November 17, 2015
Russia's Lavrov: U.S. Is Not Seriously Fighting Against The Islamic State
Throughout the last week the Russian airforce updated its target list in Syria. Plans were prepared, units designated, ammunition was loaded.
Today President Putin announced that the destruction of a Russian airliner with 224 people on board over the Sinai peninsula had indeed been an Islamic State terror attack. Traces of explosives were found on parts of the debris.
The Russian mission in Syria is no longer just to help the Syrian government but is now a matter of Russian national self-defense. The Russian parliament was not shy in assigning guilt:
"The recent tragic developments confirm the topicality of Russia’s continuous warnings that permanent destabilization in the Middle East by those who claim global dominance, primarily the United States, could lead to the expansion of the zone of bloody chaos and entail numerous human tragedies," the document says. "France and other European states are, as a matter of fact, reaping the consequences of Washington’s nearsighted and selfish policy."
There will now be no backing out for Russia and no time limit.
At the same time as Putin spoke Russian ships in the Caspian sea, submarines in the Mediterranean and long range strategic strike bombers flying from Russia launched 34 cruise missiles against Islamic State targets in Syria.
The Russian defense ministry announced that it would double its strikes in Syria using 5 TU-160, 6 TU-95MS, 14 TU-22m3. 8 SU-34 and 4 SU-27sm in addition to the 34 airplanes already in Syria. The new assets are long-range and will mostly fly directly from Russia. They will attack the static targets which the Russian and Syrian intelligence will designate. The planes in Syria will now take a more tactical role in direct combat air support for the Syrian army and the allied forces on the ground. The strike capacity will immediately double and it is planned to further increase it.
The French, now bombing IS in retaliation for the attack in Paris, are also adding to their strike capacity by moving their airplane carrier towards the Syrian coast. President Putin personally ordered the Russian ships in the Mediterranean to recognize the French forces as allies. This may be an opening to France and an offer to Hollande to leave his anti-Syrian stance and to stop his support for anti-Syrian insurgents.
After Putin shamed Obama into bombing Islamic State oil truck assemblies his Foreign Minister Lavrov went a step further. He directly accused the U.S. of not being serious about fighting the Islamic State:
"The problem around the U.S.-led coalition is that despite the fact that they declared its goal in fighting exclusively the Islamic State and other terrorists and pledged not to take any action against the Syrian army (...), analysis of the strikes delivered by the United States and its coalition at terrorist positions over the past year drives us to a conclusion that these were selective, I would say sparing, strikes and in the majority of cases spared those Islamic State groups that were capable of pressing the Syrian army," he said.
"It looks like a cat that wants to eat a fish but doesn’t want to wet its feet. They want the Islamic State to weaken Assad as soon as possible to force him to step down this or that way but they don’t want to see Islamic State strong enough to take power."
That the U.S. was not seriously fighting the Islamic State was obvious to any observer but it is now a public position stated by Russia and the U.S. will have to react to.
Maybe Lavrov hopes he can goad the U.S. into getting more serious about the Islamic State. With the background of the attacks in Paris and against the Russian plane (more are likely to come) the chances for that are not too bad.
The "isolated" Russia that was never actually isolated is not isolated anymore. The U.S. rhetorical position is now defensive as Russia is taking the lead in the fight against IS. But it still wants to look like its is doing something:
U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said on Tuesday his country is starting an operation with Turkey to finish securing the northern Syrian border.
"The entire border of northern Syria - 75 percent of it has now been shut off. And we are entering an operation with the Turks to shut off the other remaining 98 kilometers," he said in an interview with CNN.
That is not much of a change at all. Crossing the border and smuggling will in future require either a Turkish secret service or CIA permit. A real change in the U.S. position will only come when its stops the support for the various forces fighting against the Syrian government. But that may require an even bigger shock than the attack in Paris or the downing of a Russian plane.
Posted by b on November 17, 2015 at 02:01 PM | Permalink
the fact russia is making this a public announcement is a good thing.. i wonder how the western msm will run with it, or if they will touch it? " They want the Islamic State to weaken Assad as soon as possible to force him to step down this or that way but they don’t want to see Islamic State strong enough to take power." same approach taken in iraq... use ISIS as a means to regime change goals..
Posted by: james | Nov 17, 2015 2:10:14 PM | 1
We have a fifth column problem here in the United States and until we can honestly and openly address that situation, our armed forces will continue to be tasked with supporting a dishonest and destabilizing agenda in pursuit of a new world order.
Posted by: Bruno Marz | Nov 17, 2015 2:16:55 PM | 2
I tried to post what follows twice on the previous thread but it was never actually posted. Is it because of the TASS link? I'm trying again. If it doesn't post, I must conclude this website isn't really serious.
Russia's Foreign Ministry has issued a document condemning United States policy to be the cause of Daesh and urges all nations to join an anti-Hitler like coalition to totally defeat the Outlaw Empire's favorite tool--international terrorism:
"The recent tragic developments confirm the topicality of Russia’s continuous warnings that permanent destabilization in the Middle East by those who claim global dominance, primarily the United States, could lead to the expansion of the zone of bloody chaos and entail numerous human tragedies ...
"It is high time responsible countries of the world step over their tactical differences to follow the path of forming a broad anti-terror coalition following the lead of the anti-Hitler coalition as a example of unification of many countries and nations against common enemy ...
"It is obvious that the irresponsible and faulty policy of the West pursued under the slogan of ‘export of democracy’ has resulted in the emergence and strengthening of the so-called Islamic State. Attempts to use radical groups as a battering-ram to topple unwanted regimes are fraught with further negative scenarios," https://tass.ru/en/politics/837297
No more being polite; the gloves are now off.
Posted by: karlof1 | Nov 17, 2015 2:17:16 PM | 3
It's not clear where the French carrier is going. Will it be parked off the Syrian coast or is it going to the Gulf? (Guardian)
Posted by: dh | Nov 17, 2015 2:31:08 PM | 5
- Of course, the US isn't "seriously fighting against ISIS". The US made a deal with Saudi Arabia. That deal gave the US free reign to make a deal with Iran and Saudi Arabia was given free reign in Yemen & Syria.
Posted by: Willy2 | Nov 17, 2015 2:38:48 PM | 8
Hope Putin stops calling the Reptilians "our partners". Nothing wrong with world order; there is only one, it ought to be orderly. Who drives a car with a loose wheel? What the US proposes is the same old order, 99% peon.
