If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Daily Mail)   Russia sends anti-ship missiles to Syria. The rebels have ships now? Ooooh, it's for the American and NATO navies that will probably intervene at some point. Way to be a dick, Putin   (dailymail.co.uk) divider line 173
    More: Scary, anti-ship missile, Russia, Bashar, Aleppo, Syrian refugees, Erdogan, Foreign Secretary, peaceful protest  
•       •       •

7004 clicks; posted to Main » on 17 May 2013 at 10:13 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



173 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-05-17 08:55:34 AM
Who needs ships really when we have drones we can launch from Israel?
 
2013-05-17 09:07:25 AM
In fairness, Syria really is essentially a Russian issue. And have been for a long while. NATO isn't going into Syria without Russia's support. Plain and simple. Were Syria NOT under the Russian sphere of influence, things would have been put into place some time ago, but folks really don't want to admit that.
 
2013-05-17 09:12:50 AM

hubiestubert: In fairness, Syria really is essentially a Russian issue. And have been for a long while. NATO isn't going into Syria without Russia's support. Plain and simple. Were Syria NOT under the Russian sphere of influence, things would have been put into place some time ago, but folks really don't want to admit that.


And for some strange reason,  Subbyseems to think the Russians are on the side of the rebels?

I know, I know...welcometofark.jpeg.
 
2013-05-17 09:16:19 AM
Conservatives who blame Obama for doing nothing in Syria need this fact drilled into their heads: there are countries who we would go to war with Russia over. This is not one of those countries.
 
2013-05-17 09:49:04 AM
Russia supports a dictatorship? Shaddup.
 
2013-05-17 10:14:50 AM
gee it's not like Syria isn't bordered by Israel or Turkey or Iraq or anything...
 
2013-05-17 10:15:01 AM

PC LOAD LETTER: Conservatives who blame Obama for doing nothing in Syria need this fact drilled into their heads: there are countries who we would go to war with Russia over. This is not one of those countries.


The war pigs ($1 to Black Sabbath) however, don't care.  It's all 'BLOOD FOR THE BLOOD GOD!" as far as they're concerned.
 
2013-05-17 10:15:57 AM

ginandbacon: Subbyseems to think the Russians are on the side of the rebels?


Sure they are.

When they get enough aide to be a buyer I have doubt that Russia will get them the same arms catalog mailing list that Assad is on.
 
2013-05-17 10:16:42 AM

jylcat: Russia supports a dictatorship? Shaddup.


Let's not get into a game of what kitchenware we are calling black.
 
2013-05-17 10:16:45 AM

ginandbacon: Subbyseems to think the Russians are on the side of the rebels?



Russia sends anti-ship missiles to Syria. The rebels have ships now?
 
2013-05-17 10:18:19 AM
Putin acting like a major dick? What a surprise.
 
2013-05-17 10:21:35 AM

ginandbacon: And for some strange reason, Subbyseems to think the Russians are on the side of the rebels?


you didn't read the headline, did you?
 
2013-05-17 10:21:48 AM
bloodstainedink.files.wordpress.com

Crap this IS what a UN weapons ban WAS supposed to prevent!

This is not the international rule of law you were looking for...
couldthishappen.com
 
2013-05-17 10:22:28 AM
If we intervene, we deserve to get our shiat shot up.

We have zero national interest in intervening. No more wasted blood and treasure in that farking sandy shiathole.
 
2013-05-17 10:22:33 AM
So you're saying that these missile are useless for influencing Syria's civil war one way or the other but could chew up imperialists that try to intervene?

Imokwiththis.png
 
2013-05-17 10:24:17 AM

USCLaw2010: ginandbacon: Subbyseems to think the Russians are on the side of the rebels?


Russia sends anti-ship missiles to Syria. The rebels have ships now?


*note to self: read more better*

somedude210: ginandbacon: And for some strange reason, Subbyseems to think the Russians are on the side of the rebels?

you didn't read the headline, did you?


See above.
 
