Russian warships set sail to Mediterranean amid possible Syria evacuation

Dec 18, 2012 Full story: Russia Taday 3,579

Russia's three warships do not plan to stop at Syria port of Tartus, but may do so if they need to resupply, Russia's Ministry of Defense said.

Full Story
Jay

Sherwood Park, Canada

#1078 Jan 30, 2013
ocxz wrote:
<quoted text>
As a french taxpayer, i am so relieved to learn that our navy warships ACTUALLY travel armed.
I was upon the impression that these ships were disguised cruise ships featuring jacuzzis where raunchy french sailors were having a ball with female crew members while i was sweating my arse out paying 50 % overall tax.
Thank god for foreign "intelligence".
France and Britain restructured their naval assets, they utilize one aircraft carrier for operations. The aircraft carrier is half British staffed and half French including assets. Cost savings. You'll be surprised to know to the French soldiers in Mali have real bullets and the planes and helicopters supporting them have real missiles too. Lol.
George

Red Deer, Canada

#1079 Jan 30, 2013
Neville Thompson wrote:
<quoted text>
The problem for me to understand that is the Russians would have to comply with voting rules in the UN of having no connection with the parties involved in the Syrian conflict in bringing down their vote that they can't be seen to be bias otherwise they could lose their seat in the UN.
Exactly and they were never allow that loss of power.

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#1080 Jan 30, 2013
Neville Thompson wrote:
<quoted text>
Dimwit you are a dickhead seeing you can only spam in one sentence hehehehe
.

Idiotneville talking bollocks as usual, what a dumb jackass. Hehehehe.
George

Red Deer, Canada

#1081 Jan 30, 2013
Dimitri100 wrote:
<quoted text>.
Idiotneville talking bollocks as usual, what a dumb jackass. Hehehehe.
I can see how Neville came to the conclusion as to who you are.

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#1082 Jan 30, 2013
George wrote:
<quoted text>
I can see how Neville came to the conclusion as to who you are.
.

Jackassgeorge/jay/neville all the same jackass talking bollocks.

Jackass talking bollocks...has an apt ring to it. Hehehehe.
George

Red Deer, Canada

#1083 Jan 30, 2013
Neville Thompson wrote:
<quoted text>
Dimwit you are a dickhead seeing you can only spam in one sentence hehehehe
You are right he makes no sense at all, just babble.
Syrian

New London, CT

#1084 Jan 30, 2013
Neville Thompson wrote:
<quoted text>
The problem for me to understand that is the Russians would have to comply with voting rules in the UN of having no connection with the parties involved in the Syrian conflict in bringing down their vote that they can't be seen to be bias otherwise they could lose their seat in the UN.
They can't lose their "seat" in the UN by voting against a resolution.
Syrian

New London, CT

#1085 Jan 30, 2013
Neville Thompson wrote:
<quoted text>
You are very correct,if this bloody conflict doesn't get finished soon then we will have an emotional mind game of warfare between Russian and the US Naval force Commanders in close proximity to each other with their toys of mass eradication .
The West has absolutely no interest in any "real" war with Russia or China. They wage war now by attempting "regime changes" via instigating, fueling and supporting rebellions.
George

Red Deer, Canada

#1086 Jan 30, 2013
Syrian wrote:
<quoted text> They can't lose their "seat" in the UN by voting against a resolution.
I think Neville is saying that if Russia takes up arms with Syria nd joining in the fight with boots on the groun they stand a chance of loosing the seat by going agains the majority vote
George

Red Deer, Canada

#1087 Jan 30, 2013
Syrian wrote:
<quoted text> The West has absolutely no interest in any "real" war with Russia or China. They wage war now by attempting "regime changes" via instigating, fueling and supporting rebellions.
Sorry I just read his post again, and he is saying that Russia cannot show bias by siding with Assad in the conflict. They can express an opinion about not removing Assad as part of a deal and vote against a resolution that states that but they cannot show bias that has affected their vote
Syrian

New London, CT

#1088 Jan 30, 2013
George wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry I just read his post again, and he is saying that Russia cannot show bias by siding with Assad in the conflict. They can express an opinion about not removing Assad as part of a deal and vote against a resolution that states that but they cannot show bias that has affected their vote
The US, the UK, France, Russia, and China have the right to their opinions and positions on any world conflict or issue. The entire purpose of the UN is to have the differences of nations addressed in a diplomatic forum, instead of settling their differences through conflict and bloodshed.

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#1089 Jan 30, 2013
JackassGeorge talking bollocks, any country with a veto CANNOT lose it's seat regardless.