Posted by: ruralito | Nov 17, 2015 3:03:41 PM | 11
Charles de Gaulle was originally supposed to go to the Gulf, but now it is being sent to the Eastern Med. Due to arrive Thursday. Attentats à Paris : le Charles-de-Gaulle entre plus rapidement en action:
Il devait être déployé dans le Golfe, il le sera finalement en Méditerranée orientale. Pour être plus rapidement sur zone, le porte-avion Charles-de-Gaulle appareillera ce jeudi pour arriver au large de la Syrie ou du Liban. Il ne mettra que quelques jours pour être sur place, quand, cet hiver, il avait mis environ un mois pour rejoindre le Golfe.
Posted by: lysias | Nov 17, 2015 3:48:23 PM | 13
Who are the French bombing?
Posted by: alex | Nov 17, 2015 3:57:24 PM | 14
Paris Resident: Boots on the Ground is the Islamic State's Dream Come True
Posted by: okie farmer | Nov 17, 2015 4:00:16 PM | 15
It may well be that ISIS has outlived its usefulness and now they have to go.
Posted by: alex | Nov 17, 2015 4:19:48 PM | 16
@7 "Of course, the US isn't "seriously fighting against ISIS". The US made a deal with Saudi Arabia. That deal gave the US free reign to make a deal with Iran and Saudi Arabia was given free reign in Yemen & Syria."
Plausible, I suppose. But what can Saudi Arabia do about it if the USA reneges on that "deal"?
Posted by: Yeah, Right | Nov 17, 2015 6:00:54 PM | 18
Problem number one is that Saudis have Turkey in their pocket. Problem number two is that Saudis have the West in their pocket, while they needed few billion dollars worth of ammunition (bombs, missiles) they placed lucrative orders for tens of billions of dollars. And those profits are made by people with the top influence in their respective countries, "military industrial complex".
Supplying weapons for the destruction of Yemen is a good test example. For Syria, think tanks developed an elaborate story, so one can see "interests" and so on. But in Yemen? There is a tenuous "Iran" connection, but the only objective reason to provide help to GCC, both with arms and with diplomatic cover, is cash. A lot of it. And because "nobody cares" about Yemen, you can even find comments in official media that that war is a dubious idea. Next to news items about subsequent weapon contracts with GCC. It would be much better to simply send them a nice transport plane full of a more calming drug than amphetamin -- one can see that Gulf princes gobble speed by a ton.
Posted by: Piotr Berman | Nov 17, 2015 6:15:32 PM | 20
Re: Posted by: dh | Nov 17, 2015 2:31:08 PM | 4
An interesting question. In regards to the Syria coast, as long as it sits at least 50km off the coast it is most definitely in international waters in any case.
It really shouldn't be going much closer than this.
The contiguous zone is a band of water extending from the outer edge of the territorial sea to up to 24 nautical miles (44.4 km; 27.6 mi) from the baseline, within which a state can exert limited control for the purpose of preventing or punishing "infringement of its customs, fiscal, immigration or sanitary laws and regulations within its territory or territorial sea". This will typically be 12 nautical miles (22 km; 14 mi) wide, but could be more (if a state has chosen to claim a territorial sea of less than 12 nautical miles), or less, if it would otherwise overlap another state's contiguous zone. However, unlike the territorial sea, there is no standard rule for resolving such conflicts and the states in question must negotiate their own compromise. The United States invoked a contiguous zone out to 24 nmi on 24 September 1999.
Posted by: Julian | Nov 17, 2015 6:29:50 PM | 21
Your commondreams link, quotes Da'esh ...
“The world today is divided into two camps. Bush spoke the truth when he said, ‘either you are with us or you are with the terrorists.’ Meaning either you are with the crusade or you are with Islam.”
It's really only one camp, those who are for all war all the time - Bush and Da'esh, and the rest of us, who are for all ostrich all the time.
The article clearly puts the commanders of Neolibraconia and those of the Islamic State on the same team, with the Da'esh commanders clearly in the subordinate - they've revived 'subaltern' in academic circles, apparently - role.
Thanks for the commondreams link ... the Intercept acknowledged a high-powered visitor tracking mechanism a couple of weeks ago so I don't go there anymore. I guess the exposers of the NSA have figured ... as has Da'esh ... If you can't beat 'em, join 'em.
Posted by: jfl | Nov 17, 2015 6:33:45 PM | 22
So the U.S., France, Canada (still) and Turkey are conducting a NATO proxy war in Syria and Putin orders Navy to work with France??? Say Whut?
And ISIS downed the Russian airliner...all by themselves?
And I have swampland for sale.
What is wrong with this picture?
Posted by: Circe | Nov 17, 2015 6:40:32 PM | 24
The Moor has done his work, the Moor must go.
Posted by: lysias | Nov 17, 2015 6:43:39 PM | 25
So aggression against Syria is OK, as long as it's carried out from International waters. Masterful conversion of one point - are the French headed to the Gulf or the Eastern Med - into another of your choosing. You've read your handbook well. Let's hope that Putin/the Russians can enlist Oland/the French in the war against Da'esh and wean them away from Obama's war against Syria (and China, in the Spratlys, next?).
Posted by: jfl | Nov 17, 2015 6:47:10 PM | 26
Hollande heading to Moscow on the 26th?
Posted by: Rosco | Nov 17, 2015 6:52:27 PM | 27
"The Moor has done his work, the Moor must go." -- like so many before them, Saddam, Marcos, Pinochet et al...
Posted by: guest77 | Nov 17, 2015 6:52:51 PM | 28
@24 Let's hope that Putin/the Russians can enlist Oland/the French in the war against Da'esh and wean them away from Obama's war against Syria (and China, in the Spratlys, next?).
Is there cheese on the moon?
Are you forgetting the role France played in the destruction of Libya???
Posted by: Circe | Nov 17, 2015 6:54:35 PM | 29
Biden's statement opened the lid on it all - since then anyone who cares to have known knew that the US allies created ISIS. Most certainly with either the blessing or the wink of Washington:
In October 2014, Vice President Joe Biden publicly criticized US allies for backing ISIS. The previous month, General Dempsey had told the Senate Armed Services Committee that America’s “Arab allies” were funding the group.
US officials were trying to distance themselves from the ISIS-supporting actions of their allies without harshly condemning them. Biden suggested that their arming of ISIS was unintentional and quickly apologized to them. (Responding to Dempsey, Senator Lindsey Graham actually defended them: “They were trying to beat Assad. I believe they realize the folly of their ways.”)
Posted by: guest77 | Nov 17, 2015 6:55:31 PM | 31
"Are you forgetting the role France played in the destruction of Libya???"
The only thing I would note is that, at this moment, France - long weak - is now completely stunned and shattered and anything could happen there. The French are talking of the certain Le Pen victory ahead.
