• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

U.S. rebukes first Russian airstrike in Syria

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Yeah someone tell me about this 'slap.' All I see is Putin being Putin, still unable to look at someone taller in the eye.

Is it like that IRS explosion where you need special lens' to see it?
 
I love it when conservatives virtually fellate Putin.

You guys sure do love strong men leaders.

#Trump 2016!
 
Let the Russians spend money and time. We need to step away from permawar.

I say Side with Assad, I would rather have a dictator than not. At least with Hussein we had things in check.
 
Came here expecting to see an OP who was in love with Putin on a horse. Was not disappointed.

The so called "lovers of freedom" can't seem to keep raving about how great a leader Putin is. Their definition of "freedom" apparently looks a lot like a defacto authoritarian dictatorship.
 
Came here expecting to see an OP who was in love with Putin on a horse. Was not disappointed.

The so called "lovers of freedom" can't seem to keep raving about how great a leader Putin is. Their definition of "freedom" apparently looks a lot like a defacto authoritarian dictatorship.

And you would replace every dictator with genocidal terrorism.
Did the Iraqis greet you with flowers, hugs, and kisses?

Anarchy needs order, and that comes through military conquest aka dictators.
 
Let the Russians spend money and time. We need to step away from permawar.

I say Side with Assad, I would rather have a dictator than not. At least with Hussein we had things in check.
Until he attacked Iran, and then Kuwait.

In fact, if people really want to point fingers of blame about the most recent generations of terrorists in the ME at anyone, they could point it at Saddam. But the self-flagellating types in here are too oblivious to comprehend that statement since they are too mired in the righty v. lefty argument to pull their collective heads out of their asses.
 
We want to weaken ISIS, let the Russians do it for us, at least in Syria. It's not as if our own airstrikes weren't indirectly helping prop up the Assad regime anyway. We have, after all, been killing Assad's enemies. I fail to see the difference with the Russians doing it except it's their money rather than ours.
 
Only failures who play policeman inspire ISIS "wannabes". A brutal military machine that actually does killings, they inspire fear and servitude. Just ask Mosul. If Russia is stupid they will do it "our" way and fail as you expect. If Russia is smart, they'll do it Assad's way.

Time will tell.

This i what I was thinking. Russia is aware of ISIS fighters from the caucasus regions. Putin has made it clear he does not want them returning from Syria.
 
Air power can't defeat ISIS, and the Russian people don't give a shit about Syria and don't want their kids dying in another Afghanistan, so a ground force would be a huge risk for Putin. Also, Russia's involvement may result in more terrorism within Russia from ISIS sympathizers among the local Muslim population. Maybe Putin is counting on that to create a sense of fear and give him an excuse to marginalize and suppress political opposition. The whole big bad Ukrainians, and big bad Americans thing is starting to wear thin, he needs new material.
 
Playah wants to play.

Go for it I say. I guess Afghanistan is as far back in the Russian people's minds that Putin thinks it now safe to get belligerent in the Mideast again.

Nothing like learning a lesson over again.....the hard way.
 
The Right has such love and admiration for other world leaders; who are known for murder, oppression and tyranny - which explains it.

Also, here is a citizenship form to become part of the country who's leader you love so much;
MigrationCard[1].jpg
 
Correction its 4 or 5 US trained guys.
I'm not kidding a defense department guy said it was 4 or 5 US trained fighters in Syria last week.

Yeah, because the others took our training + weapons and went to AQ. The only saving grace on this disaster of a policy is it doesn't cost 2 trillion dollars.
 
Yeah, because the others took our training + weapons and went to AQ. The only saving grace on this disaster of a policy is it doesn't cost 2 trillion dollars.

It costs 560 million (I believe). However that's its budget I'd guess judging by its performance they're under budget.
The others were weeded out maybe our background checks are too strict or maybe we simply can't find enough to be trusted but obviously something is wrong when you search for trainees in a war zone, manage to locate around 60 candidates, then train & deploy 4 or 5. All this in about one year.
Again my position on Syria has not changed. We do not get involved unless someone else has a rational plan and takes the lead.
 
Last edited:
The Right has such love and admiration for other world leaders; who are known for murder, oppression and tyranny - which explains it.

Wow... the left sure likes to take the ball and run with it... no matter how idiotic the concept. Don't be one of the idiots confusing love and admiration with amazement at how Putin is able to out maneuver the obama administration at every turn. The obama checkers/putin chess analogy is so fitting.

Putin is in Syria helping the Assad regime (which is different from fighting ISIS) because he knows obama will just go on camera, say something stern, then head to the golf course.

