• Russia-Linked Mercenaries Attacked US Forces: Indicted Oligarch Told Putin Before Attack (~300 Dead)
    66 replies, posted
It sounds almost like a mass suicide, attacking a US-backed position like that. They only managed to wound a single fighter.
[QUOTE=Str4fe;53154079]It sounds almost like a mass suicide, attacking a US-backed position like that. They only managed to wound a single fighter.[/QUOTE] Might've very well been semi-on-purpose. Russia wants a 'blameless war' because they want to sell to the world that 'we are the aggressors' and so they can tell their citizens 'this is a just war'. They want to do this because then they might be able to get the EU on their side at a time where the US has refused to announce that they would protect the EU during a time where member-states of the EU are in discord after Brexit and Syria and deciding what to do with a now nuclear North Korea. Russia wants propaganda to sell its people and the EU that the US are monsters and do not deserve to be a world power. We shoot up our schools, we wholesale slaughter rather than capture military forces, our politician is trashing the planet and attempting to pull the US back into isolationism while trying to get torture and other such violations of the Geneva conventions back on the table - which means that Russia is right there, now, looming over them while they feel alone; promising to be 'a better friend and ally' than the US. For Putin, this isn't a war to win the United States or win territory. It's a war to become the world's next superpower by dividing and taking the US' allies. When it's done that, [I]then[/I] it'll start taking territories and conducting war.
I don't understand; did any Americans die?
Russia is never going to open war with the United States and you're crazy if you think they'd destabilize the world and risk nuclear war over Syria. They spend $65 billion on their military. America spends almost a trillion. They're a paper tiger.
[QUOTE=proboardslol;53154109]I don't understand; did any Americans die?[/QUOTE] One was wounded. All 300 Russian spldiers died.
[QUOTE=Popularvote;53154115]One was wounded. All 300 Russian spldiers died.[/QUOTE] It is not clear if the wounded was an American soldier or a SDF ally. I would bet on the latter, just because of numbers.
I think I share a sentiment with most Americans when I say I don't want a war. We're all pretty war weary at this point. But ya know what? [I]It's perfectly justified here.[/I] We have all the basis we need to go to the UN, to go to NATO, and get a proper wardec signed off. And...honestly? We probably need to at least begin the proceedings. Force Putin's hand, as it were, see what his reaction to that is. It's perfectly justified. It'd be a bloodbath, but shit, we've gone to wars on far shakier pretenses countless times. IT'd be the first time since WW2 we've had a legit cause to do so. I don't want it any more than any other level headed person, but at this point it's almost a necessary step.
[QUOTE=Jim Morrison;53154112]Russia is never going to open war with the United States and you're crazy if you think they'd destabilize the world and risk nuclear war over Syria. They spend $65 billion on their military. America spends almost a trillion. They're a paper tiger.[/QUOTE] They're being [I]driven crazy[/I] by their weak economy and oligarchs who are getting very fed up with not having access to the money that made them oligarchs. Crazy people do crazy things. Crazy people [I]who think they're smarter than everyone else[/I] do [U]extremely crazy[/U] things. If Russia didn't want an open war, Putin would've [I]never[/I] sanctioned that attack - because that's exactly what he's committing to the possibility of. Imagine it from the US perspective. Imagine if Trump sanctioned an attack by Black Water Mercs on, let's say, a military compound in Mexico where their military trains and arms people who are being equipped and trained to take on the Mexican Cartels. In that exact moment, Trump [I]knows[/I] that Mexico's response to this very well could be engaging in war against the US because [I]he has attacked Mexican soldiers[/I] with [I]a sanctioned attack by American assets - even if not official military assets[/I]. That means he is knowingly committing what is plainly obvious as an act of war, even if his Undersecretary is the one who for some reason gives the order to Blackwater to move out and execute the plan. If Trump then doesn't [I]apologize[/I] for that military action, disavow the mercs as 'not acting under my orders' and then punish them, or clarify that his intent wasn't to attack Mexican forces then Trump has more or less [B]dared[/B] Mexico to do something about it. That gives Mexico two options: Ignore the attack -- or acknowledge it and prepare for war. e: For a good parallel, see 9/11. A terrorist group attacks the US - the US then declares war on the nation they're from because that nation refuses to apologize or go after the terrorists responsible after the US discovers intelligence that said terrorists might've been state sanctioned, meaning this was a potentially state-sanctioned attack. They dared the US to do something about it and figured they didn't have the guts or figured America would just forgive it; they were wrong.
This is just the next step of proxy wars. Why rely on incompetent locals when you can kill each other with denyable soldiers?
[QUOTE=Destroyox;53154148]This is just the next step of proxy wars. Why rely on incompetent locals when you can kill each other with denyable soldiers?[/QUOTE] If Trump's response is to canonize and deploy Blackwater, like we canonized and backed pirates back in our early days, things are going to get very messy very quickly. I don't see the point of it anyway - both sides will quickly know they're just fighting with a different chess set and that it's war nonetheless.