French elites may well have no choice except to finally do what amounts to the right thing in the eyes of their people: drop the support for the Islamists and back Russia's coalition. Not because they care about the fate of her old colonial subjects (haha, not a whit) but because their politicians do care about completely falling out of power and handing their country over to the National Front.
Posted by: guest77 | Nov 17, 2015 7:00:55 PM | 32
"You are defending Russia and its citizens," Putin told military chiefs. "I want to thank you for your service and wish you luck."
is Russia on the way to become "exceptional" and "indispensable" nation?
What's wrong? Well, everything.
And very good point I was also puzzled by this but no surprised. They seat together in IMF and SC etc. The Russian gov. if full of neoliberals.
Posted by: Neretva'43 | Nov 17, 2015 7:00:57 PM | 33
Don't forget the Kurds ... this will be #4 for them. At least.
Posted by: jfl | Nov 17, 2015 7:03:36 PM | 35
I hope the way you hope ... but it could be that, given the choice of sinking or surrounding, the Russians - Putin - has chosen to stay close to his enemies.
Posted by: jfl | Nov 17, 2015 7:08:15 PM | 36
France joining the Russian coalition would be the perfect cooption of the Le Pen platform - which may well be their main concern now. Though I'm not sure exactly how they'd sell the move to Washington, I have always looked forward to the day when a European nation would finally face that stark choice between another stint as Washington's lackey or their own survival....
Posted by: guest77 | Nov 17, 2015 7:09:16 PM | 37
@34 jfl - agreed (as usual with you), but enemy of Russia or not, France cannot send her carrier off the coast of Syria and start bombing Assad. After all, the Syrians have already promised to sink it if it tries to do so.
I'm not suggesting France and Russia will be the best of friends, but like the French pullout from NATO in the 1960s (who would suggest they did it because they were going to join the Eastern Bloc) it can put a huge dent in USA plans for a Europe that plays only second fiddle to Washington, even while their own cities burn.
Posted by: guest77 | Nov 17, 2015 7:15:49 PM | 38
I dunno man. Wouldn't Assad destroying a French carrier start WW3, or at least be a major major major international event? The Western media would spin the crap out of it and claim that Assad was defending ISIS or some shit.
Posted by: Massinissa | Nov 17, 2015 7:37:27 PM | 39
Re: Posted by: jfl | Nov 17, 2015 6:47:10 PM | 24
Nice way to jump to a conclusion I wasn't making
The point I was making is if the French warship strays (deliberately or otherwise) into the territorial waters of Syria they have every right to sink the ship regardless of whether it is actively engaging in any military missions flying over Syria.
If it doesn't then they can't consider sinking the ships unless they are engaging in military actions over Syria.
As we have seen, it appears Russia is trying to work with France, so you'd hardly think the Syrians would therefore have any motive whatsoever to sink any French ships unless they started targeting SAA/Hezbollah/Iranian positions now would you.
To do so would obviously imperil that nascent "alliance" wouldn't it.
Posted by: Julian | Nov 17, 2015 7:38:55 PM | 40
@36 guest 'After all, the Syrians have already promised to sink it if it tries to do so. ..'
And the Russians are moving the means into place ...
I think that Charles de Gaulle was very popular when he turned down the deal he could not refuse from Washington ... and it made his career, overshadowing all the other 'rough spots' ... with the French, who were the only ones who counted to him.
If I were Oland ... admittedly hard to imagine ... I'd go Gaullist full bore, clear up my rhetoric, fly high with Mariane ... and not only with France but with all of Europa at this stage! Nothing wrong with being bouyed on the shoulders of all as a modern day Joan d'Arc is there? I'll bet Oland would be tickled pink, again.
Posted by: jfl | Nov 17, 2015 7:47:57 PM | 41
""It looks like a cat that wants to eat a fish but doesn’t want to wet its feet"
I can't help but crack up at this image. He chose a great analogy.
Posted by: Jessica | Nov 17, 2015 7:54:22 PM | 42
"We have a fifth column problem here in the United States and until we can honestly and openly address that situation, our armed forces will continue to be tasked with supporting a dishonest and destabilizing agenda in pursuit of a new world order."
Posted by: Bruno Marz | Nov 17, 2015 2:16:55 PM | 2
Worth posting again, you nailed it Bruno.
Putin's message should be front and center, on every TV news show in America. of course, it won't be, and therein lies the problem.
Posted by: ben | Nov 17, 2015 8:36:01 PM | 43
P.S... Looks like Putins going all in. It's past time.
Posted by: ben | Nov 17, 2015 8:37:42 PM | 44
Utrecht Netherlands is no different to Paris,more filth column than fifth column
Posted by: mcohen | Nov 17, 2015 8:43:22 PM | 45
The Obama administration is not seriously fighting against ISIS in SYRIA because of its regional allies (SA, Turkey, Qatar and Israel), government precedent/deep state, the Israel Lobby, the Lobby owned/pwned (intimidated)media and the hawk-dominated congress. Obama has rarely challenged the dominant neocon/neolib narrative of the MSM, congress or the Lobby and has rarely put the brakes on the foreign policy commitments of Dubya or Hillary -- consequently continuing to honor commitments to traditional allies, even if modifying the terms.
But Obama is in the process of lessening America's friction with Iran and Syria and lessening its buffering of Israel. Netanyahu is trying to distract Obama from this task, to run out the clock. Now that Russia is helping fight ISIS, etc. in Syria, Obama will concentrate more on ISIS in Iraq. At some point, France or Jordan will be putting forth Palestine's resolution in the UNSC -- where Obama has said that he's reconsidering his options.
Posted by: Rusty Pipes | Nov 17, 2015 9:03:57 PM | 46
With respect to a Russian-French alliance, I watched this weekend, thanks to a link at Russia Insider, the movie "Russian Ark" which is a tour de force film (available on Youtube)unveiling the vast and gorgeous interiors of the Hermitage museum in St. Petersburg. A Virgil-like figure takes one on this pilgrimage, and this figure is a Frenchman. He begins by decrying European-style architectural embellishments and art, but ultimately is caught up in the beauty of the interior scenes, as indeed was I. Russia and France have a very close historic relationship outside of and in spite of the confrontation with Napoleon. Their cultures intertwine. A large contingent of emigrés established themselves in France at the time of the Revolution, that period's refugees.
Well worth a look at that movie for those who question the European connection.
Posted by: juliania | Nov 17, 2015 9:10:09 PM | 47
@44 RP 'Obama is in the process of lessening America's friction with Iran and Syria and lessening its buffering of Israel.'