2013-05-17 10:25:09 AM
Are Soviet Putin's ships immune from these missiles? What if one of them got loose and hit a sister ship with lots of missiles on board?

Or those mines pressure-cookers that magically attached themselves to those ships in the narrow part of the Bosphorus or Cypress (not that Cypress has two warring NATO countries' interests).
 
2013-05-17 10:25:29 AM

ginandbacon: hubiestubert: In fairness, Syria really is essentially a Russian issue. And have been for a long while. NATO isn't going into Syria without Russia's support. Plain and simple. Were Syria NOT under the Russian sphere of influence, things would have been put into place some time ago, but folks really don't want to admit that.

And for some strange reason,  Subby

McCain & Lindwey Grahamseems to think the Russians are on the side of the rebels?

I know, I know...welcometofark.jpeg.


FTFY
 
2013-05-17 10:25:36 AM

Psylence: We have zero national interest in intervening


Well that's simply false. It absolutely is in the interest of the West to prevent Al-Nusra (Al-Qaeda affiliates) to get their hands on chemical weapons and spread them all over the Middle-East until they are eventually detonated in the West.

Then again, that would mean intervening to help Assad, so...
 
2013-05-17 10:27:17 AM

NostroZ: [bloodstainedink.files.wordpress.com image 500x400]

Crap this IS what a UN weapons ban WAS supposed to prevent!

This is not the international rule of law you were looking for...
[couldthishappen.com image 359x300]


This crap is exactly what a phoney baloney "Weapons Ban" is all about. Eliminate competition, not PROFITEERING from human misery and conflict inflicted on the rubes.

BTW, I bet those missiles don't work and Putin just bought a new boat.
 
2013-05-17 10:27:30 AM
Everyone is missing the important detail; Russian anti-ship missiles look awesome, like some kind of 1950's spaceship.
 
2013-05-17 10:27:32 AM
Um, we have had the Aegis anti missile system in place on our ships for 20 years. It can track and shoot down 1000 targets at the same time. Give me a call when the Syrians can master things like personal hygiene and self government without killing thousands of people, then they might be a threat to someone besides themselves with anti ship missiles.
 
2013-05-17 10:30:06 AM

jwilson07: Um, we have had the Aegis anti missile system in place on our ships for 20 years. It can track and shoot down 1000 targets at the same time. Give me a call when the Syrians can master things like personal hygiene and self government without killing thousands of people, then they might be a threat to someone besides themselves with anti ship missiles.


See, you had a post that was spot on for the most part, but you just had to throw some racist shiat in there. Shape the fark up, man, and drop the bigotry.
 
2013-05-17 10:30:48 AM

Ned Stark: So you're saying that these missile are useless for influencing Syria's civil war one way or the other but could chew up imperialists that try to intervene?

Imokwiththis.png


Imperialists tend to get chewed up a lot these days. Guerilla warfare is the only reasonable option if you're not a world power.
 
2013-05-17 10:31:52 AM

Tatsuma: jwilson07: Um, we have had the Aegis anti missile system in place on our ships for 20 years. It can track and shoot down 1000 targets at the same time. Give me a call when the Syrians can master things like personal hygiene and self government without killing thousands of people, then they might be a threat to someone besides themselves with anti ship missiles.

See, you had a post that was spot on for the most part, but you just had to throw some racist shiat in there. Shape the fark up, man, and drop the bigotry.



Wait a sec...it's now racist to be pro-bathing?  Wtf did this happen?
 
2013-05-17 10:35:44 AM

Tatsuma: Psylence: We have zero national interest in intervening

Well that's simply false. It absolutely is in the interest of the West to prevent Al-Nusra (Al-Qaeda affiliates) to get their hands on chemical weapons and spread them all over the Middle-East until they are eventually detonated in the West.

