Russia retaliates after pilot is killed in rebel-held Syria. (Comments on YouTube)

I agree. But he's innocent of those chemical weapons events blamed on him, and that's what we're talking about?

 

Yanks are on the wrong side. They won't listen.
Sanctions are required.

Pilots who bomb people can expect little mercy from the people below them.
This particular pilot was ****ing cool.

Not really seeing much of a Russia retaliation here. This isn't a 9/11 moment for Russia.

 

How do you know that's what he said? Because Putin claims it's true?

No, I don't.

Ahhh, now you're getting it. It's war. Who were the residents of the land the SU-25 was flying over: the Russian pilot or those who shot down the Russian pilot? Who was the invader and who was the defender?

 

Are you assuming that those fighting in Syria are all Syrian?
You have no idea of the nationality of those who shot down the Russian plane.

 

The comments from Mattis is from the last 48 hours... after the most recent incident east of the Euphrates involving the Americans.... that makes your entire second paragraph incorrect... which is why I prefer short and sweet because you just make all that crap up and think I'm going to swallow... I don' swallow Y.

 

The Yanks just bombed Assad's forces again.
I forsee another shoot down coming. This time an American one.

I think the Russians will "sell" him AA systems now.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...-war-after-deadly-syria-clashes-idUSKBN1FR3BB

 

I knew you were rooting for the Russians! Okay, let an American pilot die to satisfy your bloodlust and national revenge, comrade.

 

What were they doing there? They crossed into territory they were not suppose to cross into and the US basically beat the crap out of them...

 

Justify it all you like, whatever helps you sleep at night.
Next time they move they are going to take AA systems with them.

In fact they may just declare their whole country a no fly zone and shoot all your planes down for crossing the border.

Yes the US beat the crap out of them, yes there will be consequences for doing so.

Escalation has occurred, We've gone from an anti terrorist operation against a common enemy, ISIS, to a war against a foreign nation.
These people can shoot back. Expect loses.

 

Although it has not always been the case I'm sleeping just fine these days. Assad's troops can't even claim "oops we were lost" because they had to cross a ******n river to get where they were. They were also not there for a picnic since they packed tanks and plenty of ammo... so all your blah blah people shoot back is just hot air... they were there to kill and got killed.
So you're saying next time they will try harder, have Anti aircraft systems and be ready for the god of hell and thunder to rain down on them... I doubt the US and Kurds will not be ready for them either. This incident is entirely on Assad and if he wants to go down that road... he just received a taste of what's in store for him.

the Russians of course as usual is looking around... wtf just happened... clueless

 

I'd like to see these tough-talking Syrians try shooting back. Assad knows full well it would spell a quick end for his regime. Russia could not and would not stop it, either.

 

When a bully picks a fight with you it can't be avoided no matter what you say or do. So you still have to fight even if you know you are going to lose.

So that's what will occur. They will fight.
Syria has no choice now. America has directly targeted them and ISIS is destroyed.
They have no other reason to be there but to wage war on Syria and they have begun to do so.


America will lose it's air force if Russia turns it's SAMS on. That simple. SAM>Bomber.
It's simply a question of numbers. If Russia imports enough missiles, the Syrians will have air superiority.

I think they've gone and picked a fight. I think the Russians will be blaming America for the loss of their most heroic pilot and the Syrians will be blaming them for 100's of their own heroes and will be equiping all their battle groups with AA from now on.

I think Russians will view this as a proxy war and behave accordingly to defend their ally.

 

You must keep in mind Kurds gained control over Arab territories. Deir ez Zor is pretty far from Kurds' land in the north of Syria. After a while Arabs may agree between themselves and then...

 

Assad survived many things during the civil war. As the Americans didn't finish his regime two or three years ago when Assad controlled only about 15% of territory of Syria and really was on the verge of collapse, highly unlikely they would do it now. And Russia not always meddles when something happens with Assad forces or with someone else. Finally, it's not Russia's problem. Large Kurdish state is Turkey's problem. And Iraq's problem. Not Russia's one.

 

I'd like to see none of this happening.. but obviously Assad is pushing the US... even going as far as accusations at the UN of warcrimes lol: yeah that's rich ). But he's trying to get the US out of Syria... I even read one article that brought up the stupid invitation argument... the one that says the US haven't been invited to this party... guess this is a genocidal dictators idea of a party... but to me it's the dumbest thing I've ever heard.