Oh yeah. You can tell by the billions of dollars worth of Smart bombs he's just sold the Saudis with which to bomb the SAA in Syria and Yemen/Iran, and the $50 gigabucks he's getting ready to present to Israel over the next decade. I cannot get over you folks who just wanna believe in Obama. I guess it's his black skin? Literally skin deep. A nihilist with black skin is indistinguishable from a nihilist with white skin. They're nihilist's are all green on the inside. There's a portfolio where the heart lies in an ordinary human being.
Posted by: jfl | Nov 17, 2015 9:17:21 PM | 48
Obama is not leading a revolution against deep state. The MIC wants to sell its products to SA as it has for decades? Obama will sign off. He'll even offer SA logistical support in Yemen because they are sore about Iran and Syria. He has a few modest foreign policy goals. He'll go along with the flow otherwise (He also knows how the establishment has smacked him on the few occasions he stepped a little out of line). He is working on that Passive-Agressive Prize.
Posted by: Rusty Pipes | Nov 17, 2015 9:37:24 PM | 49
There are cycles within cycles of the empire's genocides ... From Pol Pot to ISIS: the Blood Never Dried
As a witness to the human consequences of aerial savagery – including the beheading of victims, their parts festooning trees and fields – I am not surprised by the disregard of memory and history, yet again.
A telling example is the rise to power of Pol Pot and his Khmer Rouge, who had much in common with today’s Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS). They, too, were ruthless medievalists who began as a small sect. They, too, were the product of an American-made apocalypse, this time in Asia.
Southeast to Southwest asia ... you'd thing that after 50 years we Americans would notice the patterns in the consequences of 'our' government's acts ... and break the cycle. But, nope. Not yet.
Does anyone think that the US will be allowed to do this for another 50 years? No one does. But the Nobel Peace Prize Laureate does think he can hold out until 21 January 2017. IBGYBG.
The Russians have taken their stand. I do hope they can bring down our genocidal, US war machine.
Posted by: jfl | Nov 17, 2015 9:40:22 PM | 50
From the Saker blog:
While it is way too early to come to any conclusions about what really happened in Paris, I want to share the following thought with you: President Hollande has just declared that what took place was an act of war. This, in turn, means that the entire NATO alliance could be called in to respond to this (under Article 5). As for the attackers, already one Syrian passport was found, and witnesses say that one of them screamed “for Syria” before opening fire. In other words, this attack has just given NATO a pretext to intervene in Syria. Last, but not least, the only French aircraft carrier was schedule to leave its port this Wednesday. For the Middle-East, precisely."
"You tell me."
Posted by: ben | Nov 17, 2015 9:44:44 PM | 51
I am also very skeptical of Obama. But I just read the writings of Crooke (ex MI6) linked by GoraDiva @21. Crooke gives the best explanation I've seen of Obama's attempt to keep the neocons at bay. He also describes what is at stake - future conflict with Russia and China.
I am still not fully convinced. I will have to mull over what Crooke has written a bit. But Crooke is well worth a read as he provides much interesting detail along with a narrative that makes sense, including: Obama's penchant for covert ops; the planning of neocons for the next President; and Putin's invitation to join Russia in eradicating ISIS.
I should add that my major concen with Crooke's analysis is Obama's avowed neocon stance. It's very difficult to see Obama as NOT a neocon himself when he says things like "I believe in American exceptionalism with every fiber of my being." This leads me to wonder if Obama is not just a smarter form of neocon - if Obama's moderation of outrageous neocon demands is scripted.
Posted by: Jackrabbit | Nov 17, 2015 10:10:52 PM | 52
Good catch bx4.
The Russians took off the gloves, and decided to show the world their resolve when under attack. Beware, Porkychunk, NATOstan, Erdogan fake sultan, Saudi trash, the Russian bear lost his cubs, and is ready to pounce on whoever was behind the bombing of innocent civilians. Syria will become a great training ground for the Russian army Putin has been quietly building all these years, interlocking all its branches in direct military operations, against irregulars armed and trained by the West, within the context of hybrid war. In other words, quietly and without any pompous declarations, Russia is now at war directly with the takfiris, and by proxy with the West at a higher level. Russia is not anymore only supporting Syria or propping up Assad, the axis of the contradiction has fundamentally changed, for Russia, Syria, and the West.
Lavrov's exposé on the US intentions to use IS to weaken Assad, while not allowing them to grow so strong to take power, has a strong historical resonance in Russia, with the US/UK/France delaying the opening of the Western front in WWII, waiting for Hitler to weaken/defeat the Soviet Union, to then open it on a weakened/tired German army, and a defeated Russia. The Russians know the West's dirty tricks from their own history dealing with US/UK/France/Eurostan deceit and dishonesty.
At the same time, Lavrov is a master of diplomacy, bar none, and Russia's "collaboration" with France is a diplomatic masterstroke, allowing France to become part of the fight against IS, and forcing it to make it real (our sats are watching you). Russia has to, whenever possible, drive a wedge between neo-colonized Eurostan and the US colonial masters, whether they succeed at trying is another matter altogether.
Putin looks great and in complete control as a CINC, and from the little we are afforded to see, the troika Putin/Lavrov/Shoigu is ready to take on any enemy, whatever its size, anywhere, any time.
Posted by: Lone Wolf | Nov 17, 2015 10:36:33 PM | 53
I watched this weekend, thanks to a link at Russia Insider, the movie "Russian Ark" … Russia and France have a very close historic relationship … Their cultures intertwine.
I watched another film from that set, Олимпиус инферно. (Have you learned Cyrillic yet? ;-) ) It was pretty stirring. It really does get across the idea that the US has embarked on a war against Russia. I may watch Russian Ark on your recommendation; I stopped watching it when I tried to a long time ago, because it seemed pretentious to me. Maybe I would feel differently now.
As for the French, sure, the Russian aristocracy spoke French instead of Russian. But when it comes to other Europeans, only the Germans really fascinate the Russians. God only knows if the Germans will come to their senses quickly enough and realize that their future lies with Russia.
I do hope [the Russians] can bring down our genocidal, US war machine.
I trust you just got carried away by enthusiasm there. Russia and other nations need to act together, to make the war machine bring itself down. But Russia will be leading the process, not China (even if China's is the bigger economy).
I don't know if this is how anyone expected it to end. But I see this as having happened before: the US is just taking the place of France, Germany, and others that came before them, trying to conquer Russia. That always ends the same way. The only difference this time is that it is happening on a world scale: previous countries that tried to bring Russia down were not global hegemons.
Posted by: Demian | Nov 17, 2015 10:57:04 PM | 54
Follow-up to #49:
As I think more on it, I think Crooke is wrong.
