RugbyRebels

Stones of granite wrote:Russian and/or Syrian airforces now targetting hospitals. MSF report that in the most recent attack, their hospital in Ma’arat Al Numan was hit in two seperate attacks, a fairly clear indication that it was a deliberate objective. That's the third hospital this week.

http://www.msf.org/article/syria-least- ... tack-idlib

Stones of granite wrote:Russian and/or Syrian airforces now targetting hospitals. MSF report that in the most recent attack, their hospital in Ma’arat Al Numan was hit in two seperate attacks, a fairly clear indication that it was a deliberate objective. That's the third hospital this week.

http://www.msf.org/article/syria-least- ... tack-idlib

Sandydragon wrote:

Zhivago wrote:

Stones of granite wrote:

Completely contradicts Sandy

Look at the date. The weeks previous have been no where near that balanced in their attacks. Maybe this is a shift, but given the Syrian governments ground offensives against other Rebel groups in the West of the country, ISIS isn't a priority for Russia at the moment.

Zhivago wrote:

Stones of granite wrote:Russian and/or Syrian airforces now targetting hospitals. MSF report that in the most recent attack, their hospital in Ma’arat Al Numan was hit in two seperate attacks, a fairly clear indication that it was a deliberate objective. That's the third hospital this week.

http://www.msf.org/article/syria-least- ... tack-idlib

Turkish artillery also hit a children's hospital. One one gives a shit it seems.

Stones of granite wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:

Zhivago wrote:
Completely contradicts Sandy

Look at the date. The weeks previous have been no where near that balanced in their attacks. Maybe this is a shift, but given the Syrian governments ground offensives against other Rebel groups in the West of the country, ISIS isn't a priority for Russia at the moment.

If you look back through previous reports, you will see that Russia has consistently targetted the area around Deir-es-Zour. Of course, the reason for that is that this is a Syrian Government controlled pocket controlling a majorly strategic crossroads. You are correct in as much as other ISIS controlled areas have received very little attention from the Russian Airforce.

An example from early January

Stones of granite wrote:

Zhivago wrote:

Stones of granite wrote:Russian and/or Syrian airforces now targetting hospitals. MSF report that in the most recent attack, their hospital in Ma’arat Al Numan was hit in two seperate attacks, a fairly clear indication that it was a deliberate objective. That's the third hospital this week.

http://www.msf.org/article/syria-least- ... tack-idlib

Turkish artillery also hit a children's hospital. One one gives a shit it seems.

I see, so your position is that Turkish artillery hitting a children's hospital (which is also a war crime) means free fire for the Russian Airforce on all hospitals.

Nice to know.

Sandydragon wrote:

Stones of granite wrote:

Zhivago wrote:
Turkish artillery also hit a children's hospital. One one gives a shit it seems.

I see, so your position is that Turkish artillery hitting a children's hospital (which is also a war crime) means free fire for the Russian Airforce on all hospitals.

Nice to know.

Theres an interesting article on Bellingcat regarding the use of Russian air force cluster bombs in a civilian area. Anyone who thinks that the rules of warfare have been followed in this conflict has been asleep for the past few years.

Sandydragon wrote:
The simple explanation for the Russian targeting is that they are trying to keep Assad in power. The rebels nearer the Western coast of Syria pose a much clearer danger to the regimes stability than ISIS operating further to the East (not withstanding strategic crossing points as you rightly point out). Syria government troops and their allies are stronger in the west, thus for them to make a difference, the majority of Russian air attacks will be in direct support of those ground offensives.

Stones of granite wrote:

Zhivago wrote:

Stones of granite wrote:Russian and/or Syrian airforces now targetting hospitals. MSF report that in the most recent attack, their hospital in Ma’arat Al Numan was hit in two seperate attacks, a fairly clear indication that it was a deliberate objective. That's the third hospital this week.

http://www.msf.org/article/syria-least- ... tack-idlib

Turkish artillery also hit a children's hospital. No one gives a shit it seems.

I see, so your position is that Turkish artillery hitting a children's hospital (which is also a war crime) means free fire for the Russian Airforce on all hospitals.

Nice to know.

Sandydragon wrote:

Zhivago wrote:

Stones of granite wrote:

Completely contradicts Sandy

Look at the date. The weeks previous have been no where near that balanced in their attacks. Maybe this is a shift, but given the Syrian governments ground offensives against other Rebel groups in the West of the country, ISIS isn't a priority for Russia at the moment.

Zhivago wrote:

Stones of granite wrote:

Zhivago wrote:
Turkish artillery also hit a children's hospital. No one gives a shit it seems.

I see, so your position is that Turkish artillery hitting a children's hospital (which is also a war crime) means free fire for the Russian Airforce on all hospitals.

Nice to know.

No, I'm pointing out that the first casualty in war is the truth. Obviously I don't think such targets are legitimate nor indeed will I ever apologise for war. I think it's the wholly unnecessary suffering of normal people when world elites (for want of a better term) vie for wealth resources.

Zhivago wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:

Zhivago wrote:
Completely contradicts Sandy

Look at the date. The weeks previous have been no where near that balanced in their attacks. Maybe this is a shift, but given the Syrian governments ground offensives against other Rebel groups in the West of the country, ISIS isn't a priority for Russia at the moment.

War on two fronts, would you not prioritise? My point is that Russia is not focusing on ISIS as much as the others because it makes more sense from a strategic perspective to achieve victory on the one front first. Russia is acting primarily for Assad, this I don't deny. But ISIS is not ignored as such.