As far as I'm concerned the Kurds should get their own state... Assad lost that territory and he does not deserve to get it back... (my personal opinion clearly no ones official line)

 

You want some real laughs, https://engforum.pravda.ru/index.php?/forum/3-main-forum/

 

Also Iran and Syria's problem.
Kurds are a problem for all their neighbours without exception.

 

Russian huh...saw some thread about "The Pentagram..." instead of "The Pentagon"" the hypocrisy would also be strong on there... just as well I can only manage one forum at a time anyway.

 

I thought that was quite witty myself.

Had a look at the forum. All the same topics under discussion we have here. Certainly better informed on events involving Russia. But threads all had same titles as here. Nothing new to discuss. I might register some day and have a spam. Looked like a good board to me.

Wasn't any "**** yeah America" action going on there. And I felt it to be overt in it's Jew bashing. The jew bashing I could do with out, but the "**** yeah America" I can also. So... good and bad. Overall. Good board. I expect I'll try it out some time.

 

You might find a genuine Russian or two there, but most are American, English, Canadian, Aussie, European kooks. People like Jenny.

 

My quote is made 48 hours after yours. But it still refers to it. Which is quite obvious IMHO.
You haven't mentioned any serious fact or interpretation to answer my words. So I will be short. The previous comment of mine hasn't had a decent answer from you so far. If you want to continue - try to come with more substantial analysis of the situation then mine.

 

You said the quote related to god knows how long ago, I pointed out Mattis said what he said (which is something like...Russia is clueless and doesn't know wtf is going on) within 48 hours of me linking to it.

Other than that you're just complaining and whinging about my source.... I think you spent 3 paragraphs on that.... yawn... excuse me. It's simple you use Russian sources I do not. Your sources are rubbish according to me, mine is rubbish according to you. Do you really want to sit here and argue over something we will never agree on? If yes then find something else to argue about because arguing about sources gets old really quickly for me.

 

1. There is a video in the Internet filmed by those who shot down the plane and almost captured the pilot.
2. Russian forces are officially invited to Syria by the official political leadership elected by Syrian people under democratic procedure. If the people who shot down the plane are the citizens of Syria - they cannot be called invaders. But in this case they are criminals who try to break Syria in their battle for political power with arms and not with democratic procedures. If these people are not citizens of Syria - they are invaders.
It's not possible to tell in the modern war who is the attacker and who is the defender judging every single clash. If I attack an invader from an ambush I can be a defender. If the plane attacks terrorists from above he can be a defender even if the plane comes from the US and attacks terrorists in Afghanistan. The media justify terrorists just because they were ordered to do so.
All the kinds of 'rebels' whatever peaceful they are need to sit down and talk over the way out for peace. If they don't - they need to understand that they are continuing the war.

 

ok so just to make sure what we are arguing about... are you saying that because of the modern war and inability to identify attackers... Russia can now shoot and bomb everyone within...say a 500km radius of where the plane went down, just to make sure they kill whoever is responsible... because currently that's pretty much what are happening... they are bombing indiscriminately

 

If Russian diplomats didn't come up with their blaming of the US position around Syria that US has lost all the vision of who is allies and who are enemies - Mattis wouldn't say the words you quoted. In fact the position of Russia is simple. Everyone who is peaceful - tries to negotiate peace. If the sides are not ready to negotiate peace and continue fighting with legally elected government and legal army of Syria - they need to be treated as terrorists. Russia doesn't want to establish Assad's rule, but it is surely not trying to overthrow Assad at all the costs of all the Syrian lives possible like Mattis's gang does. For sure Mattis understands it and his remark about clueless is just a misleading continuation of a quarrel. It's like a couple quarreling. All the blames are based on emotions and previous insults.

I could say. Hey. I saw an American name among the readers of the resource and that means that it is propaganda... smth they do say in your propaganda media about Russia. I don't regard this argument serious. So I had to analyse the organization, sponsors, aims and methods. This takes time and place. Sorry...

Exactly. Wrong. If you analyzed at least once any of sources you regard as rubbish the way I did with yours - it would be a wise spending of time. It would be something to discuss. At the moment you just called my sources of information rubbish without even reading it! While I made some job with the source of yours showing you the references and providing with arguments... This is a big difference.

If we start to talk and you stop to waste time of both of us with empty comments we can agree on anything. You are here to support the sources I don't trust with another voice? Well. You will never have any opinion of your own then and it really makes any conversation with you... pointless. It is much better to talk to those who define your opinion. Saves time.