The salient feature of the Obama Administration is duplicity and subterfuge in service of powerful interests. From his 2008 campaign ("Change you can believe in") to his bank bailouts and non-prosecution of bank execs to his 'shovel-ready jobs' to his breaking of campaign promises (including "most transparent administration ever", and closing Guantanamo) to his screwing the poor in the fiscal cliff/sequester dance to his bogus plan to tackle inequality to his support for Syrian rebels and extremists and more.
So, I have to call BS on holding back the neocons and securing a 'legacy' of peace. Those that ask us to see Obama as a white knight ask us to 'peel the onion' - but in the end there is nothing but tears.
Posted by: Jackrabbit | Nov 17, 2015 11:32:58 PM | 55
At 51, so funny you should mention that movie, I just watched it the other day. I'm teaching myself Russian (just for fun) and so I love watching Russian movies with English subtitles.
Posted by: Lysander | Nov 17, 2015 11:33:24 PM | 56
jfl at 48: "... you'd thing that after 50 years we Americans would notice the patterns in the consequences of 'our' government's acts ... and break the cycle. But, nope. Not yet."
Not ever, the cult of stupidity is too strong. The cycle is being broken by foreign policy stupidity, military resistance, and economic decline. Smiley face!
Posted by: fairleft | Nov 17, 2015 11:38:34 PM | 57
Well apparently we all needed a leader ... and Russia stepped up to the task. Was forced to, given its history. I add the last lest I'm again charged with being an enthusiast of Russia. In fact I may become one.
Posted by: jfl | Nov 18, 2015 1:38:04 AM | 58
Crooke proposes that Obama wants to see a long-term peaceful relationship with Russia and China while the neocons foresee/seek conflict (and are vetting the next President accordingly). This is the outline of Obama's legacy - the first step being the peace deal with Iran. In addition, Obama is reported to have said that he was "always skeptical" about the moderate rebel program - suggesting another point of disagreement with neocons.
But the neocons and ME allies are committed to using extremism as a tool for destabilization. And that destabilization will eventually reach to Iran/Russia/China. If the USA+allies thought that the connection between extremists/ISIS and US allies would remain hidden they must've been shocked by Putin's announcement at the G20 that USA is not serious about bombing ISIS and Russia had traced ISIS funding back to 40 countries!
As much as Obama is criticized by neocons for not acting more forcefully to remove Assad, Obama has gone along with the neocon+allies extremists/ISIS program. In fact, just before the Paris attacks he said that ISIS was 'contained' and at the G20 Summit he defended his Administration's approach to ISIS.
Obama's legacy? Obama has been obscuring and defending a too clever by half end-run around the 'international order' that USA+allies purport to uphold.
Posted by: Jackrabbit | Nov 18, 2015 1:38:31 AM | 59
@50 LW 'Lavrov's exposé on the US intentions to use IS to weaken Assad, while not allowing them to grow so strong to take power, has a strong historical resonance in Russia, with the US/UK/France delaying the opening of the Western front in WWII, waiting for Hitler to weaken/defeat the Soviet Union, to then open it on a weakened/tired German army, and a defeated Russia. The Russians know the West's dirty tricks from their own history dealing with US/UK/France/Eurostan deceit and dishonesty. '
That's a great observation. People were calling Kuweires Syria's Stalingrad and it does fit, doesn't it?
Posted by: jfl | Nov 18, 2015 1:45:01 AM | 60
@49 JR ' It's very difficult to see Obama as NOT a neocon ... '
It's very difficult for me to see him as anything other than a nihilist. He's gone with the neocons because they appeared to be winning ... in Washington. Because his Daddy John Brennan had gone with the neocons. The CIA punched his ticket and brought him on board from childhood, before he met all the really big money boys on Wall Street ... and the CIA are fundamentalists, just like Da'esh. Money is only useful insofar as it enables power. Power can always furnish money, while money by itself is transient, no gurantee of power.
But this is all speculation. We know who he is and who he works for, and it certainly ain't us. And it is very difficult to perceive shades of nihilism ... between that of the MIC and that of the financiers, for instance. Nothin' from nothin' leaves nothin' ... and ya gotta have somethin' - if ya wanna be with me.
Posted by: jfl | Nov 18, 2015 1:57:51 AM | 61
The CIA's 'moderate rebels' - in this case al Nusra head-choppers - have recently moved west from the area north of Aleppo and surrounded Rojava Kurd's Afrin city. Don't bother looking for anything about this in the MSM. They are being painfully silent on the matter.
The city lies in a river valley that would be a great smuggling route for arms and bulk explosives from Turkey to the north. The writing is already on the wall that JAN will lose their Kilis - Azaz - Aleppo smuggling/theft/extortion route soon enough, so they are likely looking for another safe lair and defensible rat line for future Turkey/CIA supply convoys and human trafficking enterprises.
Nearly everyone recognizes Rojava Kurds as a credible and substantial force to fight ISIS. Likewise, nobody is really fooled by attempts by the U.S. to rebrand al Nusra as 'moderate' head-choppers. So now comes the acid test: who will step in to provide air support for the Kurds?
I don't expect the U.S. to lift a finger, unless it's AFTER Afrin is annihilated (just like we did in Kobane). Complicating matters is the fact that most all of al Nusra is either ex-FSA or other assorted 'moderate' rebels, or they're mercenaries directly on the U.S./Turkish/Gulf payrolls. We won't bomb our contract killers - they wouldn't like that. Probably plenty of Xe/Academi boys in that club as well. And we have never bothered bombing them as far as I know, with the exception of a few buildings they deserted a day or two before the actual air strike. So there's some sensitivity on the issue of the U.S. not appearing soft on JAN head-choppers, but not really bombing them to any effect.
Russia on the other hand has always considered JAN and their affiliates as terrorists, indistinguishable from ISIS. In fact, one of the reasons for the JAN assault on Afrin may be because they are getting pounded to dust by the Russians and can't get supplies either down from Turkey or up from Aleppo. Afrin would be a good place to scurry for cover and it's full of human shields.
Russia has every reason to bomb JAN forces anywhere in Syria, but they have been pretty silent about either aiding the Kurds or arming them directly. The issue has never presented itself as urgently as it is now, but Afrin isn't really a priority. In fact, it's never been an issue. It's too far behind the lines to send troops, and I don't think the SAA, Hezbollah or Iran have many to spare.
So now we see where Russia will stand. They seem to be eager for new targets as of late, so the Kurds may be in luck. Will the U.S. get pissed if they start smoking our hired help? What can the U.S. do but the usual bad propaganda about Russia bombing hospitals and orphanages or whining about Russian jets getting close to Turkish airspace? Would we really down a Russian jet to save our covert contract killers? Would Turkey be so foolish to try?