[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;53153886]Russia's war against the US now includes [I]lethal force[/I], as opposed to "just" information warfare. This underscores that Trump's willful collusion with the Russian government is not just a "criminal conspiracy," but outright treason. Life in prison is the least of his worries now, as the penalty for treason established in our criminal justice system is execution.[/QUOTE] My god. Imagine if the Kompromat was so bad that Trump and Putin were willing to agree to start a war over nothing to detract from it? And Trump would have this monumentally stupid moment worthy of being attributed to Wheatley from Portal 2 where he claims that Russia couldn't have helped him win the election to destroy the US, because "if he wanted to destroy the US, then why would he put his most challenging adversary in charge of it? Huh? Huh?! Can he beat me? Can Putin beat me? Nah, forget about it! We. Will. Win!"
[QUOTE=Zero-Point;53154153]My god. Imagine if the Kompromat was so bad that Trump and Putin were willing to agree to start a war over nothing to detract from it?[/QUOTE] If he's a true narcissist, he'd be willing to do anything to save face. If his image is his number one priority, which it appears to be, the only real Kompromat Russia would need is something that he couldn't easily deny or claim was fake and threaten to release it. Meaning it doesn't need to be 'so bad' if Trump sees a 'mildly embarassing videotape' as a threat to his life because he can't weasel out from it harming his public image.
[QUOTE=Firgof Umbra;53154158]If he's a true narcissist, he'd be willing to do anything to save face. If his image is his number one priority, which it appears to be, the only real Kompromat Russia would need is something that he couldn't easily deny or claim was fake and threaten to release it. Meaning it doesn't need to be 'so bad' if Trump sees a 'mildly embarassing videotape' as a threat to his life because he can't weasel out from it harming his public image.[/QUOTE] Not even tapes, just links to criminal activities involving the Kremlin and/or the crime bosses/oligarchs linked to them. War is good for business, they have plenty of destabilized "shitty" countries to fight in instead of their own, and it draws attention away from any hope that Trump and Putin are friends because why would friends go to war HUH LIB'RALS?!
[QUOTE=EcksDee;53153869]Yeah, it's gonna end up with "Random mercenary bands with suspiciously good equipment just annexed the Baltic states, Russia claims no responsibility" "The mercenaries decided to become vassals of Russia" Rip baltics.[/QUOTE] Sorry if I'm missing something, but isn't this what's already happening with Ukraine? Just with Russia claiming (a small amount of) responsibility before annexation, instead of after.
[QUOTE=Jim Morrison;53154112]Russia is never going to open war with the United States and you're crazy if you think they'd destabilize the world and risk nuclear war over Syria. They spend $65 billion on their military. America spends almost a trillion. They're a paper tiger.[/QUOTE] That's the thing, they do these things because they know no one is gonna start a war over it and it keeps their country's oligarchy entertained with the notion that they're still powerful. They wouldn't be doing this shit if the threats of war were real, or if some punishments that actually affect them were dealt but Trump has shown he's not gonna do shit about Russia. [editline]23rd February 2018[/editline] [QUOTE=RedDagger;53154208]Sorry if I'm missing something, but isn't this what's already happening with Ukraine? Just with Russia claiming (a small amount of) responsibility before annexation, instead of after.[/QUOTE] Yeah pretty much but I don't know if they're willing to try that again though, the Ruble for example has not recovered at all since their bullshit in Crimea, another play like that and they risk fucking their economy more than it already is.
[QUOTE=Firgof Umbra;53154151]If Trump's response is to canonize and deploy Blackwater, like we canonized and backed pirates back in our early days, things are going to get very messy very quickly. I don't see the point of it anyway - both sides will quickly know they're just fighting with a different chess set and that it's war nonetheless.[/QUOTE] You know we're [i]already[/i] in a proxy war with Russia, right? Syria is their ally and we're funding the jihadists and rebels currently fighting the Syrian government.
Hilary wouldn't have put up with this shit.
[QUOTE=RedDagger;53154208]Sorry if I'm missing something, but isn't this what's already happening with Ukraine? Just with Russia claiming (a small amount of) responsibility before annexation, instead of after.[/QUOTE] Difference there was Ukraine is not a part of NATO. I'm more worried that if Russia decides to mercenary-invade Estonia for example, and we all called Article 5 ([B]WHICH TRUMP FUCKING FORGOT TO AFFIRM[/B]) then maybe we'd be ignored.
[media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QS2a44F5TgM[/media] Guess RMoney was right after all.
hey guys i guess if we're going to war with russia i'll see y'all either in boot camp or dead in a godforsaken ditch after we all get drafted
On another note the title gave me fucking panic imaging some of the dead were Americans
[QUOTE=Ninja Gnome;53154335]hey guys i guess if we're going to war with russia i'll see y'all either in boot camp or dead in a godforsaken ditch after we all get drafted[/QUOTE] While I seriously doubt either will declare full out war, I suspect Russia will get folded like a cheap suit in serious, 1-on-1 combat. You saw what happened to their mercs, not a single SDF casualty. If that's any kind of indication of Russia's might, then I stand by my original point.
