Russia and Iran warn US they will 'respond with force' if red lines crossed in Syria

[ParanoiD84]

Might give them a chance to finally get rid of that abomination that is israel... Worth WWIII ?

Who would take care of Israel? Iran lol. Russia and Israel have good relations so i dont think there would be anything there.

[Phlegethon]

Who would take care of Israel? Iran lol. Russia and Israel have good relations so i dont think there would be anything there.

We can only hope them attacking makes the surrounding countries retaliate...

[caervek]

I don't see anyone denying anything in this article though?

That was @Shacker was talking about right?

Well obviously they don't deny the fake reports because they probably haven't heard about them yet, but they do give official statements that directly contradict the fake reports.

Generally speaking, an official statement from Russia stating that the sun is up should be enough to refute a trash news article claiming Russia have stated the sun is down, if you get what I mean.

[Ghostpanther]

In a conventional war, Russia will get their asses kicked by the US. In a nuke war, no one would win. We could completely dominate the air space in Syria in less than a week.

[GennGreymane]

In a conventional war, Russia will get their asses kicked by the US. In a nuke war, no one would win. We could completely dominate the air space in Syria in less than a week.

But.... but.... but.... air dominance starts WW3!

[Ghostpanther]

But.... but.... but.... air dominance starts WW3!

It did not in the Iraq war.

[GennGreymane]

It did not in the Iraq war.

But but.... Killary was gonna do da air dominance and it was gonna start WW3

[Ghostpanther]

But but.... Killary was gonna do da air dominance and it was gonna start WW3

And? She lost, so it is a mute point. Right now Putin is blowing smoke just as Obama did with his " red line" bullshit.

[GennGreymane]

And? She lost, so it is a mute point. Right now Putin is blowing smoke just as Obama did with his " red line" bullshit.

I just find it funny how quickly people are turning around on a major point.

[Ghostpanther]

I just find it funny how quickly people are turning around on a major point.

That was not one I ever commenting on anyway. If she was President and wanted to control the air space in Syria, I would not be opposed to that. But for myself, I would also not have a issue if we pulled all the troops out of there and let them destroy themselves. But if we are going to be there...do the damn job right..:P

[GennGreymane]

That was not one I ever commenting on anyway. If she was President and wanted to control the air space in Syria, I would not be opposed to that. But for myself, I would also not have a issue if we pulled all the troops out of there and let them destroy themselves. But if we are going to be there...do the damn job right..:P

Its just silly :P

[Skroe]

This is again, Russia just trying to pick itself up after the body blow it just suffered.

Remember when Russian Anti-Air defenses, and beyond that, the presence of Russian troops, was supposed to intimidate the US against acting? "The US would never take the risk and cause World War III".

Turns out all it did was buy Russia a courtesy phone call: "tell your troops to stay in their barracks, we're sending cruise missiles to the base they're on in an hour... it would be a shame if something happened to them." So much for the Russian bear being some kind of anti-US barrier.

Russia cannot protect anybody.

[Ghostpanther]

Its just silly :P

What Obama said and Rich said was done? Of course it was. :P

[caervek]

This is again, Russia just trying to pick itself up after the body blow it just suffered.

Actually it's fake news which has already been debunked, reading the thread helps

[Ulmita]

This is again, Russia just trying to pick itself up after the body blow it just suffered.

Remember when Russian Anti-Air defenses, and beyond that, the presence of Russian troops, was supposed to intimidate the US against acting? "The US would never take the risk and cause World War III".

Turns out all it did was buy Russia a courtesy phone call: "tell your troops to stay in their barracks, we're sending cruise missiles to the base they're on in an hour... it would be a shame if something happened to them." So much for the Russian bear being some kind of anti-US barrier.

Russia cannot protect anybody.

This is the exact same thing as when the Russians bombed the American and British backed terrorist base, over and over again.
USA even send F-18s to try to protect, and despite that they kept bombing.

USA cannot protect anybody.
or
Russia / USA are afraid of starting a hot conflict between them?

Lastly, i believe that this is a PR stand of Trump and then will be bussiness as usuall with Putin

[Skroe]

This is the exact same thing as when the Russians bombed the American and British backed terrorist base, over and over again.
USA even send F-18s to try to protect, and despite that they kept bombing.

USA cannot protect anybody.
or
Russia / USA are afraid of starting a hot conflict between them?