Eventually Russia will bomb ISIS... and they will probably blow up convoys and training camps and do some actual damage.
 
And you would replace every dictator with genocidal terrorism.
Did the Iraqis greet you with flowers, hugs, and kisses?

Anarchy needs order, and that comes through military conquest aka dictators.

As long as the trains run on time eh? Syria is a mess, but I wasn't referring to Putin being the defacto dictator of Syria.

It seems the original purpose of this thread was to admire Putin's abs on a horse.

If someone wants to have an honest discussion about policy in Syria that should probably be a new thread.
 
Last edited:
Wow... the left sure likes to take the ball and run with it... no matter how idiotic the concept. Don't be one of the idiots confusing love and admiration with amazement at how Putin is able to out maneuver the obama administration at every turn. The obama checkers/putin chess analogy is so fitting.

Putin is in Syria helping the Assad regime (which is different from fighting ISIS) because he knows obama will just go on camera, say something stern, then head to the golf course.

Eventually Russia will bomb ISIS... and they will probably blow up convoys and training camps and do some actual damage.

The Hawks most of whom are conservatives do admire Putin's ability to use force. They don't admire Putin, with this caveat I agree with you. Way too much partisan BS everywhere.
I'll give Linsey Graham credit. He doesn't hide or sugarcoat his positions. He want tens of thousands US troops in Iraq, Afghanistan and Syria for decades. He doesn't act like it will be simple. While I don't want to make that commitment and I think he is wrong about what results we'd achieve I salute his honesty.
 
Last edited:
It costs 560 million (I believe). However that's its budget I'd guess judging by its performance they're under budget.
The others were weeded out maybe our background checks are too strict or maybe we simply can't find enough to be trusted but obviously something is wrong when you search for trainees in a war zone, manage to locate around 60 candidates, then train & deploy 4 or 5. All this in about one year.
Again my position on Syria has not changed. We do not get involved unless someone else has a rational plan and takes the lead.

Absolutely a joke I agree. It is another case of govt mismanagement. I was using the 2 trillion reference to the Iraq war.
 
I don't imagine we can get away with selling Stinger missiles to the rebels, so it probably won't be another Afghanistan.

Ha, I was thinking something similar. Russia is helping Assad, so we should give stinger missiles to ISIS just to make things interesting.
:awe:

Does it ever seem like these proxy wars are just tech demos? Sort of like video games that but only exist to show what a game engine can do? Russia bombs ISIS to show how powerful Russia is, and then we give MANPADS to ISIS to show how much Russia sucks? Meanwhile, neither side actually cares about the conflict?

btw, I would like to inform everyone that the domain manpads.com is available. If you want to make a parody website about men wearing maxi pads, here's your chance.
 
Russians are cleaning Al-Nusra which is an arm of Al-Qaeda, they are cleaning all rdical Sunni fractions. Power to Russians !!

Everyone were cursing at the beheadings and other stuff these guys (Radicals) were doing just weeks ago, you and we could not do anything, Russians are doing it, what is this nonsense about supplying Al-Nusra and others stinger missiles ? Are you out of your minds or are you hypocrites ?
 
Last edited:
It is amazing how the US is so openly on the wrong side of this. It seems like the propaganda machine has given up.
 
Russians are cleaning Al-Nusra which is an arm of Al-Qaeda, they are cleaning all rdical Sunni fractions. Power to Russians !!

Everyone were cursing at the beheadings and other stuff these guys (Radicals) were doing just weeks ago, you and we could not do anything, Russians are doing it, what is this nonsense about supplying Al-Nusra and others stinger missiles ? Are you out of your minds or are you hypocrites ?

Out of their minds. yes lets supply ISIS on purpose with systems that can shoot down planes to spite Putin. What could go wrong?
 
PUTIN DRAFTS 150,000
IRAN TROOPS READY
"Assad allies, including Iranians, prepare ground attack in Syria"

You naysayers were saying airstrikes don't work?
Who said it was limited to airstrikes?

Military victory over ISIS is actually quite easy. You just have to be willing to kill people. That's what the military is designed for - we just refuse to use it. Instead we pretended our soldiers were policemen whose specialty was solving crimes on the street while be sniped down on their daily patrols.

I have long argued that our leaders were retarded by changing the mission from victory in Iraq to bleeding in Iraq. I suspect Russia, Iran, Iraq, and Syria have no such qualms over doing what is necessary. Especially if they don't care about our feelings on the matter.

Time will tell if there really does exist a practical approach, but I believe there is.
 
Back
Top