France seems eager to get into the fight, but has all kinds of covert anti-Assad stuff going on in Syria. Maybe some of the head-choppers are on their payroll as well. Will they ignore the Kurds plight and forgo attacking JAN to (irrationally) focus exclusively on ISIS? How is that going to look to the world?
Rojava Kurds are tough and have been holding their own in Afrin all along, but haven't been the focus of any sizeable assaults. JAN and the various moderate rebel factions have only worked around the edges of Afrin until now. The Kurds are only lightly armed, while JAN has plenty of vehicles, medium machine guns and anti-aircraft cannon, and are suspected of having a goodly number of TOWs. JAN has the troops and equipment to give it a good chance to take Afrin. Not sure if they will get U.S. intel like they do when they attack Assad's forces, but who knows.
In any case, this is somewhere between an act of desperation and a strategic retreat by JAN. They have to let Aleppo and their outlying holdings go and they need a new, defensible power base far from the front lines. I don't doubt their resolve to take Afrin or the Kurd's conviction to defend it. I'm afraid the Kurds success will largely depend on someone providing them solid air support, but it's still going to be bloody.
Posted by: PavewayIV | Nov 18, 2015 3:45:54 AM | 62
Always good to have the latest report from the Rojava Propaganda Service.
Posted by: Laguerre | Nov 18, 2015 3:58:14 AM | 63
I can't find any detailed information on what really happened at Stade de France. Witnesses? 3 guys blew themselves off without making victims (or a single Egyptian, as from BBC yesterday?)and no one saw them?
Posted by: Mina | Nov 18, 2015 4:47:13 AM | 64
Indeed, the population in the west seems to get dumber by the minute, this shows how strong propaganda is in the west. Average joe in France have no idea what Hollande is doing in Syria.
And then the tears, sure ok, but what about the tears for not 130 but rather 1,3 MILLION people killed with the aid of western forces in the middle east? Are people that ignorant? Hopeless.
Posted by: Seder | Nov 18, 2015 5:21:14 AM | 65
re Mina 61. Two, I think, not three. The first one failed to get past the security (Hollande was at the stadium, so increased security, I suppose), and reacted by setting off his explosive belt. The second one seems to have followed him. There was a guy on the media showing off his iphone, which stopped a piece of shrapnel. The affair was a bit of a failure in the end.
We've had good fun with the siege at St Denis this morning. I was watching it live on the tele in bed. The best bit was the interview with the occupant of the apartment, who'd let it out to the jihadis because a friend asked him to. At the end of the interview, the cops showed up and took the guy away. Obviously they'd been watching the TV themselves, but hadn't otherwise known.
Posted by: Laguerre | Nov 18, 2015 5:34:03 AM | 66
the story about someone trying to get in the Stade and fleeing from the security has been denied by the WSJ which first got it and Le Monde today; the first guy exploded himself at 21h20 and it was loud enough for the people in the stadium to hear it, but we have no witness, no injury, no dead?
Posted by: Mina | Nov 18, 2015 6:26:34 AM | 67
the story about someone trying to get in the Stade and fleeing from the security has been denied by the WSJ which first got it and Le Monde today
As you like. I wouldn't believe the WSJ anyway. The story must have been something like I described it. The event took place in the street, as witnessed by the guy whose life was "saved" by his iphone. And there was another witness, a woman restaurant owner, who described the explosion taking place in front of her on the other side of the road. The intention must have been to explode the bomb inside, and that failed. Must have been because of the security.
What was denied was the story that it was a Muslim security guard, who prevented the entry, as he was in fact on the players' tunnel. Doesn't change the basic story though. What was the link in LeMonde, so I can check it out? I couldn't see it on the front page.
Posted by: Laguerre | Nov 18, 2015 7:19:23 AM | 68
A bomb that downed a Russian plane in Egypt last month had been placed in the aircraft's main cabin not in the cargo compartment as reported earlier, the daily Kommersant said on Wednesday citing an unnamed source.
The newspaper, citing a source close to the investigation of the crash, said the epicenter of the explosion appeared to have been at the rear of the cabin near the tail section.
"According to a preliminary version, the bomb could have been laid under the passenger seat by the window. Its operation has led to the destruction of the frame and depressurization of the cabin, which had an explosive character," the newspaper said
Posted by: okie farmer | Nov 18, 2015 7:52:28 AM | 69
okie farmer #68:
If you are going to quote from a news story, would you please give a link?
You quote from stories without giving links to them all the time, and it just ads noise to threads. Please stop this. I've brought this up with you before. It is semiliterate behavior.
Posted by: Demian | Nov 18, 2015 8:06:42 AM | 70
Always good to have the latest report from the Rojava Propaganda Service.
Much, much better than reading Wayoutwest's stand in thoughtless twists and distortions. Obviously, Paveway IV posts bother those who lack an intellect to counter his thoughtful posts with facts, not derision and insults.
Posted by: Lone Wolf | Nov 18, 2015 8:27:22 AM | 72
@okie farmer #70:
Tony Cartalucci seems to be worried that "the West" is trying to use the Paris attacks to reinvigorate its efforts to destroy Syria:
West Leverages Paris Attacks for Syria Endgame
I just skimmed this article. I think Cartalucci is overreacting. As has been pointed out at MoA before, Russia has switched the conflict in Syria to a full-fledged ground war. Under such circumstances, the West's ongoing propaganda and amateur diplomatic efforts will have little effect on the final outcome.
What is now happening in Syria is completely new: Russia and its allies are conducting full scale, traditional military operations in a country in which "the West" thus far has only pursued hybrid warfare. Western propagandists and planners are having difficulty processing and adjusting to the new reality. Thus, The Guardian writes all kinds of nonsense about Syria.
Posted by: Demian | Nov 18, 2015 8:35:00 AM | 73
Always good to have the latest report from the Rojava Propaganda Service.
Much, much better than reading Wayoutwest's stand in obfuscated twists and distortions. Obviously, Paveway IV posts bother those who lack an intellect to respond to his arguments with facts and reason, not derision and insults.
Posted by: Lone Wolf | Nov 18, 2015 8:44:07 AM | 74
re 73. Bots don't usually go well on MoA. There's not a regular hasbara agent, for example, though we get them from time to time. Kind of surprising. There few blogs that don't. That's all I was saying. Just so he would be aware of the position.
Posted by: Laguerre | Nov 18, 2015 8:52:23 AM | 75
As long as the Gulf countries were part of the bombing 'coalition' the USA was not allowed to bomb the Islamist militias on the ground that Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Qatar have been funding.
