Do you have adblock enabled?
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 172
    More: Scary, anti-ship missile, Russia, Bashar, Aleppo, Syrian refugees, Erdogan, Foreign Secretary, peaceful protest  
•       •       •

7018 clicks; posted to Main » on 17 May 2013 at 10:13 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-05-17 10:56:04 AM  

jylcat: Russia supports a dictatorship? Shaddup.


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!)

 
2013-05-17 10:56:17 AM  
Tatsuma:
And yes chemical weapons in the hand of Al-Nusra means they will eventually be detonated in the West. That's their whole endgame.

Israel is not "the west"
 
2013-05-17 10:56:44 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.


You have no idea what Aegis is. It is an anti ballistic missile system. It is not effective against cruise missiles like the p-800 that russia is accused of having delivered to Syria. There are several variants, but none of them can track more than 100 targets, and none of them can engage more than 4.

The Aegis system has never successfully defended a US ship from hostile attack, although it did help USS Vincennes shoot down a passenger liner.
 
2013-05-17 10:57:16 AM  
Those Syrians carry the Exocet anti-ship missile. They can fire them from 100 miles away. Gentlemen, this is the real thing.
 
2013-05-17 10:57:32 AM  

Voiceofreason01: Tatsuma:
And yes chemical weapons in the hand of Al-Nusra means they will eventually be detonated in the West. That's their whole endgame.

Israel is not "the west"


Pish posh, it's west of lots of things!
 
2013-05-17 10:57:54 AM  

amoral: You have no idea what Aegis is. It is an anti ballistic missile system


No it's not, it's a naval surface to air system with some ABM capability
 
2013-05-17 10:58:01 AM  

Mr_Fabulous: You're not fooling anyone with this coy shiat. Just stop.


I said the West since the beginning. Europe is more likely than America, but only at first, since it's closer and well there are not really any borders in the EU.
 
2013-05-17 10:58:03 AM  

bindlestiff2600: jylcat: Russia supports a dictatorship? Shaddup.

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!)


oops sorry wanted to snark
and just reposted prior post

ahem
left handed children have a problem over there
 
2013-05-17 10:59:10 AM  

bindlestiff2600: bindlestiff2600: jylcat: Russia supports a dictatorship? Shaddup.

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!)

oops sorry wanted to snark
and just reposted prior post

ahem
left handed children have a problem over there


sinister little buggers, serve 'em right
 
2013-05-17 11:02:13 AM  

To The Escape Zeppelin!: Everyone is missing the important detail; Russian anti-ship missiles look awesome, like some kind of 1950's spaceship.


Well, duhhh, they are Assault Missiles!

/ gotta be scary looking
// even if they don't work
 
2013-05-17 11:03:03 AM  

LewDux: 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


Interesting read... and nice theory, since Russia has always been viewed as the 'other' not quiet Europe, not quiet Asia, but independent and ruthless.

Still, it only applies to Russia, and not to China or Syria, or any other regime that's now pro-west.
I naturally liked my made up definition of "Warlord Fascism"
 
2013-05-17 11:03:15 AM  
Who ever wins, it's almost assured they will hate the west. Since they have chemical weapons, and are working on worse, we need to "nip it in the bud." So....
Nuke em from space. It's the only way to be sure.

We kill them to save them.

/Definitely not serious.
 
2013-05-17 11:04:39 AM  
US military industrial complex ships weapons all over the world..... just sayin'
 
2013-05-17 11:04:47 AM  

UrukHaiGuyz: 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?


Lol.  If you read the link, you'd see that soap is not usually part of the equation.
 
2013-05-17 11:07:48 AM  

NostroZ: UrukHaiGuyz: 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?

Lol.  If you read the link, you'd see that soap is not usually part of the equation.


I think that makes soap the real hero here.
 
2013-05-17 11:07:55 AM  

Private_Citizen: Who ever wins, it's almost assured they will hate the west. Since they have chemical weapons, and are working on worse, we need to "nip it in the bud." So....
Nuke em from space. It's the only way to be sure.

We kill them to save them.

/Definitely not serious.


Definitely NOT helping.

Since the reality of the view you espouse means that whoever survives your Middle-Eastern holocaust will have so much vengeance in their heart they will destroy you and the world with it.
 
2013-05-17 11:08:41 AM  
If we are to intervene in Syrian civil war, Congress should vote for it and then vote to raise taxes to pay for it. No more wars on plastic!
 
