Putin: A Plea for Caution From Russia • Hacker News Board

Re: Putin: A Plea for Caution From Russia

#261

Post by Wingman4l7 » Fri, Sep 13, 2013, 4:34 AM UTC

tptacek wrote: post #237

gdy wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why not?

* There is overwhelming evidence that the Syrian military has stockpiles of nerve agents and ballistic delivery systems for them. BTW: thanks, Russia. * The FSA on the other hand is conducting raids to get rifle ammunition. * There's the obvious issue that the (apparent) sarin attack targeted a neighborhood that was effectively allied with the FSA and that just happened to be a current critical objective for the Syri…

> known Syrian sarin stockpiles, which had noted no loss of custody to the FSA

If you were the guy in charge of those when they got raided, I wouldn't blame you if you were reluctant to inform your superiors that you dropped the ball on that. =P

Re: Putin: A Plea for Caution From Russia

#262

Post by varjag » Fri, Sep 13, 2013, 7:31 AM UTC

cdash wrote: post #86

Demiurge wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Aside from the rest of your comment... >Syrian army distributed gas masks to their soldiers before the attacks gas mask are for defense more so than for attack, giving those out is totally reasonable if they feared the insurgence could use gas. using this as an argument is playing to ignorance.

Gas masks don't even protect you from sarin, skin contact is deadly.

In Soviet Army the gas masks were always used along with OZK (common troop protection kit), which is basically a full body rubber suit. It's reasonable to expect that Russian-drilled, chemical weapons possessing Syrian military has the same procedure. These suits are even cheaper than the gas masks.

Re: Putin: A Plea for Caution From Russia

#263

Post by gdy » Fri, Sep 13, 2013, 11:15 AM UTC

tptacek wrote: post #237

gdy wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why not?

* There is overwhelming evidence that the Syrian military has stockpiles of nerve agents and ballistic delivery systems for them. BTW: thanks, Russia. * The FSA on the other hand is conducting raids to get rifle ammunition. * There's the obvious issue that the (apparent) sarin attack targeted a neighborhood that was effectively allied with the FSA and that just happened to be a current critical objective for the Syri…

In addtion to other replies to your comment: * So does the US and Saudi Arabia. * Terrorists in Syria are supplied by Saudis and Qatar. * If you are conducting a false-flag operation you would attack your own forces or your allies', no? Also there's been rumours (http://www.mintpressnews.com/witnesses-of-gas-attack-say-sau...) that terrorists simply mishandled the chemicals. As for the place being "current critical objective", it doesn't make sense for Assad to achieve a tactical victory and bring the strategic defeat (because that's what it will be if America intervenes). * It's not the first attack, the previous smaller attacks had only brought UN inspectors. * It's not a problem if you have the outside help (BTW: thanks, Saudi Arabia) and have absolutly no problem with killing (that's who the terrorists are) * The same intelligence that presented the world the reason to attack Iraq? If they have the proof, why haven't it been submitted to the UN?

Having said all that, I must add that there is not enough proof for either point of view and it's exactly the reason why UNSC shouldn't authorize a military operation agains Syria.

As a side note, who benefits the most from the use of chemical weapons and what seemed to be emminent US attack? Looks like it's syrian terrorists, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the US.

And here is an interesting thought experiment for you: if tomorrow it turns out that it was the terrorist's false-flag op, will the US intervene and wipe out the terrorists in Syria? Because, you know, they crossed the red line by using chemical weapons that are banned throughout the world?

Re: Putin: A Plea for Caution From Russia

#264

Post by gtirloni » Fri, Sep 13, 2013, 1:29 PM UTC

VladRussian2 wrote: post #168

mrb wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"For those of you buying into his rhetoric, remember that Putin is the head of a 'virtual mafia state'" If a criminal says that helping an old lady cross the street is the right thing to do, would you discard his statement because he is a criminal? No! For the same reason, Putin may be doing evil things in his country, but I still side with him: bombing Syria is a silly idea.

>If a criminal says that helping an old lady cross the street is the right thing to do, would you discard his statement because he is a criminal? No! many people unfamiliar with Russia or similar countries forget that selective enforcement of law is a well established and widely practiced form of tyranny and abuse of power there. The same principle applies when people like Putin are selectively say/do something that…

So you are saying that Putin's point is only for short-term gain while ignoring the long term goals (supposedly bad) that Putin/Russia has, right? Ok.. makes sense and it's playing the fear of something card.

Since being short-sighted is bad and we clearly should be looking at it from all sides/perspectives, please enlighten us as to what impact Obama's short-term plan (to bomb Syria) will have in the long-term plans that he might have? While at it, please share what's Obama long-term plan for Syria what why American should have one at all.