The Russian have changed the rules. They have no incentive to please the Gulf countries. When they started to bomb Al Nusra, the Gulf countries reacted angrily by declaring that the Russian were bombing the 'moderates'.
The 'moderates' need the extremists to survive and the extremists need them as fig leaves.
Now that neither Russia nor France will make a distinction, the 'moderates' are trapped. Either they surrender to the Syrian army or they will get the same fate as the extremists.
The Gulf countries are enraged as even France that they bought with lucrative military contracts are turning against them.
As for the USA and Turkey to become serious about fighting ISIS and ignoring the Gulf countries protests, it may need a violent shock in the shape of a terrorist attack on US or Turkish soil.
Yet, will ISIS prefer to avoid provoking the USA and Turkey like they provoked France and Russia?
Posted by: Virgile | Nov 18, 2015 10:06:42 AM | 77
People were calling Kuweires Syria's Stalingrad and it does fit, doesn't it?
I saw that comment, and IMHO, that's a stretch. In sheer magnitude and armies sizes, Stalingrad dwarfs any other battleground in history, though an analogy can be made about the historical stakes. Kweires' thousand soldiers were not just defending an airbase, they were upholding Syria's determination as a country to fight the takfiris, and the SAA's morale and steadfastness to sustain the struggle to the bitter end.
Similar to Stalingrad, which marked the beginning of the end of the Nazis onslaught on Russia, Kweires is a landmark in battleground Syria. After Kweires, the SAA/NDF/HA retook the strategic initiative, and the offensive in Aleppo's surrounding area has been extremely successful. I have not followed it in the last couple of days, but I could expect M5 highway to have been cut off by now, and the SAA moving east-west across M5 liberating towns from the takfiri plague.
Personally, I equate Kweires more with the 300 at Thermopylae, and although the former survived against overwhelming odds, the latter passed on to history as an example of what the will of a few can do against superior forces, when motivated by higher ideals.
Posted by: Lone Wolf | Nov 18, 2015 10:20:02 AM | 78
Gen David Richards believes Assad’s troops are the only credible force to take on Isis on the ground in Syria.
Thanks okie for that link. Finally s.o. is talking some sense from the UK, though I don't think it would change anything at all at government level. Cameron is deaf and dumb, a twin political brother to Bliar. Still, Gen. Richards' statement is a ray of hope.
Posted by: Lone Wolf | Nov 18, 2015 10:32:50 AM | 79
Based on the quantity (clearly not the quality) of the trolling we're seeing this morning I'd have to assume that the discussion here may be hitting a bit close to home for those supporting the continued destabilization operation known as ISIS in Syria.
Posted by: Bruno Marz | Nov 18, 2015 10:33:37 AM | 80
71;Yes,the Graun does post total BS,today they have a Zionist saying shoot all the terrorists? on sight!Just like that spawn of hell Israel,right?No mercy.What a bunch of scum,when the no mercy comes their way they hide under cover and wail.
They still have the French bombings as the dominate news item,with a small blurb saying Russians say plane blown up.No mercy and tears for them huh?
A rag.A Shame.
Posted by: dahoit | Nov 18, 2015 10:35:11 AM | 81
PS;when's the last time we heard from Libya,it must be a total disaster that they wish kept from US,as it would further reveal our complete idiocy.
Posted by: dahoit | Nov 18, 2015 10:37:18 AM | 82
@87 It's just foff back with a new selection of IDs.
Posted by: dh | Nov 18, 2015 10:53:40 AM | 84
@okie farmer 77, thanks for that link. I completely agree with keeping Assad in power. Let Syrians take back their country. Give them their fair share of Leviathan gas field profits so they can rebuild their country. DO NOT BOMB the infrastructure.
You would think NATO would start to have second thoughts on their regime change policies in the ME after ISIS, Inc. has now shown their effectiveness in asymmetrical warfare. Somehow, I think the latest bombings might be a turning point. If not they better start building walls.
As the prime minister prepares the ground for a Commons vote on extending RAF airstrikes against Isis forces from Iraq to Syria, Lord Richards called for Britain and other allied nations to broker a deal with Russia that would pave the way for Assad’s forces to lead the charge against Isis on the ground.
In an interview on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme on Wednesday, he said: “At the moment we’ve got contradictory war aims. We want to deal with Isis but we also want to get rid of Assad at the same time. I personally don’t think that’s plausible. Any general will tell you you need to have unity of purpose and clear aims in a war. That muddies those aims.”
What are the original reasons for taking down Assad? Gas/oil fields and pipelines, and supporter of Palestinian statehood? The farmers' uprising were a ruse, imo.
Posted by: shadyl | Nov 18, 2015 10:54:06 AM | 85
I don't think Basher a.k.a. Winding Down? a.k.a. Breaking News!! understands what the Zio-Nazi term actually describes. I'm not sure this individual understands much of anything.
Posted by: Bruno Marz | Nov 18, 2015 10:55:57 AM | 86
Why isn't the nasty little Social-engineering Experiment known as "Israel" ever mentioned in discussions about the "West's" War on Islam? "Israel" invented the War on Terror/Islam in order to demonise and smear Palestinians who were "upset" at Jews who've been stealing their land and killing their children for more than 70 years. And who wouldn't be upset if a plague of Jews descended on their neighborhood and began kicking you and your neighbors out of your homes and killing your children at gun point (G-d point).
Given "Israel's" expansionist ideology, it should surprise no-one that they've expanded their demonisation from Palestinians to neighboring arab states and then eventually to virtually the whole of ME Islam.
"Israel" and its dopey, greedy, amoral 800 kg gorilla, AmeriKKKa, have to be tamed.
Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Nov 18, 2015 11:13:44 AM | 87
Why isn't the nasty little Social-engineering Experiment known as "Israel" ever mentioned in discussions about the "West's" War on Islam? "
Because the West's war on Islam has become just one front in the Empire's world war against Russia. I don't think people have forgotten about Israel/Palestine.
And speaking of which, I recently saw a map of Syria ca. 15th century or so. Why do we even talk about Israel/Palestine? That land all used to be part of Syria. A state called "Palestine" is a creation of the British Empire and France, just as Israel is. Same goes for Lebanon. What should have been one Syrian state was split up by Sykes-Picot into several states to keep a strong Arab state from emerging. When I saw that map of Syria, I finally understood why Israel is so obsessed with destroying Syria.
Posted by: Demian | Nov 18, 2015 11:28:43 AM | 88
Speaking of Syria's borders.
