Russian Army in Syria

Russia, as a permanent member of UN Security Council, has the whole right to block any resolutionon on any international issue. The same as the USA. The sense of the United Nations does not consist of satisfaction of US wishes, and the function of the Security Council is not a covering of US aggressions with fitted UN resolutions. Moreover, if there were no Russia in the UNSC, this body would become the branch of the US State Department long time ago. You may don't like that, but this is just a historical fact: Russia, Great Britain and USA created the United Nations 70 years ago and established these rules.

 

Back in 2014 there were about 20 Million people living in Syria.

There are only 9.8 Million REGISTERED SYRIAN VOTERS!!!

Half the nation of Syria could not even vote so the numbers do not add up as it is IMPOSSIBLE

Syrian President Bashar al-Assad has been re-elected in a landslide, officials said on Wednesday, capturing another seven-year term in the middle of a bloody three-year-old uprising against his rule that has devastated the country.

Syria's parliament speaker, Jihad Lahan, announced the final results from Tuesday's election, saying Assad garnered 10,319,723 votes, or 88.7%. Laham said Assad's two challengers, Hassan al-Nouri and Maher Hajjar, won 4.3% and 3.2% respectively. The supreme constitutional court put turnout at 73.42%.

After the results were released, Damascus erupted into a thunderous, rolling clap of celebratory gunfire that appeared to include heavy weaponry. On the streets of the capital, men cheered and whistled. Some broke into the familiar pro-Assad chant: "With our souls, with our blood, we sacrifice for you, Bashar!"

Assad's victory was always a foregone conclusion, despite the presence of other candidates on the ballot for the first time in decades. Voting was held only in government-controlled areas, excluding huge tracks of northern and eastern Syria that are in rebel hands. The opposition and its western allies, including the United States, have denounced the election as a farce.

The win boosts Assad's support base, and provides further evidence that he has no intention of relinquishing power.

For the first time in decades, there were multiple candidates on the ballot. In previous presidential elections, Assad and before him his father, Hafez Assad, were elected in single candidate referendums in which voters cast yes-no ballots.

The government has sought to present this vote as a democratic solution to Syria's three-year conflict, although a win for Assad is certain to prolong the war. Much of northern and eastern Syria is in rebel hands, and those in the armed opposition show no signs of relenting in their fight to oust Assad.

Advertisement

Adopter, convertible or skeptic: who are you when it comes to clean energy?
Brought to you by:About this content
The war, which activists say has killed more than 160,000 people, has left the international community deeply divided, with the US and its allies backing the revolt against Assad, who enjoys the support of Russia and Iran.

That division persisted in perceptions of Tuesday's vote.

In Beirut, US secretary of state John Kerry sharply criticized the Syrian election, calling it "a great big zero." He said it can't be considered fair "because you can't have an election where millions of your people don't even have an ability to vote."

"Nothing has changed from the day before the election and the day after. Nothing," Kerry said during a one-day visit to the Lebanese capital. "The conflict is the same, the terror is the same, the killing is the same."

The European Union joined the US in condemning the election, saying in a statement that "it cannot be considered as a genuinely democratic vote."

From the Guardian.

AboveAlpha

 

Oh dear, if Kerry and the Guardian say the election did not represent the will of the Syrian people, then who are we lesser folks to say differently.

[video=youtube;DqNrsGRHI_U]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DqNrsGRHI_U[/video]

 

Jeannette....YOU know and I know that there is no such thing as a fair and free election in Syria.

I have spent time there and the vast majority of the Syrian people are TERRIFIED of Assad.

AboveAlpha

 

From The Telegraph:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...st-should-join-with-Putin-to-defeat-Isil.html

“Thank goodness for Vladimir Putin” is not a sentiment that you come across very often in these pages. Yet, at a time when the limitations of the West’s futile attempts to defeat Islamic State (Isil) are becoming increasingly clear, Mr Putin’s robust approach could prove to be pivotal in trying to resolve the Syria conflict.

It was a year ago today that American warplanes, together with their coalition partners, launched the military campaign against Isil after it added large swathes of territory in northern Iraq to the fiefdom it had created for itself in Syria.

But despite the thousands of combat sorties flown during the past 12 months, Isil is in a stronger position today. It holds more territory in Syria and Iraq, has many more fighters, and has even succeeded inexporting its malevolent Islamist brand as far afield as Afghanistanand Libya.

Western hopes of containing the conflict, meanwhile, lie in tatters. Far from keeping Syria’s brutal conflict within the confines of the Arab world, Europe now finds itself struggling to cope with a tidal wave of desperate refugeesfleeing the Middle East to seek sanctuary in the West.

One of the main reasons for this abject failure of Western policy is the disinclination of politicians on both sides of the Atlantic to formulate a rational and effective plan for tackling the Isil threat. From the outset, both Barack Obama and David Cameron have declared a preference for waging war by remote control, relying primarily on combat jets and drones to attack Isil targets, with ground involvement being limited to the occasional Special Forces operations.