Then again, that would mean intervening to help Assad, so...


we want Assad dead but we don't want terrorist groups taking over either

but that's the problem - the longer this civil war goes on the deeper any opposition group gains traction - including people we don't want to deal with

maybe had we intervened in the first 3-4 months we could've gotten our cake and eaten it too, but the Russians blocked that from happening as well as preventing another Libya-esque quick escalation in rebel control (thus causing a drawn-out conflict)

with the Russians still wanting influence there, the best route out of a never-ending civil war is for Assad to step down and leave the country - appoint a more democratic-friendly successor who signs a peace treaty and during that that weapons stockpiles are accounted for, terrorists get dispatched, a year goes by and maybe people start returning home
 
2013-05-17 10:36:50 AM

snocone: NostroZ: [bloodstainedink.files.wordpress.com image 500x400]

Crap this IS what a UN weapons ban WAS supposed to prevent!

This is not the international rule of law you were looking for...
[couldthishappen.com image 359x300]

This crap is exactly what a phoney baloney "Weapons Ban" is all about. Eliminate competition, not PROFITEERING from human misery and conflict inflicted on the rubes.

BTW, I bet those missiles don't work and Putin just bought a new boat.


Yup, a weapons ban is worthless if Russia/China are not abstaining... since they are the MAIN competition for the 'other side' (it's not Communism anymore... what shall we call it?  Anti-Capitalist?)

The thing with Syria does feel like a proxy war between West / East in terms of both sides backing different factions.
 
2013-05-17 10:37:00 AM

LL316: Wait a sec...it's now racist to be pro-bathing? Wtf did this happen?


It's racist to say that Arabs are a dirty people who can't bathe, yes.
 
2013-05-17 10:37:18 AM
Wouldn't it be weird if the 'ignite booster' and 'detonate warhead' wires got switched somehow.
 
2013-05-17 10:37:25 AM

Tatsuma: jwilson07: Um, we have had the Aegis anti missile system in place on our ships for 20 years. It can track and shoot down 1000 targets at the same time. Give me a call when the Syrians can master things like personal hygiene and self government without killing thousands of people, then they might be a threat to someone besides themselves with anti ship missiles.

See, you had a post that was spot on for the most part, but you just had to throw some racist shiat in there. Shape the fark up, man, and drop the bigotry.


It's true. . .they do not use toilet paper.

Wipe with left, eat with right?
 
2013-05-17 10:39:05 AM

NostroZ: Yup, a weapons ban is worthless if Russia/China are not abstaining... since they are the MAIN competition for the 'other side' (it's not Communism anymore... what shall we call it? Anti-Capitalist?)


'Totalitarian Oligarchic capitalism masquerading as Democratic Socialism' works for me
 
2013-05-17 10:40:50 AM
Funny, I was just thinking that what America really needs is a proxy war with Russia and Iran.
 
2013-05-17 10:40:58 AM

LL316: Wait a sec...it's now racist to be pro-bathing? Wtf did this happen?



You can't say  'all ME people are non bathing hygene lacking brown people...'  that's too broad and you can't go there.

It's like trying to say any girl could not have a morning after pill.   You can't go there.   No one ever should be burdened with an unwanted baby.   Conversation ends.  Don't go there.

Now.   Syria, Russia and missiles.    That's where we left off....
 
2013-05-17 10:41:09 AM
Seriously Tats??

Trust me on this one. No sane person here in the USA is worried about OMG SARIN FROM SYRIA showing up in the USA. No one. If Israel is worried, roll on in and handle your business.
Remember OMG WMD back in Iraq? Fool me once...uhh... can't get fooled again?
 
2013-05-17 10:42:14 AM

NostroZ: [bloodstainedink.files.wordpress.com image 500x400]

Crap this IS what a UN weapons ban WAS supposed to prevent!

This is not the international rule of law you were looking for...
[couldthishappen.com image 359x300]


the rule of thumb of international law is that if you're a permanent member of the security council they're really more of guidelines than actual rules
 
2013-05-17 10:42:39 AM

Tatsuma: It absolutely is in the interest of the West to prevent Al-Nusra (Al-Qaeda affiliates) to get their hands on chemical weapons and spread them all over the Middle-East until they are eventually detonated in the West.