Hmm, if this is true. No news coverage on this in MSM.
New York, SANA – The UN demanded that Israel comply with the international legitimacy’s resolutions on the occupied Syrian Golan, particularly the Security Council resolution no. 497 of 1981 that declared Israel’s decision to impose its laws and jurisdiction on the Golan as “null and void and without international legal effect”.
An overwhelming majority of the delegations of state members voted in favor of the resolution, in whose preparation 35 states took part, which shows the great international support given to the issue of fully restoring Golan to the line of June 4th, 1967.
The resolution provided that Israel immediately cancel its decision on annexing the occupied Syrian Golan and declared all the legislative and administrative measures and procedures that Israel has taken or will take to the effect of changing the features and the legal status of the Golan are “null and void”.
The resolution demanded that Israel desist from imposing the Israeli citizenship and Israeli identity cards on the Syrian citizens in the Golan and stop its repressive measures against its population, calling on all UN member states to not recognize any of the Israeli measures and procedures in the Golan that are in violation of the international law.
Posted by: shadyl | Nov 18, 2015 12:06:50 PM | 90
After Putin shamed Obama into bombing only a 100 some ISIS oil tankers the Russians had enough of such sham pinpricks.
They attacked the oil tankers themselves and claim that 500 were hit.
Sounds too high? Well - see the video
Posted by: b | Nov 18, 2015 12:10:32 PM | 91
Mina. There were 3 self-blow up suicide-attacks at (1, very near) the Stade de France. According to the media story, for now, 2 (the same or different) suicide bombers were refused entry to the SdF because they didn’t have tickets to the match. Makes absolutely no sense, but it seems to be now an attested ‘thing’.. This is all muddled up with a story about a guard…
One of them tried to enter (reportedly) the entrance reserved for the players, trainers, and other hoi polloi and was turned away. (?) One of the turned-away ones went towards the Metro station, expecting, it is stated, there be a massive crowd movement, lots of people around, panicked, trying to get away, where blowing oneself up would create more panic and deaths, injuries. The narrative is that realising their plot was dead in the water (or on the field), they blew themselves up anyway.
In fact, the audience was prevented from leaving the stadium (except Hollande, Cazeneuve, Steinmeier?, others?) I posted links about that previous.
Hollande (+ ??) left, was ‘exfiltrated’ in the jargon, at half-time, while requesting (see wiki, which is cobbled together from various reports, etc.) some of those w. him to stay till the end of the match, to avoid panic. The match thus proceeded, and only after it was over was the public informed.
The SdF ‘attack’ is the only one I am slowly looking into. It is certainly bizarre, suspicious. Wiki states ‘nobody knew, nobody was informed’, but the links I posted previous show that both the head, at the SdF, and one influential, high top MSM, twittering journo at least, knew the ‘explosions’ were serious, and that other attacks were going on at the same time.. (and btw tens of thousands of spectators who have cell phones??)
wiki in F https://tinyurl.com/ofn52os
Shows imho that Hollande did not know what was going on. His behavior is exactly what one would expect in case of ‘worrisome explosions but for all safety, etc.’ Though a helicopter circling above?
And what to make of this, Paul Craig Roberts
some more about, unclear, NYT pulled article
more fanciful maybe
Posted by: Noirette | Nov 18, 2015 12:13:26 PM | 92
actually, b, that video doesn't show that much damage...
but, anyway, better late than never...
Posted by: john | Nov 18, 2015 12:34:49 PM | 93
Why are Russian bombers so much more pretty than American bombers?
Russian mindset: form + function are =s.
US mindset: form ever follows function (and money) = F-35 trash.
BTW, thanks for that link to "From Russia with Love." It is raining hell on the takfiris. Wonder what altitude those bombers are when dropping bombs, what kind of bombs they drop, and how long a bombing run Russia-Syria-Russia takes them.
Posted by: Lone Wolf | Nov 18, 2015 12:46:11 PM | 94
No, sadly I am not good with the language, though I stumble along with my old Russian dictionary translating bits of Dostoievski that I think translators have not quite rendered into English. So, I'm really relying on the captions, but this particular movie is a great one for that because the dialogue is quite spare. This is a movie you will puzzle over, and the point of the 'french connection' for me is that it concentrates on what happened during and after the reign of Catherine rather than Peter - I'll have to go back but I have a feeling things improve after she leaves the scene, tromping out into the snow with her servant (Voltaire?) who thoughtfully puts his cap on her head as they depart.
Germany? Well, I can think of Goethe, who was admired by Dostoievski, and rightly so - Schiller also maybe - Ode to Joy, Beethoven. . .
The French Vergil character was of the same opinion as you to begin with - pretentious, unimaginative - he changes his tune maybe for the last third of the movie and the fun is in figuring out why he does so.
But back on the theme of using terror to create a state (and there is none of that in this movie - it is an ark after all) this is from rt.com by Bryan MacDonald:
". . .While large-scale Islamic terror shocks are relatively new to Europe, Russia has been on the frontline for years. Back in 2013, 34 people died in two separate suicide attacks in Volgograd. That followed a 2011 assault on Moscow’s Domodedovo Airport in which 37 were slaughtered. Sadly, these were minor calamities compared to 2002’s Moscow Theatre hostage crisis (over 130 innocent civilians were killed) and Beslan, two years later, where over 300 civilians, including 186 children lost their lives. Thus, terrorism is not an abstract concept for Russians, even if their suffering is under-reported in the West. . ."
I will watch the movie you mention. If I saturate myself with Russian movies I am sure it will help me learn the language. ;)
Posted by: juliania | Nov 18, 2015 1:36:00 PM | 95
actually, b, that video doesn't show that much damage...
One would expect either a bombing run in a straight line raining bombs on the oil tankers (they are all lined-up asking to be bombed), or a fireball chain-reaction given they all carry, or have carried, flammable products.
Posted by: Lone Wolf | Nov 18, 2015 1:38:35 PM | 96
I will even say that whilst both Milton and Dante didn't quite (in my very humble opinion) reach the heights in their "Paradise Regained" and "El Paradisio" (and I make a reservation on the latter that I can't read it in Italian lest my tutor rise from the grave and berate me), I do think this movie comes very, very close to getting there.
Posted by: juliania | Nov 18, 2015 1:40:52 PM | 97
OK, I'll definitely watch it, then.
The movie I mentioned about the small 2008 war is nothing special, but worth watching, I think, just to see how things look from the Russian side. White Tiger, another war film, is a must-see, I would say, if for nothing else than the soliloquy at the end, but I don't know how easy it is to get.
Posted by: Demian | Nov 18, 2015 2:20:02 PM | 99