Any effort to dislodge Isil on the ground has been left to pro-Western proxies, such as the Free Syrian Army. But, as a recent Congressional inquiry has revealed, this, too, has been – to quote a senior US official – “a complete disaster”.

The Pentagon has only managed to train 54 “vetted” Syrian fighters, despite spending nearly $500 million on a programme that was supposed to prepare and equip a force of around 15,000.

To this unholy mess must be added the deep-rooted confusion that lies within the highest ranks of both the American and British governments over what should be the main objective in Syria: overthrowing the Assad regime, or destroying Isil?

It now seems clear to me that the West’s incoherent and woefully misjudged response to Isil ranks as the greatest foreign policy disaster of the 21st century, greater even than the invasion of Iraq in 2003 where, whatever you might think about the decision, at least the coalition achieved its main objective of removing Saddam Hussein’s tyrannical regime.

But for too long in Syria our politicians have been caught 'twixt and 'tween as to whether the main effort should be directed against Bashar al-Assad or Isil, which is why Mr Cameron lost the disastrous Commons vote in 2013 over his plans to bomb Assad.

And yet, to judge by George Osborne’s recent comments, the Government still has not learnt its lesson. Earlier this month Mr Osborne, who now seems to have added the role of Foreign Secretary to his ever-expanding political portfolio, suggested Britain’s aim should be to defeat both Assad and Isil at the same time.

With such muddled thinking undermining Whitehall’s ability to mount an effective response to the Syrian crisis, it is hardly surprising that Mr Putin’s altogether more pragmatic approach is attracting attention.

So far as Mr Putin is concerned, Isil, not Assad, constitutes the greater threat, and to this end Russia is now reported to have deployed 28 warplanes to Damascus to support the war effort against Isil.

Or Putin may have other reasons for wanting to keep Mr Assad in power, such as preserving Moscow’s long-standing strategic ties with Damascus. But his no-nonsense approach has brought a much-needed degree of clarity to the Syria debate.

Even John Kerry, the US Secretary of State, who previously said there could be no peace deal so long as Mr Assad remained in power, has been forced to rethink his position, conceding at the weekend that the Syrian leader’s future should be part of a negotiated settlement of the conflict.

No one doubts the evil that lies at the heart of the Assad regime: the majority of the 220,000 Syrian fatalities during the past four years have died at the hands of regime loyalists, who have used chemical weapons and barrel bombs against their own people.

But whatever his sins – and they are many –Assad does not constitute a threat to the outside world. On that score it is the terrorist fanatics associated with Isil who pose the greater threat, including the hundreds of British-born jihadis who are believed to have returned home after undergoing training in Isil terror camps. If Mr Putin wants to wage war against Isil, therefore, we should be prepared to give him our total backing.

 

Putin ordered Airstrikes in Syria have killed scores of both Civilian's and Legitimate Syrian Rebel's who are not a part of ISIS.

We warned Putin not to strike until both U.S. and Russian Intelligence went over target selection and Putin has fallen for an ISIS TRAP where they disguised an area to be a location of their operations but was loaded with Civilian's.

Already Russian Forces and Bases have been targeted and attacked.

AboveAlpha

 

I don't know from where you invented these numbers, but anyway in Syria 6 million children and old men and fools... don't vote

If to look at the majority of the western mass media (promotion) - speak about events in Syria as usual... showing only that is necessary, for example at the beginning of the conflict, only protests in the remote place, in the small cities as people tear posters with Assad. But if in the same time, they show the capital - Domask, there hundreds of thousands people on the street supported Assad. A set of the Russian mass media, showed all events. Both in the south of Syria and in the center. Here for example there are a lot of archival documentary videos who doesn't understand Russian, in the bottom of video the full text about what this video (read through google the translator if it is necessary, I will give a lot more references if you need)
https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=ru&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.1tv.ru%2Fnews%2Fworld%2F173453


Supporters of authorities in power rebelled against foreign diplomats after US Ambassadors and France went to Homs where many weeks don't stop anti-government protests. There diplomats met leaders of opposition. Official Damascus regarded it as violation of the sovereignty.https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=ru&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.1tv.ru%2Fnews%2Fworld%2F180403

After brutal murder of Muammar Gaddafi at the world community of humanists on turn fight against the new enemy. Syria, before recent time the stablest of the countries of the Arab East, became object of political strategy attack. Everything goes according to one plan - organized groups dissatisfied, the mutinies in the remote provinces compelling the authorities to use force and depiction of all horrors of the next dictatorship with the purpose to blow the mind of the average successful inhabitant in Europe.

Here, in Hama, Assad's army confiscated armory and improvised explosive devices. marking It is made in Israel, it is made in the USA.
"We don't know, whether it from Israel, or from other state which has such weapon arrived.
https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=ru&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.1tv.ru%2Fnews%2Fworld%2F189649

Full archive
https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=ru&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.1tv.ru%2Fnewsarchive%2Ftags%2F24952%2F%23page62

 

Sure ... but please don't name any farce of election as proof that someone is valid elected. This is my point

 

It you about the president of Ukraine - I agree!...