Just to be clear... you are not suggesting that the U.S. military needs to get involved in Syria, or else Al-Nusra is going to detonate a weapon of mass destruction in the United States of America, killing lots of U.S. citizens, right?

Because if you are suggesting that, please piss off.
 
2013-05-17 10:43:11 AM

Broktun: Tatsuma: jwilson07: Um, we have had the Aegis anti missile system in place on our ships for 20 years. It can track and shoot down 1000 targets at the same time. Give me a call when the Syrians can master things like personal hygiene and self government without killing thousands of people, then they might be a threat to someone besides themselves with anti ship missiles.

See, you had a post that was spot on for the most part, but you just had to throw some racist shiat in there. Shape the fark up, man, and drop the bigotry.

It's true. . .they do not use toilet paper.

Wipe with left, eat with right?


Ever actually been to the Middle East to witness said behavior? No? How about a nice warm cup of STFU then.

/In my travel experience, Middle Easterners LOVE bidets, specifically to be nice and clean
 
2013-05-17 10:45:30 AM

jwilson07: Um, we have had the Aegis anti missile system in place on our ships for 20 years. It can track and shoot down 1000 targets at the same time. Give me a call when the Syrians can master things like personal hygiene and self government without killing thousands of people, then they might be a threat to someone besides themselves with anti ship missiles.


What percentage of US ships carry the Aegis systems? how many are based in the Med fleet? Aegis is built to defend battle groups, not to stop rogue attacks on commercial shipping or the such. The chance of Syria attacking an Aegis guarded battle group is slim to none, the chance of them hitting Turkish, Israeli or commercial shipping is a bit higher
 
2013-05-17 10:45:37 AM

Broktun: Tatsuma: jwilson07: Um, we have had the Aegis anti missile system in place on our ships for 20 years. It can track and shoot down 1000 targets at the same time. Give me a call when the Syrians can master things like personal hygiene and self government without killing thousands of people, then they might be a threat to someone besides themselves with anti ship missiles.

See, you had a post that was spot on for the most part, but you just had to throw some racist shiat in there. Shape the fark up, man, and drop the bigotry.

It's true. . .they do not use toilet paper.

Wipe with left, eat with right?


They?  Wipe with hands?

I thought this was a joke or a minor practice... so I just looked it up... nope, and nope (toilet paper is an American innovative export to the world... thank g-d!)
 
2013-05-17 10:48:19 AM

Tatsuma: NostroZ: Yup, a weapons ban is worthless if Russia/China are not abstaining... since they are the MAIN competition for the 'other side' (it's not Communism anymore... what shall we call it? Anti-Capitalist?)

'Totalitarian Oligarchic capitalism masquerading as Democratic Socialism' works for me


How about... Warlord Fascism?

It's got to roll off the tongue.
 
2013-05-17 10:49:15 AM

Mr_Fabulous: Just to be clear... you are not suggesting that the U.S. military needs to get involved in Syria, or else Al-Nusra is going to detonate a weapon of mass destruction in the United States of America, killing lots of U.S. citizens, right?

Because if you are suggesting that, please piss off.


I listed one of the interests America had to intervene in Syria. This is one of them. That does not mean that I in fact favor intervention.

And yes chemical weapons in the hand of Al-Nusra means they will eventually be detonated in the West. That's their whole endgame.
 
2013-05-17 10:50:15 AM

NostroZ: snocone: NostroZ: [bloodstainedink.files.wordpress.com image 500x400]

Crap this IS what a UN weapons ban WAS supposed to prevent!

This is not the international rule of law you were looking for...
[couldthishappen.com image 359x300]

This crap is exactly what a phoney baloney "Weapons Ban" is all about. Eliminate competition, not PROFITEERING from human misery and conflict inflicted on the rubes.

BTW, I bet those missiles don't work and Putin just bought a new boat.