I did not name you JackassGeorge for nothing,
you are a dumbass. Hehehehe.
George

Red Deer, Canada

#1090 Jan 30, 2013
Dimitri100 wrote:
JackassGeorge talking bollocks, any country with a veto CANNOT lose it's seat regardless.
I did not name you JackassGeorge for nothing,
you are a dumbass. Hehehehe.
Go back inthe corner and play with your balls.
George

Red Deer, Canada

#1091 Jan 30, 2013
Syrian wrote:
<quoted text> The US, the UK, France, Russia, and China have the right to their opinions and positions on any world conflict or issue. The entire purpose of the UN is to have the differences of nations addressed in a diplomatic forum, instead of settling their differences through conflict and bloodshed.
.

I think it comes down to the guranteed vote cannot be used to stop other countries involvement in the war and that country can participate. In other words if Russia stopped the security counsel from sending troops into Syria then Russia joined Assad, that would be illegal, would it take Russias vote away, I do not know.
Jay

Sherwood Park, Canada

#1092 Jan 30, 2013
Syrian wrote:
<quoted text> The US, the UK, France, Russia, and China have the right to their opinions and positions on any world conflict or issue. The entire purpose of the UN is to have the differences of nations addressed in a diplomatic forum, instead of settling their differences through conflict and bloodshed.
Then why doesnt the entire security council change seats out for other member states, we get 2 spots that float but the arms sales countries get to control permanent seats? AS Russia and China have openly admitted selling arms to Syria recently an end to the conflict would cost them money.

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#1093 Jan 30, 2013
George wrote:
<quoted text>.
I think it comes down to the guranteed vote cannot be used to stop other countries involvement in the war and that country can participate. In other words if Russia stopped the security counsel from sending troops into Syria then Russia joined Assad, that would be illegal, would it take Russias vote away, I do not know.
.

JackassGeorge talking bollocks again.

If Russia vetos a resolution to send troops into Syria,

It will be illegal for any country or countries to send troops into Syria.

Example...Iraq war was an illegal war and if the ICC was a fit and proper Institution, T Blair and G W Bush would have been convicted and would be in jail by now.

I suggest to Jackassgeorge, post what you know...not what you think.
Jay

Sherwood Park, Canada

#1094 Jan 30, 2013
Dimitri100 wrote:
<quoted text>.
JackassGeorge talking bollocks again.
If Russia vetos a resolution to send troops into Syria,
It will be illegal for any country or countries to send troops into Syria.
Example...Iraq war was an illegal war and if the ICC was a fit and proper Institution, T Blair and G W Bush would have been convicted and would be in jail by now.
I suggest to Jackassgeorge, post what you know...not what you think.
Your surprising right on Iraq! I'm shocked Dimitri what's gotten in to you? What have you done with the other Dimwit who doesn't know anything?
Canada did not participate in Iraq with any land forces or violate Iraqi airspace because it was not sanctioned by the UN.( Ps. Sunshine exchange officers don't count )
Bush telephoned our Prime Minister and he publicly stated we would gladly send forces if the UN sanctioned the action. The UN did not so techniquely it was an offensive action that was illegal. Regardless there's no one on earth that would dare arrest the US president, if he was way wrong the congress would impeach him..

Since: Apr 11

Location hidden

#1095 Jan 30, 2013
Jay wrote:
<quoted text>
Your surprising right on Iraq! I'm shocked Dimitri what's gotten in to you? What have you done with the other Dimwit who doesn't know anything?
Canada did not participate in Iraq with any land forces or violate Iraqi airspace because it was not sanctioned by the UN.( Ps. Sunshine exchange officers don't count )
Bush telephoned our Prime Minister and he publicly stated we would gladly send forces if the UN sanctioned the action. The UN did not so techniquely it was an offensive action that was illegal. Regardless there's no one on earth that would dare arrest the US president, if he was way wrong the congress would impeach him..
.

As I said, the ICC is not a fit and proper Institution.

You're still talking bollocks jackassjay.

“Free Speech in a Free World ”

Since: May 10

Australia

#1096 Jan 30, 2013
George wrote:
<quoted text>
I think Neville is saying that if Russia takes up arms with Syria nd joining in the fight with boots on the groun they stand a chance of loosing the seat by going agains the majority vote
Their vote would be seen as a conflict of interest

“Free Speech in a Free World ”

Since: May 10

Australia

#1097 Jan 30, 2013
Dimitri100 wrote:
JackassGeorge talking bollocks, any country with a veto CANNOT lose it's seat regardless.
I did not name you JackassGeorge for nothing,
you are a dumbass. Hehehehe.
We didn't name you "dimwit" for nothing .

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Middle East Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Blaming Israel for carnage (Jul '06) 44 min cheer the f up 119,695
Europe should first find a solution for Islamop... 1 hr Kannibaal M 7
Author Asks Why WWI Genocide Still Splits Turks... 1 hr Dander 3
UK Jews feel anti-Semitic backlash 2 hr mataleo 1,726
Turkish PM resolved to punish 'plots against na... 2 hr Kannibaal M 24
Islamic State's tyranny strikes all religions 3 hr Shamma 10
Messianic Jews say they are persecuted in Israel (Jun '08) 3 hr JOEL 71,272
More from around the web