US forces 'ready to strike Syria'

[balipseyev]

Relax ra kaayo mo support ang Russia...



Russia has just sent their most advanced anti-ship missiles to Syria.

"The New York Times quotes unnamed US officials as saying the missiles could be used to counter any potential future foreign military intervention in Syria.

The missile has the NATO reporting codename SS-N-26 Super Sunburn. It is reportedly a replacement for the P-270 Moskit, but possibly also for the P-700 Granit. The P-800 was reportedly used as the basis for the joint Russian-Indian supersonic missile the BrahMos."

[Hammer_and_Sickle]

uhaw sa gasolina ang USA, maningkamot sila mangita ug rason para gubaton ang syria, tsk,tsk,..

maypa ang china, nagpa tambok ra sa economiya

[cardo]

here they go again, apil2x nasad ang US...

[reptoid]

another warmonger fool here in istorya... lols

Another childish individual who can't accept any point of view other than his own and who should probably stick to Yahoo comments.... or an ostrich with his head in the sand pretending nothing's wrong and that atrocities are always someone else's problem. Which one are you godwhacker?

[JcBoY]

Wala nay mahimo ang US of A gawas sa pagtuman sa kagustuhan sa mga Zionists but whether they obey or not padulong na gyud sa pagkahagba ning US of A wala silay choice. Labi pang mibuhi sila ug mga pulong nga they will do the strike alone, na hala pag-suicide na mo ug sugod diha.

[flanker]

Relax ra kaayo mo support ang Russia...



Russia has just sent their most advanced anti-ship missiles to Syria.

"The New York Times quotes unnamed US officials as saying the missiles could be used to counter any potential future foreign military intervention in Syria.

The missile has the NATO reporting codename SS-N-26 Super Sunburn. It is reportedly a replacement for the P-270 Moskit, but possibly also for the P-700 Granit. The P-800 was reportedly used as the basis for the joint Russian-Indian supersonic missile the BrahMos."

USN will stay away from Syrian waters or wont get closer to the range of the Yankont Anti-Ship Missiles which is 300KM.



The USN will just use Tomahawk cruise missiles which has a standard range of 1600 KM.


It would be exciting to see how the Syrian Pantsir will engage against the Tomahawks which it was designed for.


Air Defense: Russia Offers Cruise Missile Insurance

Wala nay mahimo ang US of A gawas sa pagtuman sa kagustuhan sa mga Zionists but whether they obey or not padulong na gyud sa pagkahagba ning US of A wala silay choice. Labi pang mibuhi sila ug mga pulong nga they will do the strike alone, na hala pag-suicide na mo ug sugod diha.

Well its an open secret that Israel is Uncle Sam's daddy . Its the first time that UK wont join the US. Obama felt really isolated in this. Intervention wont really solve the problem, only political solution.

[godwhacker]

Another childish individual who can't accept any point of view other than his own and who should probably stick to Yahoo comments.... or an ostrich with his head in the sand pretending nothing's wrong and that atrocities are always someone else's problem. Which one are you godwhacker?

childish bro? basin ikaw ang mabandahan ana kay sige ra kang basa ug putos buwad. brad, most people in the world now wants to avoid war except you. even more than half of the US population is sick and tired of war. Euro members are doing 180 deg turn around because of lack of support. nasobrahan ra siguro nimo ug tan-aw sa CNN that's why as you said, attacking syria even without international support is the right thing to do. basin angayan mong mag partner ni obam-i ug bibi... lols...

[flanker]

childish bro? basin ikaw ang mabandahan ana kay sige ra kang basa ug putos buwad. brad, most people in the world now wants to avoid war except you. even more than half of the US population is sick and tired of war. Euro members are doing 180 deg turn around because of lack of support. nasobrahan ra siguro nimo ug tan-aw sa CNN that's why as you said, attacking syria even without international support is the right thing to do. basin angayan mong mag partner ni obam-i ug bibi... lols...

The Geneva Protocol of 1925 (which Syria ratified) and the Chemical Weapons Convention of 1993 (which Syria has not ratified) ban the use of chemical weapons, but do not authorize countries to attack other countries that violate these treaties. The United States has no more authority to attack Syria for violating these treaties than it does to bomb Europe for giving import preferences to Caribbean banana producers in violation of international trade law. At one time, countries could use military force as “countermeasures” against treaty violators, but only against violators that harmed the country in question—and Syria has not used chemical weapons against the United States—but in any event, that rule has been superseded by the U.N. Charter.

For the people who think attacking Syria is legal (without UN approval), needs to check their head first before commenting into this topic.

[godwhacker]

Israel: The missing link in Syria puzzle

As the world holds its breath, wondering when the US and its allies will attack Syria, Western governments and its well-oiled mainstream media seem to be ignoring a key player that has kept strangely quiet during this crisis: Israel.

Today, US power rests heavily on its terrifying military, its industrial-financial complex, and its global media clout. But that power is fast eroding because, in the age of the Internet, power is increasingly much more about prestige, credibility and trust, an area where the US is falling to pieces.

US interventionism has become all too blatant over the past 20 years. The Balkans War in the late 1990s, with the bombing of Belgrade, triggered initial alarms especially amongst non-ally countries because, coupled with Bush Sr.’s 1991 Gulf War, it became clear that the American global hegemon was out to get the whole world, especially with the former Soviet Union out of the way.

