• Changing RCF's index page, please click on "Forums" to access the forums.

Shootouts and explosions in Paris

Do Not Sell My Personal Information
KI4MVP said:
I was talking about Iraq, the country we attacked in supposed response to 9/11,
Click to expand...

We did not attack Iraq in retaliation for 9/11, but more importantly, that has absolutely nothing to do with France supporting our efforts in Afghanistan with troops on the ground.

But even in Afghanistan we weren't on the ground the next week. The fighting in Afghanistan didn't start until Oct 7th, nearly a month after 9/11. France didn't deploy troops in Afghanistan until Nov 17th, over 2 months after 9/11. You complained the US didn't already have ground troops fighting ISIS in response to the Paris attacks just 1 week after they happened.
Click to expand...

No, I did not complain that the U.S. "didn't already have ground troops fighting ISIS in response to the Paris attacks." You're deliberately misrepresenting my point.

How fast troops could get there isn't the point. The point is that the President has completely fallen down even in terms of making a verbal commitment. Timing is a separate issue.

Shit, it's not even us actually sending troops. It's telling our ally that we'd stand by them if that is what they decide they want to do.
 
It's been about 8 hours since the plane and rescue helicopter were attacked and Russia's starting to make some moves...

Russia deploys missile cruiser off Syria coast, ordered to destroy any target posing danger
Published time: 24 Nov, 2015 18:16Edited time: 24 Nov, 2015 19:14
Get short URL
5654afa1c4618819768b45cd.jpg

A missile cruiser "Moscow" firing anti-aircraft missiles during the joint sailing of various fleets' vessels for combat training. © Vitaliy Ankov / Sputnik
Follow LIVE UPDATES on Russian warplane shot down at Syria-Turkey border

Moscow plans to suspend military cooperation with Ankara after the downing of a Russian bomber by Turkish air forces, Russian General Staff representatives said on Tuesday. Further measures to beef up Russian air base security in Syria will also be taken.
Three steps as announced by top brass:

  1. Each and every strike groups’ operation is to be carried out under the guise of fighter jets
  2. Air defense to be boosted with the deployment of Moskva guided missile cruiser off Latakia coast with an aim to destroy any target that may pose danger
  3. Military contacts with Turkey to be suspended

Sergey Rudskoy, a top official with the Russian General Staff, condemned the attack on the Russian bomber in Syrian airspace by a Turkish fighter jet as “a severe violation of international law”. He stressed that the Su-24 was downed over the Syrian territory. The crash site was four kilometers away from the Turkish border, he said.

Rudskoy said the Russian warplane did not violate Turkish airspace. Additionally, according to the Hmeymim airfield radar, it was the Turkish fighter jet that actually entered Syrian airspace as it attacked the Russian bomber.

The Turkish fighter jet made no attempts to contact Russian pilots before attacking the bomber, Rudskoy added.

“We assume the strike was carried out with a close range missile with an infra-red seeker,” Rudskoy said. “The Turkish jet made no attempts to communicate or establish visual contact with our crew that our equipment would have registered. The Su-24 was hit by a missile over Syria’s territory.”

Russia now plans to implement new measures aimed at strengthening the security of the country’s air base in Syria and in particular to bolster air defense.

Russian guided missile cruiser Moskva, equipped with the ‘Fort’ air defense system, similar to the S-300, will be deployed off Latakia province's coast.

"We warn that every target posing a potential threat will be destroyed,” lieutenant general Sergey Rudskoy said during the briefing.

“All military contacts with Turkey will be suspended,” he added.
 
The Human Q-Tip said:
We did not attack Iraq in retaliation for 9/11, but more importantly, that has absolutely nothing to do with France supporting our efforts in Afghanistan with troops on the ground.



No, I did not complain that the U.S. "didn't already have ground troops fighting ISIS in response to the Paris attacks." You're deliberately misrepresenting my point.

How fast troops could get there isn't the point. The point is that the President has completely fallen down even in terms of making a verbal commitment. Timing is a separate issue.

Shit, it's not even us actually sending troops. It's telling our ally that we'd stand by them if that is what they decide they want to do.
Click to expand...

your post is complaining about some sort of apparent inaction on our part over what happened in Paris and comparing it to the response from France after 9/11. You complained 1 week after the Paris attacks. There was no action from France a week after that. They didn't actually do anything for nearly 2 months.

How about if we're going to use 9/11 for a frame of reference that we at least allow for the same timeline before we talk about being ashamed or outraged?
 
MalTalm said:
but Assad is a genocidal tyrant whom many of our staunchest allies are very much opposed to.
Click to expand...

The rebels that rose up against Assad are made up of many groups and most with extremists views that are more in line with ISIS than moderate Islam. We should throw more support behind Assad because I believe he is trying to rid Syria of its terrorism problems but has made a lot of enemies in doing so.

These rebels are not American allies.

I've watched several interviews with Assad and I'm not so sure that our perception of him in the West is the reality. He pretty much lays out exactly what he does and why he does it with no hesitation. Things that we hype up as "tyrannical" he easily dismisses with logic and rationale.