2013-05-17 11:09:38 AM  

Vectron: US military industrial complex ships weapons all over the world..... just sayin'


oh well yeah(more than anyone else in the world) but we're not (currently) arming anybody in this war. Any deal limiting the sales of weapons that does not have the USA, Russia and China on board is basically a waste of time.
 
2013-05-17 11:13:43 AM  

NostroZ: Private_Citizen: Who ever wins, it's almost assured they will hate the west. Since they have chemical weapons, and are working on worse, we need to "nip it in the bud." So....
Nuke em from space. It's the only way to be sure.

We kill them to save them.

/Definitely not serious.

Definitely NOT helping.

Since the reality of the view you espouse means that whoever survives your Middle-Eastern holocaust will have so much vengeance in their heart they will destroy you and the world with it.


They already have an undying, unquenchable hatred in their heart. Nuking a few of them won't change that. But it will - "eventually" - teach them not to provoke the dynamite monkey.

"Eventually"- because we'll probably have to nuke a few more before they get the message.

/Still Not serious.
 
2013-05-17 11:18:05 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...


couldn't we just bomb all suspected chemical weapon storage sites in Syria? Israel bombed a bunch of sites they suspected of having weapons they didn't want to fall in the wrong hands... and Syria hasn't retaliated because it can't fight israel and a civil war at the same time. Same would probably happen if NATO planes conducted a series of raids from bases in Turkey. (Can chemical weapons' sites be bombed withou risking massive contamination... or is that not possible?)
 
2013-05-17 11:19:26 AM  

Private_Citizen: They already have an undying, unquenchable hatred in their heart. Nuking a few of them won't change that. But it will - "eventually" - teach them not to provoke the dynamite monkey.

"Eventually"- because we'll probably have to nuke a few more before they get the message.

/Still Not serious.


Okay, okay, you got me... they already do hate us with the unquenchable thirst of a thousand suns.

Maybe if we have a good excuse like we did with Hiroshima and Nagasaki...  you know, invade their country and when they fight back, just say "our losses are too great and this will be too difficult to do conventionally... nuke em!  Nuke em today... Nuke em tomorrow... and tell them WE'LL KEEP NUKING THEM EVERY DAY AFTER"

That's how you become a world power

/Somewhat serious
 
2013-05-17 11:21:49 AM  

amoral: 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.

You have no idea what Aegis is. It is an anti ballistic missile system. It is not effective against cruise missiles like the p-800 that russia is accused of having delivered to Syria. There are several variants, but none of them can track more than 100 targets, and none of them can engage more than 4.

The Aegis system has never successfully defended a US ship from hostile attack, although it did help USS Vincennes shoot down a passenger liner.


YOU have no idea what Aegis is. Anti-ballistic missile capability is only part of what Aegis does. Aegis equipped destroyers are used to protect carrier battle groups from incoming missiles and aircraft. This includes cruise missile defense. The relevant paper from the Rand Corporation can be found here

You are correct about the 100 target limitation.
 
2013-05-17 11:23:29 AM  
Since when do the Russians all dress like James Bond henchmen.
I'll never complain about Navy denim again...!
 
2013-05-17 11:26:04 AM  

NostroZ: LewDux: 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

Interesting read... and nice theory, since Russia has always been viewed as the 'other' not quiet Europe, not quiet Asia, but independent and ruthless.

Still, it only applies to Russia, and not to China or Syria, or any other regime that's now pro-west.
I naturally liked my made up definition of "Warlord Fascism"


But China uses pretty much same logic - we are different (and superior) people, and western democracy doesn't work here so STFU and be happy that trains run on time

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guided_Democracy

Not sure about "Warlord" part but..
www.narodni-bolsevik.org
 
2013-05-17 11:26:54 AM  

Voiceofreason01: Vectron: US military industrial complex ships weapons all over the world..... just sayin'

oh well yeah(more than anyone else in the world) but we're not (currently) arming anybody in this war. Any deal limiting the sales of weapons that does not have the USA, Russia and China on board is basically a waste of time.


A little off topic but I read that the US has already funded the rebel forces in the amount of 300 million dollars.

My question is, are there kickbacks to US politicians? Is the agreement that, say, 5% comes back to Obama and members of his cabinet?
 
2013-05-17 11:29:05 AM  

tlenon: Since when do the Russians all dress like James Bond henchmen.
I'll never complain about Navy denim again...!


Since ALWAYS because the James Bond henchmen/supervillains were BASED on Russians.
www.enzian.org

www.foreignpolicy.com
No Mr. Bond, I expect you to die...
 