Yup, a weapons ban is worthless if Russia/China are not abstaining... since they are the MAIN competition for the 'other side' (it's not Communism anymore... what shall we call it?  Anti-Capitalist?)

The thing with Syria does feel like a proxy war between West / East in terms of both sides backing different factions.


it's a legacy proxy conflict from the cold war and our relationship with Israel, one which actually became friendly during Bush's second term but has since spiraled out of control with the Arab Spring uprisings

and i wouldn't really say China/Russia are anti-capitalist in any sense of the word, it's more anti-dollar if anything, you've got 3 countries whose economies are propped up by debt-intense value-driven gov't-backed commodities and big populations that can reinvest in said commodities, said commodities are international investments and as such creates an international competition over investment... with the dollar being the main currency of oil trade, that means everybody else wants it out of the region and that means us being out of the region (or something like that)
 
2013-05-17 10:50:15 AM

ginandbacon: *note to self: read more better*


We'll just assume that you started your day in a fashion consistent with your Fark handle. Lord knows I wouldn't mind similar.
 
2013-05-17 10:50:41 AM
NostroZ: "The thing with Syria does feel like a proxy war between West / East in terms of both sides backing different factions."

They're backing different factions with some vague gestures, but not a lot of practical support. Russia is cock-blocking the UN/NATO, but they're not really *helping* Assad. Similarly the West is making noises about Assad, but they're not really *helping* the rebels either. It's like everyone is just going through the obligatory motions, keeping some plausible distance, because while they like to tweak their enemies, they don't really want to be stuck holding the bag when 'their' team wins.
 
2013-05-17 10:52:53 AM

Tatsuma: Mr_Fabulous: Just to be clear... you are not suggesting that the U.S. military needs to get involved in Syria, or else Al-Nusra is going to detonate a weapon of mass destruction in the United States of America, killing lots of U.S. citizens, right?
......

yes chemical weapons in the hand of Al-Nusra means they will eventually be detonated in the West.


You're not fooling anyone with this coy shiat. Just stop.
 
2013-05-17 10:53:20 AM

BigNumber12: ginandbacon: *note to self: read more better*

We'll just assume that you started your day in a fashion consistent with your Fark handle. Lord knows I wouldn't mind similar.


Not gonna lie--I'm stuck here waiting for the cable guy and I *might* have had an Irish coffee...
 
2013-05-17 10:53:54 AM
It is no more of a dick move than what we did in Libya.
 
2013-05-17 10:54:29 AM

AdamK: with the dollar being the main currency of oil trade, that means everybody else wants it out of the region and that means us being out of the region (or something like that)


Interesting point you make, since Russia, China, and some ME & Latin countries are trying to get away from trading in dollars (they use basket of currencies, or direct swaps of goods i.e. oil for steel).
 
2013-05-17 10:55:27 AM

NostroZ: Yup, a weapons ban is worthless if Russia/China are not abstaining... since they are the MAIN competition for the 'other side' (it's not Communism anymore... what shall we call it? Anti-Capitalist?)


(neo-)Eurasianism
 
2013-05-17 10:55:33 AM

NostroZ: Broktun: Tatsuma: jwilson07: Um, we have had the Aegis anti missile system in place on our ships for 20 years. It can track and shoot down 1000 targets at the same time. Give me a call when the Syrians can master things like personal hygiene and self government without killing thousands of people, then they might be a threat to someone besides themselves with anti ship missiles.

See, you had a post that was spot on for the most part, but you just had to throw some racist shiat in there. Shape the fark up, man, and drop the bigotry.

It's true. . .they do not use toilet paper.

Wipe with left, eat with right?

They?  Wipe with hands?

I thought this was a joke or a minor practice... so I just looked it up... nope, and nope (toilet paper is an American innovative export to the world... thank g-d!)


Look at it this way: if you had sh*t on your face would you scrub it off with water and soap or dab it off with a little square of paper and call it a day?

/shake hands?
 
Displayed 50 of 173 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report