But what got red lights blinking really strongly was Iraq. Baby Bush’s false accusations of “weapons of mass destruction” as an excuse to take out an entire country just so he could “smoke out” an uncomfortable former associate, Saddam Hussein, were blatantly obscene and proved to many that the American global hegemon was officially out of control.

Back then, America still had the excuse of the horrendous 9/11 terror attacks in New York and Washington to justify its mass war-mongering. But American credibility took a sharp fall when George W himself ended up admitting that: (a) there was no connection whatsoever between nasty Saddam and nasty Osama who allegedly did 9/11 (Alas! We’ll never know because Obama later threw Osama into the ocean...) and (b) there most definitely, assuredly and unequivocally were NO weapons of mass destruction in Iraq... Add to that the burden of growing proof that 9/11 may have been a false flag...

So, America had to design a new system of war or, rather a new system of getting itself into war against its selected “rogue state” targets. It’s no longer enough to go on TV and accuse such and such a country of being a “danger to world peace” or that it “does not have the kind of democracy that we want to see” as Hillary Clinton said when visiting Egypt only last year...

No. Something new had to be invented: “The Arab Spring”, which is the code for instigating, triggering and engineering civil strife in target countries which can then be escalated, as necessary, to veritable social war. And if the ongoing leadership still don’t get the message and insist on clinging to power, then US, UK, Israeli and other intel agencies can escalate the engineered nationwide mischief all the way up to fully–fledged civil war. Libya, Syria, Egypt, Afghanistan, Iraq…

A member of the Islamist Syrian opposition group Ahrar al-Sham fires against a position of the Committees for the Protection of the Kurdish People (YPG), a militia set up to protect Kurdish areas in Syria from opposing forces, during clashes in the countryside of the northern Syrian Raqqa province on August 25, 2013. (AFP Photo / Alice Martins)A member of the Islamist Syrian opposition group Ahrar al-Sham fires against a position of the Committees for the Protection of the Kurdish People (YPG), a militia set up to protect Kurdish areas in Syria from opposing forces, during clashes in the countryside of the northern Syrian Raqqa province on August 25, 2013. (AFP Photo / Alice Martins)

Engineering such wars throughout the Middle East basically required:

(a) Identifying who the “freedom fighters” would be – mostly thugs, terrorists, guerrillas, soldiers of fortune and a wide assortment of violent mercenaries;

(b) Then arming them with lethal high (though not too “high”)-tech weaponry, financing them to ensure they can do as they please inside the target country, and

(c) Unleashing them onto the cities of Egypt, Libya, Syria and elsewhere, just as they did (and still do) inside Iraq.

And if all of that doesn’t work, then just order several NATO fighter squadrons to bomb the damn place to smithereens and provide satellite Intel to local “freedom fighters” so they can execute Hollywood-like operations such as the live-TV assassination of Muammar Gaddafi and his family, accompanied by Hillary Clinton’s chuckles on CBS TV.

But the case of Syria is different.

The world will no longer have America pulling the wool over its eyes. Growing sectors in the international community are coming to understand that those gangs of violent assassins, rapists and criminals – aka Syrian Freedom Fighters – have been armed, trained, financed and given the fullest media support by the US and its allies.

America’s dirty tricks department is raving full-blast right now trying to pin recent chemical weapons attacks on Bashar al-Assad’s government, but this is getting very low credibility ratings. Common sense dictates that it would be suicide for President Bashar Assad to kill his own civilians – including children – in a Damascus neighborhood, when his real enemies are the Western-backed terrorists and delinquents trying to take over his country.

Why would Assad give his enemies the “perfect excuse” for an armed attack against Syria? Common sense tells us that Assad is surely telling the truth when he accuses those very same terrorists for that “false flag” attack as a way of bringing NATO in on their side, with its jets, cluster bombs and napalm.

Every time we hear of such dreadful terror attacks we need to understand two fundamental issues: (1) who benefits from such attacks, and (2) follow the money trail...

Today, America’s credibility, trust and prestige have fallen so low that even the British Parliament finally disavowed any armed intervention by the UK, at least until such time as the UN or some truly trustworthy independent entity churns up irrefutable proof regarding who perpetrated those heinous chemical weapons atrocities in Syrian last week.

more...

[dbalagosa]

The Geneva Protocol of 1925 (which Syria ratified) and the Chemical Weapons Convention of 1993 (which Syria has not ratified) ban the use of chemical weapons, but do not authorize countries to attack other countries that violate these treaties. The United States has no more authority to attack Syria for violating these treaties than it does to bomb Europe for giving import preferences to Caribbean banana producers in violation of international trade law. At one time, countries could use military force as “countermeasures” against treaty violators, but only against violators that harmed the country in question—and Syria has not used chemical weapons against the United States—but in any event, that rule has been superseded by the U.N. Charter.

For the people who think attacking Syria is legal (without UN approval), needs to check their head first before commenting into this topic.

+1 to that.Nganu kaha uban tao mag huna2x nga ang solution ani kay gubat man gyud?

dili pwede iinvestigate sah sa UN unsa jud nahitabo or ipa agi man lang ug diplomatic means?