Stones of granite wrote:

Zhivago wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:
Look at the date. The weeks previous have been no where near that balanced in their attacks. Maybe this is a shift, but given the Syrian governments ground offensives against other Rebel groups in the West of the country, ISIS isn't a priority for Russia at the moment.

War on two fronts, would you not prioritise? My point is that Russia is not focusing on ISIS as much as the others because it makes more sense from a strategic perspective to achieve victory on the one front first. Russia is acting primarily for Assad, this I don't deny. But ISIS is not ignored as such.

I don't have a problem with them prioritising. My issue is with them lying about it. They have also denied using cluster munitions and targeting hospitals (laughably claiming that they allowed US aircraft to make attacks 65Km from Russian headquarters) when the facts tell a different story.

Sandydragon wrote:Anyone who thinks that the rules of warfare have been followed in this conflict has been asleep for the past few years.

Sandydragon wrote:

Stones of granite wrote:

Zhivago wrote:
War on two fronts, would you not prioritise? My point is that Russia is not focusing on ISIS as much as the others because it makes more sense from a strategic perspective to achieve victory on the one front first. Russia is acting primarily for Assad, this I don't deny. But ISIS is not ignored as such.

I don't have a problem with them prioritising. My issue is with them lying about it. They have also denied using cluster munitions and targeting hospitals (laughably claiming that they allowed US aircraft to make attacks 65Km from Russian headquarters) when the facts tell a different story.

Agreed. The lumping together of all anti-Assad opposition into the same terrorist pot is u helpful. There were legislate grips about Assad before the Arab Spring,it's not a huge surprise that there is an armed rebellion when the population are being gunned down in large numbers.

Zhivago wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:

Stones of granite wrote: I don't have a problem with them prioritising. My issue is with them lying about it. They have also denied using cluster munitions and targeting hospitals (laughably claiming that they allowed US aircraft to make attacks 65Km from Russian headquarters) when the facts tell a different story.

Agreed. The lumping together of all anti-Assad opposition into the same terrorist pot is u helpful. There were legislate grips about Assad before the Arab Spring,it's not a huge surprise that there is an armed rebellion when the population are being gunned down in large numbers.

Especially unhelpful when they are referred to as 'moderate' rebels. Moderate compared to what? A religio-fascist death cult??

cashead wrote:

Zhivago wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:
Agreed. The lumping together of all anti-Assad opposition into the same terrorist pot is u helpful. There were legislate grips about Assad before the Arab Spring,it's not a huge surprise that there is an armed rebellion when the population are being gunned down in large numbers.

Especially unhelpful when they are referred to as 'moderate' rebels. Moderate compared to what? A religio-fascist death cult??

That would be technically correct though.

Zhivago wrote:

cashead wrote:

Zhivago wrote:
Especially unhelpful when they are referred to as 'moderate' rebels. Moderate compared to what? A religio-fascist death cult??

That would be technically correct though.

It's a value loaded word in the sense that it has a positive connotation. That's what makes it propaganda in this instance, as it does not reflect fairly the value of what it describes. The word distorts the reader's estimation of the value of the thing (the rebels in this case). If the reader bothers to dig into the detail about the rebels, they would not describe them as moderate.

Zhivago wrote:

Sandydragon wrote:

Stones of granite wrote: I don't have a problem with them prioritising. My issue is with them lying about it. They have also denied using cluster munitions and targeting hospitals (laughably claiming that they allowed US aircraft to make attacks 65Km from Russian headquarters) when the facts tell a different story.

Agreed. The lumping together of all anti-Assad opposition into the same terrorist pot is u helpful. There were legislate grips about Assad before the Arab Spring,it's not a huge surprise that there is an armed rebellion when the population are being gunned down in large numbers.

Especially unhelpful when they are referred to as 'moderate' rebels. Moderate compared to what? A religio-fascist death cult??

Zhivago wrote:

cashead wrote:

Zhivago wrote:
Especially unhelpful when they are referred to as 'moderate' rebels. Moderate compared to what? A religio-fascist death cult??

That would be technically correct though.

It's a value loaded word in the sense that it has a positive connotation. That's what makes it propaganda in this instance, as it does not reflect fairly the value of what it describes. The word distorts the reader's estimation of the value of the thing (the rebels in this case). If the reader bothers to dig into the detail about the rebels, they would not describe them as moderate.

Sandydragon wrote: No, you learn that there is a very wide variety of beliefs in those described as Terrorists. As I pointed out below, and as you quoted yourself, the alliances made in Syria are as much about desperation as shared ideology.

Sandydragon wrote:

Zhivago wrote:

cashead wrote: That would be technically correct though.

It's a value loaded word in the sense that it has a positive connotation. That's what makes it propaganda in this instance, as it does not reflect fairly the value of what it describes. The word distorts the reader's estimation of the value of the thing (the rebels in this case). If the reader bothers to dig into the detail about the rebels, they would not describe them as moderate.

No, you learn that there is a very wide variety of beliefs in those described as Terrorists. As I pointed out below, and as you quoted yourself, the alliances made in Syria are as much about desperation as shared ideology.

Galfon wrote:500 'insurgents' go to Azaz ftom Turkey..this place is a link between Turkey and Aleppo.
Kurds would like to join Afrin & Kobane through this area, Turkey would be mortified.
No guessing where Russia sits with this..and Ankara is already blaming Kurdish terrorist 'pawns' ( of Russia ) for the latest deadly bomb.
Will T. risk ground forces alone, or with Saudi's ..
Massive stakes for Turkey,Russia & NATO, even Iran...who's got the twitchy finger ?