[QUOTE=Eva-1337;53154348]While I seriously doubt either will declare full out war, I suspect Russia will get folded like a cheap suit in serious, 1-on-1 combat. You saw what happened to their mercs, not a single SDF casualty. If that's any kind of indication of Russia's might, then I stand by my original point.[/QUOTE] we all know what happened last time russia got underestimated in a fight, a war with them wouldn't be a cakewalk by any meaning of the word. it has been a long time since we've been in a standup war with a country with arguably comparable access to resources and military-industrial complex.
[QUOTE=Charades;53154319][media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QS2a44F5TgM[/media] Guess RMoney was right after all.[/QUOTE] He may have been right at the time, but ask him now and he'll say otherwise.
Jumping in late, but I feel like the response the US gave was something Russia didn't want to see. Like sheer overwhelming firepower not only from planes but from counter-battery fire such as HIAMARS and an actual cannon crew? I don't think they fully expected that the US will demolish your position if you choose to try and test them. It's a reason why TFSA and other FSA haven't tried to attack US advisors or conveys passing through because they know it'll likely have the result of having a drone strike or an F-18 dropping some ordnance.
[QUOTE=Eva-1337;53154348]While I seriously doubt either will declare full out war, I suspect Russia will get folded like a cheap suit in serious, 1-on-1 combat. You saw what happened to their mercs, not a single SDF casualty. If that's any kind of indication of Russia's might, then I stand by my original point.[/QUOTE] Except they didn't have ANY air/artillery support or any anti-air capabilities. Not sure what they were trying to accomplish(honestly there are much cheaper ways to test the response, and there's clearly something else that we don't know yet), but an all out war won't be anything like you imagine it.
[QUOTE=Eva-1337;53154348]While I seriously doubt either will declare full out war, I suspect Russia will get folded like a cheap suit in serious, 1-on-1 combat. You saw what happened to their mercs, not a single SDF casualty. If that's any kind of indication of Russia's might, then I stand by my original point.[/QUOTE] The last time someone said that it singlehandedly ruined any chance of their Reich lasting more than a handful of years.
[QUOTE=TestECull;53154684]The last time someone said that it singlehandedly ruined any chance of their Reich lasting more than a handful of years.[/QUOTE] I finally get it - we're letting global warming continue unchecked so the next time we invade Russia, we won't freeze to death!
[QUOTE=gman003-main;53154774]I finally get it - we're letting global warming continue unchecked so the next time we invade Russia, we won't freeze to death![/QUOTE] I thought it was counteract the nuclear winter?
Given how emotionally fueled are some posts in this thread, I would preface this by saying that I'm not trying to defend or normalize anything or anyone, but purely trying to provide a viewpoint and some assumptions I find likely. With that said, I believe [B]the Russian PMC did not specifically target US forces and likely did not have any idea there were any in the Khasham base in the first place.[/B] [I]Let me elaborate: [/I] SDF bases don't regularly house US troops or equipment, especially not frontline bases like this one. Logically there is no point, considering the US doesn't have any frontline combatants in Syria, the ground forces are limited to a handful of artillery teams and spec ops units doing ops and training. (SDF itself is a Syrian Kurdish faction which is not led by the US (as some articles erroneously imply, although they are part of the coalition), and their units doesn't have US members.) Information on the specific location of US posts is obviously not easy to come by for security reasons, so the best I could find is this map made by a Turkish news agency last year (the fact that the actually Pentagon raised concern about this map makes me believe the info is somewhat solid): [t]https://www.geopolitica.ru/sites/default/files/ussyr.jpg[/t] Note that even the closest ones are like 100km away from the frontline, as I said there is no point in moving US troops closer. I think it is fair to say the base in Khasham (which is right next to the Euphrates, immediately next to the frontline) had no regular US contingent. So a premeditated attack on US forces doesn't sound plausible to me. Now the reason why the US retaliated so quickly was that at the time there was an "undisclosed number of US [U]special forces[/U]" on site (who called support in self-defense). Special forces aren't exactly known to announce their positions to other states, let alone in advance (and this attack was planned well before), they can pop up anywhere, anytime. Which likely means that the time of the Russian attack simply coincided with the SOF presence there due to bad luck, resulting in them getting completely rekt by US air support and artillery (note that the US forces used HIMARS rocket artillery (200-300km range) and not the more common howitzers (20-30km range), also a likely indication there were no other units that close). The fact that the Russians suffered such heavy losses also supports the idea that they simply did not anticipate that they'd be countered by anything else than Kurdish SDF units, at least not in such short notice. If all this would have happened at a position with regular US presence (such as an artillery base) the ramifications would have been much more serious (that is the point I would say that calling it a declaration of war is no longer an overreaction). Well they still crossed the previously agreed deconfliction line, but its not like that would have been the first time for a "red" attack on "yellow" territory, except this time the circumstances turned out to be a bit different. Also last I heard the SDF is welcoming the Russian-backed SAA troops in Afrin with open arms to defend against the Turks so I guess they got over the whole thing pretty quickly.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.