USA attack to RUSSIA soon.

[SerenaL]

I heard from rt that USA is going to attack RUSSIA soon. How USA will attack and where invasion will start? I'd like to know 

I'm still waiting for that attack. zzzz

[1714970887]

1714970887

[1714970887]

1714970887

[1714970887]

1714970887

[1714970887]

1714970887

[galdur]

I heard from rt that USA is going to attack RUSSIA soon. How USA will attack and where invasion will start? I'd like to know 

I'm still waiting for that attack. zzzz

Well I think you are going to have to keep waiting indefinitely, at least that isn't a bad thing.

U.S. is unlikely to do anything of much consequence in the near future. The president is a lame duck by now so things should be relatively quiet until 2017. There´ll be the same saber rattling and rhetoric but it should just muddle through.

[bryant.coleman]

It´s true that this whole mess is the result of that invasion and the decade long occupation. But where is the evidence that this ISIS has any meaningful support from the population there? Don´t tell me that it comes from U.S. intelligence (which feed the media spin). Obviously the creators aren´t very interested in having their creature destroyed. So this spin sounds like it comes from them.

IMO, ISIS seems to be having considerable support in Iraq and Syria, as well as in other Muslim majority nations. Recently, a survey by a reputed European polling agency calculated the support for ISIS among the Syrian migrants to Europe at around 20%. In Iraq, large numbers of Sunnis support the ISIS, as it is the only viable alternative against the Shiite militias.

[jlauzon]

I'll just leave this here:




If the countries on the left fight each other, the game is over. It would be Armageddon.

[galdur]

It´s true that this whole mess is the result of that invasion and the decade long occupation. But where is the evidence that this ISIS has any meaningful support from the population there? Don´t tell me that it comes from U.S. intelligence (which feed the media spin). Obviously the creators aren´t very interested in having their creature destroyed. So this spin sounds like it comes from them.

IMO, ISIS seems to be having considerable support in Iraq and Syria, as well as in other Muslim majority nations. Recently, a survey by a reputed European polling agency calculated the support for ISIS among the Syrian migrants to Europe at around 20%. In Iraq, large numbers of Sunnis support the ISIS, as it is the only viable alternative against the Shiite militias.

Well, if that´s true it´s bloody scary. If they continue spreading where´ll it stop? At the Israeli border?

It´s all rather murky to say the least,

[bryant.coleman]

Well, if that´s true it´s bloody scary. If they continue spreading where´ll it stop? At the Israeli border?

It´s all rather murky to say the least,

It will stop when Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Kuwait, Israel, and Turkey stops supporting the Islamic State. Without the foreign funding and support, the Kurds and the Shiites would have routed the ISIS by now. But now Turkey is bombing the Peshmerga positions, making the Kurds extremely vulnerable against attacks by the ISIS, and the GCC nations have stepped up their support for the Islamists.  

[galdur]

Well, it always helps to try to read between the (pipe) lines. Of course it isn´t the fault of interests that want to transport gas from the Gulf over to the Mediterranean that Syria is in the way 

[bryant.coleman]

Well, it always helps to try to read between the (pipe) lines. Of course it isn´t the fault of interests that want to transport gas from the Gulf over to the Mediterranean that Syria is in the way 

Hmm... I am afraid that the Qataris need to find some alternate route to transport their gas. Why don't they transport their gas via Israel?  That will be epic. Israel gaining billions of USD in gas transit fees, from some of their mortal enemies. Or they can transport it via Iraq and Turkey, but the geography and the terrain is not that good in that region.

[galdur]

Well, it always helps to try to read between the (pipe) lines. Of course it isn´t the fault of interests that want to transport gas from the Gulf over to the Mediterranean that Syria is in the way 

Hmm... I am afraid that the Qataris need to find some alternate route to transport their gas. Why don't they transport their gas via Israel?  That will be epic. Israel gaining billions of USD in gas transit fees, from some of their mortal enemies. Or they can transport it via Iraq and Turkey, but the geography and the terrain is not that good in that region.

Israel is set to become a major exporter of natural gas in the not so distant future so they´re probably not very interested in facilitating pipelines of any competition whether through Syria or their own land.

--------------------------

The Leviathan gas field is a large natural gas field located in the Mediterranean Sea off the coast of Israel, 47 kilometres (29 mi) south-west of the Tamar gas field. The gas field is located roughly 130 kilometres (81 mi) west of Haifa in waters 1,500 metres (4,900 ft) deep in the Levantine basin, a rich hydrocarbon area in one of the world's larger offshore gas finds of the past decade.  According to some commentators, the gas find has the potential to change Israel's foreign relations with neighboring countries Turkey and Egypt. Together with the nearby Tamar gas field, the Leviathan field is seen as an opportunity for Israel to become a major energy player in the Middle East. ......

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leviathan_gas_field

[coinspiracy]

I'll just leave this here:




If the countries on the left fight each other, the game is over. It would be Armageddon.

"defence spending" america world police

[ThePrinceofTea]

1. Nevada was nuked multiple times
2. 3000 synchronous strikes on russian cities
3. interceptors for the few counter launches
4. strike back to where it came from
5. it's easier to wait it rot... first it was nemsov that didn't get his share from the loot, then who?
6. or wait for an event that would usa in bad shape and lead the russian to have the hedge?

for sure 6 is a trade off that this potus can't do. it's too big... skin is closer to the nose.

[mladen00]

1. Nevada was nuked multiple times
2. 3000 synchronous strikes on russian cities
3. interceptors for the few counter launches
4. strike back to where it came from
5. it's easier to wait it rot... first it was nemsov that didn't get his share from the loot, then who?
6. or wait for an event that would usa in bad shape and lead the russian to have the hedge?

for sure 6 is a trade off that this potus can't do. it's too big... skin is closer to the nose.

well USA can't even bomb isis, why you think that they can bomb Russia???