Lastly, i believe that this is a PR stand of Trump and then will be bussiness as usuall with Putin

Ah but here's the rub. Thing is, I knew one of you or the other Putinistas were going to say something like this. Here is why you're wrong: Russia has far more to lose in Syria than the US does.

The US isn't propping up anybody in Syria. It's advising some rebels and telling them how to fight ISIS, but it's not even putting up the pretense of offering them air protection.

Russia, however, is propping up Assad, and is, or rather was, offering that pretense.

If Russia where to wipe out the rebels, the US would suffer a set back in the fight against ISIS, but just a setback.
If the US were to wipe out Assad, Russia would be dealt an even greater humilating blow and lose its only Middle Eastern ally.

Syria matters far more to Russia than the US, and the US, possessing escalation dominance again in the country, is free to exploit that.

After all, it's not like Russia is bombing Greece, Turkey, Jordan, Israel or an actual US ally.

So no. Russia can't protect anybody.

- - - Updated - - -

Actually it's fake news which has already been debunked, reading the thread helps

Oh really? Oh well. Our message to Russia is still the same.

[caervek]

Oh really? Oh well.

Yeah, Russian officials are saying they have no idea where Reuters got the fake statement from, and that “Russia does not intend to get involved in an armed standoff with the United States there [in Syria], our task there is to support the Syrian military forces in their fight against terrorists, this is the task we have a mandate for,”

- - - Updated - - -

If Russia where to wipe out the rebels, the US would suffer a set back in the fight against ISIS, but just a setback.

Funny thing is, if the west had never supported the rebels then Assad would have ragdolled them before ISIS even got to the fight then roflstomped them too. Kinda shot ourselves in the foot on that one lol (then again, prior to 2001 helping Osama vs the USSR seemed like it had worked out too, this just backfired much quicker).

[lonely zergling]

Its time someone retaliates for the breach of international law by the US. By "US" logic every "protector of the worldz" has now the right to destroy the ships that launched the missiles.

I for one would love to see the ships destroyed.

If america establishes that a breach of international law allows anyone to bomb something without evidence then so be it. Let everyone play by the same rules.

[caervek]

Its time someone retaliates for the breach of international law by the US. By "US" logic every "protector of the worldz" has now the right to destroy the ships that launched the missiles.

That may be true, but who has the balls?

Lets be blunt here, the US launched an air strike against the military of a sovereign nation because they didn't quite like something they allegedly did, a nation they are currently bombing against the will of that nation because they claim to have a legal grey area to do so, and nobody is going to do anything about any of it because it's a superpower and there's nothing they can do but cry :P

[Skroe]

Yeah, Russian officials are saying they have no idea where Reuters got the fake statement from, and that “Russia does not intend to get involved in an armed standoff with the United States there [in Syria], our task there is to support the Syrian military forces in their fight against terrorists, this is the task we have a mandate for,”

I mean, I'll say it again, as I've been saying for ages now: the entire premise is ridiculous. Russia has about 30 fixed wing combat aircraft in Syria and about 12 of them (may actually be fewer now) are air superiority fighters. And it has a couple of handfuls of S-300 and S-400 launchers. This is not the stuff of World War III, especially when the US has hundreds of aircraft, bombers, carrier strike groups pretty much everywhere around it.

The idea, from both Trumpkins and from Putinistas, that there was ever going to be some kind of showdown - be it over a no fly zone or something else - in Syria was always fanciful and delusional. Russia simply doesn't have the forces in Syria to make that a credible risk, nor does it have the manpower, money, or aircraft to scale up their presence in a way that acts as an effective counterweight to the US-allied presence in the region.

These cruise missile strike really just laid that bare. Of course, the US striking a Russian base and exposing the fact that Russia can't protect Syria in no way implies Russia can't protect itself, on its home territory. But it does lay bare the enormous amount of bullshit people like Ulmita, Shalcker and the Trumpkins have spent years parroting. Syria is not important enough to Russia to get into World War III over, and there were always going to scope their mission with that in mind.

I mean even the "naval base" at Tartus is scarcely worthy of the name. It can host 4 mid-sized ships, and it's far too small for Russia's most capable combat ships. It's scheduled for modest expansion, but Naval Base Subic Bay-on-the-Mediterranean, it ain't gonna be.

Hopefully this acts a reality check for the you-know-who's. But I doubt it. For whatever reason they have a really hard to seeing the difference between how the US holds Baltic or German security as a core interests with how Russia holds Syria. They're entirely different.