

I will say though, if this indeed happened, while it's far too late (and pointless) to remove Obama from office, it should dog him for the rest of his crap life.

[Marcellus1986]

I understand Marcellus. I would be butthurt AF too if my government trained terrorists got bombed several times by my "existential threat" and we didn't do anything about it despite saying how irrelevant Russian army is and how powerful we are - aka we just barked and barked and barked.

Bombed what? Desert tribesman? There weren't any western troops in the base. It was about as effective as bombing wind. Not to mention US jets chased your bombers off and you just ran around like scared rats till they returned to their carrier.

Had there been servicemen killed, Russia would be answering for it and there would have been more of an uproar in media about it.

Again, you're trying to find something, anything to make it seem like Russia is doing jack all in Syria.

[Kellhound]

USA had sent F-18 to intercept those Russian bombers but once they left to refuel, Russian's returned and bombed again the fuck out of that base. These news are not from fox. We also knew that USA was "training" (terrorists) allies there so we knew it was CIA sponsored.

What we didn't know is that was remarked official as a USA / UK base.

There are other sources on these news like: http://www.wsj.com/articles/russian-...u-s-1469137231


The best part is that after bombing into the oblivion the base, USA agreed on cooperating with the Russians on Syria hahaha.

(I'd love to see Skroe's face right about now <3)

The idiot in the White House decided to, the US military wanted (and wants) nothing to do with the amateurish Russian military.

[Deleted]

Bombed what? Desert tribesman? There weren't any western troops in the base. It was about as effective as bombing wind. Not to mention US jets chased your bombers off and you just ran around like scared rats till they returned to their carrier.

Had there been servicemen killed, Russia would be answering for it and there would have been more of an uproar in media about it.

Again, you're trying to find something, anything to make it seem like Russia is doing jack all in Syria.

Yes, because the goal was to kill US servicemen -

- - - Updated - - -

The idiot in the White House decided to, the US military wanted (and wants) nothing to do with the amateurish Russian military.

Could be because no US policy will work unless its in conjunction with the Russians.

[Kellhound]

Yes, because the goal was to kill US servicemen -

- - - Updated - - -



Could be because no US policy will work unless its in conjunction with the Russians.

It will not work in conjunction with the Russians because the goals of the two countries are diametrically opposed: Keep Assad in power vs Remove Assad from power. The enemy of my enemy is not my friend, they are just my enemy's enemy.

[Skroe]

It will not work in conjunction with the Russians because the goals of the two countries are diametrically opposed: Keep Assad in power vs Remove Assad from power. The enemy of my enemy is not my friend, they are just my enemy's enemy.

And don't forget to mention, the concern about it informing the Russians of the location of all US / coalition assets in the region... their up to the date movements, their plans... everything.

Obama wants to give away the store to save his own ass.
@GoblinP, in addition to what Kellhound said, why is it the US that must do the deconflicting. Last check the US alone had, between ground based and sea based aircraft, about six to eight times as many aircraft in the region as Russia. All of them more modern, more capable, and flown by pilots who fly on average ten times the flying hours per year as Russian pilots do.

Russia should keep out of the US's way in Syria, not the other way around. That's the opinion of the State Department, which has been advocating bringing down the hammer on Assad for months in memos. That's the opinion of the Department of Defense which is deeply offended by Administration policy. The only people it's not the opinion of is the guy who is out of office in 109 days and the handful of people who work down the hall in the West Wing and believe some really weird shit.

I honestly can't wait for Hillary to put this terrible era in foreign policy behind us.

As for my face @Ulmita, it's blank, because I read about this yesterday, and I wasn't remotely surprised that the Obama Administration turned the other cheek. This isn't really about Russia, or Syria, or ISIS. It's about the bizarre parallel universe about seven people in the West Wing exist in. It was blank because it's been 4 years of nonsense like this. I can't be surprised at this point, about that set of no talent failures.

But soon, it's over, and the bi-partisan consensus foreign policy restoration will be in full effect.

[Deleted]

It will not work in conjunction with the Russians because the goals of the two countries are diametrically opposed: Keep Assad in power vs Remove Assad from power. The enemy of my enemy is not my friend, they are just my enemy's enemy.

But the problem is, the US has two goals, one, get rid of Assad, two, get rid of ISIS/avoid a Libya.
Those goals are not mutually compatible.
Absent a US ground force, those things are not mutually compatible.
Getting rid of Assad will collapse Syria, and be a cluster fuck of untold proportions.

And don't forget to mention, the concern about it informing the Russians of the location of all US / coalition assets in the region... their up to the date movements, their plans... everything.
Obama wants to give away the store to save his own ass.

To avoid accidents - This incident, seems like a very orchestrated 'accident' -

@GoblinP, in addition to what Kellhound said, why is it the US that must do the deconflicting. Last check the US alone had, between ground based and sea based aircraft, about six to eight times as many aircraft in the region as Russia. All of them more modern, more capable, and flown by pilots who fly on average ten times the flying hours per year as Russian pilots do.

Sure - Russia should be nice and but out, but they wont, and that's life.

Russia should keep out of the US's way in Syria, not the other way around. That's the opinion of the State Department, which has been advocating bringing down the hammer on Assad for months in memos.

Which would be monumentally stupid.

That's the opinion of the Department of Defense which is deeply offended by Administration policy. The only people it's not the opinion of is the guy who is out of office in 109 days and the handful of people who work down the hall in the West Wing and believe some really weird shit.

What would Clinton's policy be? how would it be implemented? What would the outcomes be?
What would the price tag be?

Because to be clear, the only policy proposal I have heard from Clinton is, enforcing a No fly over parts of Syria.
Which would be awesome, because it would in no way be a violation of Syrian Sovereignty, it would risk war no way when the Syrians shoot down some of those Aircraft illegally patrolling its airspace, and it would be awesome to see Russia not give a fuck about the No fly and then that would be awesome.
And for what? - Well if done without opposition (or rather elimination of the Syrian opposition) absent ground forces it would only be a new Libya.
Because Libya was such a resounding success.

[kaid]

Shit happens. During the Gulf War roughly a quarter of US losses in battle was due to friendly fire. Hopefully both sides get it in their heads, that - let's be honest, apart from some equipment testing under real life conditions - shooting at each other doesn't accomplish anything.

Hell in the stuff in Yugoslavia we bombed the hell out of the Chinese embassy.