[elrippo]

1. Nevada was nuked multiple times
2. 3000 synchronous strikes on russian cities
3. interceptors for the few counter launches
4. strike back to where it came from
5. it's easier to wait it rot... first it was nemsov that didn't get his share from the loot, then who?
6. or wait for an event that would usa in bad shape and lead the russian to have the hedge?

for sure 6 is a trade off that this potus can't do. it's too big... skin is closer to the nose.

well USA can't even bomb isis, why you think that they can bomb Russia???

Isis is finaced by the USA and the Saudis, so why should they bomb them, there are too much interests involved  

Interests of ISIS
Interests of CIA

Hmmm... related 

[mladen00]

1. Nevada was nuked multiple times
2. 3000 synchronous strikes on russian cities
3. interceptors for the few counter launches
4. strike back to where it came from
5. it's easier to wait it rot... first it was nemsov that didn't get his share from the loot, then who?
6. or wait for an event that would usa in bad shape and lead the russian to have the hedge?

for sure 6 is a trade off that this potus can't do. it's too big... skin is closer to the nose.

well USA can't even bomb isis, why you think that they can bomb Russia???

Isis is finaced by the USA and the Saudis, so why should they bomb them, there are too much interests involved 

Interests of ISIS
Interests of CIA

Hmmm... related 

isis = CIA

[elrippo]

1. Nevada was nuked multiple times
2. 3000 synchronous strikes on russian cities
3. interceptors for the few counter launches
4. strike back to where it came from
5. it's easier to wait it rot... first it was nemsov that didn't get his share from the loot, then who?
6. or wait for an event that would usa in bad shape and lead the russian to have the hedge?

for sure 6 is a trade off that this potus can't do. it's too big... skin is closer to the nose.

well USA can't even bomb isis, why you think that they can bomb Russia???

Isis is finaced by the USA and the Saudis, so why should they bomb them, there are too much interests involved 

Interests of ISIS
Interests of CIA

Hmmm... related 

isis = CIA

Trained and financed pretty sure 

[galdur]

Wow, the Russians are firing cruise missiles from the Caspian Sea over two countries and what 900 miles away in Syria wiping out western trained and backed terrorist scum. Great on the ground intelligence. Should give U.S./NATO girlie-men commanders and other screwballs on that side a clue about how any military operation in Eastern Europe would turn out. Yes, it was Warsaw Bloc/Soviet territory for decades and yes the Russians still have plenty of agents all over the place. There will be some barking from small NATO doggies, U.S. lapdogs, a Norwegian and a tiny Dane. Yawn. All will be quiet on the Eastern front.

[galdur]

Yet another scam bites the dust...

---------------------------------------

The White House just abandoned the big Syria rebel training program that Obama said he never wanted

BRETT LOGIURATO MILITARY & DEFENSE    OCT. 9, 2015, 8:23 PM

The Obama administration has ended the $500 million train-and-equip program, The New York Times reports, marking a sudden end to a troubled program that was supposed to be a cornerstone of the US strategy to combat ISIS.

The program, run by the Pentagon, has been hit by setbacks from its inception.

‘Four or five’

The Obama administration’s policy toward Syria and its more than four-year-old civil war is rapidly becoming a black mark on the president’s legacy.

A scathing report by Peter Baker of The New York Times last month detailed the White House’s refusal to accept any responsibility for the program’s crash.

The blame for the failed US effort to train Syrian rebels to fight ISIS “should be pointed not at Mr. Obama but at those who pressed him to attempt training Syrian rebels in the first place,” administration officials told Baker.

At that point, there were only “four or five” US-trained rebels left fighting in Syria, according to a top US general, after a group of 60 were ambushed in August by the Al Qaeda branch in Syria, the Nusra Front.

‘The devil made me do it’

Obama’s argument, according to Baker, is that “he reluctantly went along with those who said it was the way to combat the Islamic State, but that he never wanted to do it and has now has been vindicated in his original judgment.”

But some people who worked in Obama’s administration disagree — and they’re calling him out.

“It looks like the White House would like to blame its critics for its own operational illiteracy,” Frederic Hof, a former special adviser for transition in Syria under then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, told Business Insider over email. “I don’t think I’ve ever seen any other administration employ ‘the devil made me do it’ argument to excuse and explain its own shortcomings.”

“In this case a micromanaging White House saddled [the Defense Department] with something dead on arrival due to a lopsided anti-ISIL mission (one that tried to ignore Assad) and crippling vetting requirements,” Hof added, using an alternative acronym for the Islamic State, or ISIS.

Ryan Crocker, a retired career diplomat who was an ambassador to Afghanistan under Obama, echoed Hof’s sentiments.

“How un-presidential that sounds — ‘We didn’t want to do it. We thought it was unsound, but you made us do it,’” Crocker told The Times. “It’s just indicative of their whole approach to Syria, which is not to have a policy. This is the worst thing they could say.”


Read more at http://www.businessinsider.my/obama-syria-training-program-2015-9/#xWqZX3JE5o6OwsaJ.99

[IamTalkingaboutmoney]

if USA attack in RUSSIA,  usa will fall piece by piece i think, the russian technology its 1000% more updated than the americans , its like to fight king kong(russia) vs monkey(usa) i dont say that usa he has low weapons and technology but russia its the first power in the world.

[TheGr33k]

I can't imagine that any two super-powers at this point would want to directly clash heads, because this would start a ripple affect throughout the world on so many different levels.
Multiple countries would get involved and it would effectively turn into WW3 within the week.

I don't think that USA would be at benefit to attack Russia.

[Balthazar]

I think it's clear even without translation.