I posted one of the interviews a few pages back I believe and he made the British interviewer look like a fool. Hell, I kind of felt like a fool after watching it. I'm not saying the guys hands are clean but he's far from this sort of Sadam like figure people make him out to be. Anyways I suggest you watch the interview.
 
France already had its work cut out for it trying to build a coalition to (properly) fight Daesh considering Obama's Assad fetish, the Russians being Russians and the shit-show on the ground.

The Turks making a big splash (whether or not Ivan did violate their airspace or not, Turkey has been a faithless ally against ISIS at best) just pushed the complication level up to 11.
 
No Regard said:
Am I crazy for thinking that we are slowly but surly closing in on World War III?
Click to expand...

The only way I could see this morphing into World War III is if the terrorists somehow set us against either Russia or China. As it stands, they've basically ensured that we're on the same side as Russia, a really dumb move when you think about it, and China isn't likely to become significantly involved. Right now this is basically everyone against ISIS.

I mean, maybe you could technically call it a world war because most of the western world may get involved after Paris since most of us are allied and have a common enemy here, but it's unlikely that we're going to see much in the way of actual battles outside of the Middle East, and battles are nothing new there.
 
And what if Turkey/Russia escalates and Russia declares war on Turkey?
 
IWantAKouki said:
And what if Turkey/Russia escalates and Russia declares war on Turkey?
Click to expand...

Russia can't realistically declare war on Turkey. Turkey is a member of NATO.

This would essentially be an end of the world scenario. It's not remotely in the cards.
 
gourimoko said:
Russia can't realistically declare war on Turkey. Turkey is a member of NATO.

This would essentially be an end of the world scenario. It's not remotely in the cards.
Click to expand...

Why not?
 
No Regard said:
Why not?
Click to expand...

NATO is an alliance between the United States and much of Europe.

Any attack on one member nation is an attack against all of them. This alliance is what essentially allowed West Germany, and West Berlin, to survive the Cold War.

Therefore, any attack on Turkey, by Russia, allows Turkey to invoke Article V of the NATO treaty which legally requires a collective defense and response to the attacking party.

Given that we have, and always have had a nuclear first strike policy with respect to Russia and China, and given the fact that the Russians know this, there can be no reasonable confrontation between a NATO ally and Russia.
 
KI4MVP said:
your post is complaining about some sort of apparent inaction on our part....
Click to expand...

No, I'm not. I'm complaining about a shitty decision announced by the President.

Here's something from those GOP partisans and Obama haters at MSNBC and The Atlantic.

MSNBC Contributor and Washington Editor-at-Large for the Atlantic, Steve Clemons stated that French officials he had talked with criticized lack of US support against fighting terrorism, with one arguing that, “ISIS has been incubated for two years with an absence of US leadership, and that the United States needs to take the security of its allies more seriously” during MSNBC’s coverage of the terrorist attacks in Paris on Saturday.

In response to a question about his conversations “with some French officials here in the United States expressing frustration about perhaps a lack of support from the US, in terms of France’s ability to fight this jihad.” Clemons said, “Well, the discussion I — was with French officials in Paris who were communicating this, and you know, in doing so, on a background basis, and on a personal basis, saying that one of the things that they’re facing is why did this happen, why did this happen? A lot of it has looked at their relation with the United States. I got an email this morning saying that’s not why, our proximity to Syria and all things Syria is profound and big, but he said the bigger part of this is that, for a variety of reasons, directly and indirectly, ISIS has been incubated for two years with an absence of US leadership, and that the United States needs to take the security of its allies more seriously, and it was a direct implication that we had not done and acted in a way to take action…he recognized in his email that I have a different view of that, that that’s not my view, but that — very clearly I sensed in these emails and the exchanges, frustration, tenseness, but also confidence. He said, we will prevail in this, but there was a real frustration and tenseness over that. And a frustration that — not only about what was happening and unfolding on the streets of Paris, but where it had come from, how it had been able to metastasize and to grow over the last two years.”

http://www.breitbart.com/video/2015...zing-absence-of-us-leadership-against-terror/

How about if we're going to use 9/11 for a frame of reference that we at least allow for the same timeline before we talk about being ashamed or outraged?
Click to expand...

So the President can't be criticized for announcing that he's not changing his approach? We have to wait until the troops would have actually gotten there if he had made a different decision than the one he announced?

That's nonsense. Shitty decisions can be criticized when they are made, not just when the eventual effects of that shitty decision manifest.
 
It's not clear if these are Syrians or Turkish rebels but apparently this is the body of one of the Russian pilots who parachuted out before the jet was shot down. These don't appear to be ISIS members.

Lots of Allah akbars over a dead body. Shit is just so twisted to me.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Video

Episode 3-14: "Time for Playoff Vengeance on Mickey"

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Spotify

Episode 3:14: " Time for Playoff Vengeance on Mickey."
Top