PS:
Ministry of Defence of the Russian Federation

The Russian aviation group placed in the Syrian airfield "Hmeymim" struck the first surgical strikes to objects of the IGIL international terrorist organization.
The planes of shock aircraft equipped with modern complexes of defeat struck blows to eight objects.
These are armories and ammunition, fuels and lubricants, military equipment, points of management, communication centers, vehicles of fighters of IGIL.
All targets are hit.
Such objects as the command point of fighters and headquarters of management of terrorist formations which are in the mountain district are destroyed completely.

"Today planes of the Russian Aerospace forces struck surgical strikes to eight objects of the IGIL terrorist group (the former name "Islamic state" - primas. TASS) in the territory of the Syrian Arab Republic. About 20 samoletovylet were executed", - the official representative of the Ministry of Defence of the Russian Federation major general Igor Konashenkov reported.
[video=youtube_share;hiA0JUdWR6M]http://youtu.be/hiA0JUdWR6M[/video]

 

Nice piece of balanced reporting from the Gruniard.

Did they also mention that the UK has a population of approx. 65 million but in the last May's election the Conservative party was returned to power with only 24% of the electorate voting for them?

Didn't think so.

That's representative democracy for you.

 

If you agree that Assad wasn't democratic and really valid elected ... then yes.

About the rest of your post:
Yes I read and follow issue intense and good they do it. But of course the US and others are now telling hat "these other and Non-Jihadist Rebels" were bombed too. Pure by objects named which are bombed, Russian attacks happened only in ISIS controlled areas. If there were other attacks too, I can't say ... but honestly: If these "other rebels" shot on Russian Forces, it is legitimate that Russian Forces shot back!

 

You see, I have a little different attitude about ethnic cleansing and creating refugee crises.

 

Well I'm anxious to hear your plan.

 

Russia is by far the biggest country in the world, why doesn't russia accept refugees? It's almost 100 times bigger than Germany, it has a low pop. density.
They have very much weapons, if they have money to build so much weapons, they should accept refugees.

 

Syria is a close Russian ally. You would think they would shelter the Syrians?

 

I can tell you with 100% Certainty that any weapons we gave to the Legitimate Syrian Rebels were all Soviet made.

American Weapons are much more complex and take Soldiers who are well trained in cleaning and taking care of and being able to use such much more complex and advanced American made weapons systems.

As an example we don't supply Syrian Rebels with M-4's....we gave them AK-47's.

Why?

Because even though a Soldier who is equipped with an M-4 can easily and accurately kill the enemy at much longer distances away than the enemy can kill them with an AK-47....the M-4 is a precision rifle that requires a good amount of training on how to use it and clean it and keep it clean....where an AK-47 can be dropped in the mud and sand and water and keep on shooting.

But a Soldier with an M-4 or other M-16 variant can carry much more ammo than a soldier who has an AK-47 can.

When you have ill trained and inexperienced soldiers you supply them Soviet or Russian made equipment.

Only well trained, intelligent and disciplined Soldiers should be issued American Arms and weapons systems.

AboveAlpha

 

No they gave them AKs' because ammo could be taken from Assad and need not be provided by the allies. Assads' lost bases and deserter left behind spoils are massive amounts of ammo for AKs not ARs.

 

That's part of it....but you don't give untrained Soldiers M-4's.

Also giving them AK-47's could mean those arms could have come from anyone.

AboveAlpha

 

To Legitimate rebels? You made them lawful in others country? Who to you granted such right? Why for you not lawful rebels in Donbass? I will tell - the American double standards. Let rebels will be though Taliban though cannibals but if they work for the USA - them will support the USA.
[video=youtube_share;s2lSypmyF9Y]http://youtu.be/s2lSypmyF9Y[/video]

 

There are legitimate Syrian Rebels and then there are the ISIS Crazies.

Putin is only interested in helping the Syrian Dictator remain in power as Russia could have chosen ISIS Targets but instead chose Syrian Rebel Targets.

We already warned the Russian's that if they did...what they now have done...that they better get ready for reprisals by OPEC and other Moderate Sunni's.

This is Putin's problem now.

AboveAlpha

 

May be becuase we are not idiots? Humanitarian aids - yes! But millions of people of other culture - no thanks.

 

That pretty much sums it up folks! LOL!!

Oh...and I have not seen much "Humanitarian Aid" coming out of Russia.

AboveAlpha

 

haha and what?)) You are realy thinking that refugees like EU or US?) and there is no radicals among them? if you want to fight against ISIS or other things like this on your own territory - be my guest

haha if you never heard it does not meant it not exists 3 yyears - we ve being doing this for 3 years

 

Name a Nation that Russia has sent Humanitarian Aid to that was not a Nation that the Russian Military was either annexing or attacking?

AboveAlpha

 

Probably they made it by mistake. Three days ago, Saudi Arabia by mistake,from military planes - killed 110 peace people during a wedding in Yemen. All western mass media told about it? You warned Arabia also?