2013-05-17 11:32:44 AM  
 
2013-05-17 11:33:19 AM  

LewDux: NostroZ: LewDux: 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

Interesting read... and nice theory, since Russia has always been viewed as the 'other' not quiet Europe, not quiet Asia, but independent and ruthless.

Still, it only applies to Russia, and not to China or Syria, or any other regime that's now pro-west.
I naturally liked my made up definition of "Warlord Fascism"

But China uses pretty much same logic - we are different (and superior) people, and western democracy doesn't work here so STFU and be happy that trains run on time

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guided_Democracy

Not sure about "Warlord" part but..
[www.narodni-bolsevik.org image 427x600]


Guided Democracy... there's that Orwellian word I've been looking for... perfectly detached for academia (and why not, it's hard to find fault with billions of people only because they act different than you).
 
2013-05-17 11:35:57 AM  

Tatsuma: Mr_Fabulous: You're not fooling anyone with this coy shiat. Just stop.

I said the West since the beginning. Europe is more likely than America, but only at first, since it's closer and well there are not really any borders in the EU.



Well shucks... the impressive consistency of your coyness and duplicity have won me over, by Jove!
Send in the U.S. Marines! Let the blood flow!

Seriously, who do you think you're fooling?
 
2013-05-17 11:36:48 AM  

ginandbacon: 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...



It's the price we pay for cable. Stay strong.
 
2013-05-17 11:37:25 AM  
Vectron:
A little off topic but I read that the US has already funded the rebel forces in the amount of 300 million dollars.

"non-lethal aid" is code for food and medical supplies and probably a few trucks to haul it all around. I said that the US wasn't selling guns to anybody in this war not that they aren't involved at all. US foreign aid isn't just a way to launder public funds and funnel into the pockets of politicians BUT(big "but") aid money is often used to buy money from US suppliers or manufacturers which can be constituents of congressmen who approved the spending. So the short answer to your "question" is "no" US foreign aid is a carrot used to achieve specific foreign policy goals, the longer answer is: it's complicated.
 
2013-05-17 11:38:08 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...


So we should just unleash Israel and park ships off of their coast, telling the rest of the ME that reprisals against Israel will not be tolerated. Syria, Hezbollah, theseare all immediate threats to Israel, not to the US. We should not put our forces on the line in what is not our direct fight. We can neither afford it, nor do we have the forces to spare.
 
2013-05-17 11:39:19 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.


To be fair, Russia isn't particularly likely to be willing to go to war over it either.
 
2013-05-17 11:39:46 AM  

kbronsito: couldn't we just bomb all suspected chemical weapon storage sites in Syria?


Well that in itself would require Western intervention, but yes it's most likely the best short-term situation. We'd probably have to destroy a whole lot of government labs associated with research and kill a whole bunch of scientists as well. It's not like this stuff will not be lying around (or cowering under bed) once the rebels take over.

kbronsito: Same would probably happen if NATO planes conducted a series of raids from bases in Turkey


Except that if this happened, bombs would start exploding all over Turkey like they did a few days ago, and Turkey would massively push for NATO boots on the ground, and it'd be hard to argue against it. They very well might say 'Intervene or we're out'.

kbronsito: (Can chemical weapons' sites be bombed withou risking massive contamination... or is that not possible?)


For the most part, absolutely
 
2013-05-17 11:39:51 AM  

amoral: 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.

You have no idea what Aegis is. It is an anti ballistic missile system. It is not effective against cruise missiles like the p-800 that russia is accused of having delivered to Syria. There are several variants, but none of them can track more than 100 targets, and none of them can engage more than 4.

The Aegis system has never successfully defended a US ship from hostile attack, although it did help USS Vincennes shoot down a passenger liner.


Unfortunately, you have no idea what Aegis is either.  It's an integrated defense system consisting of many layers (VLS/Phalanx are two.)  It is designed to shoot down standoff threats from aircraft, ships, subs, land cruise missiles and AFTER A TEST YESTERDAY AND A NEW MODEL SM (:standard missile" RIM 161) it will hopefully shoot down ballistic missile threats.  The ACS/AWS system even goes so far as to control torpedo launches from helos, ship's guns, harpoon anti-ship missiles and tomahawk land attack missiles as well as basically every other weapon system in the fleet.

You also seem to somehow imply it isn't effective because we haven't had a major naval conflict.  In fact it has tested superbly and the Vincennes incident was a result of a failure on the part of the Captain, not the system.

I'm also not sure where you got able to track "100" targets and engage "4."  That's ridiculous.  As for the P-800, Syria has had them since 2010.  From Defense Update speaking of the P-800 and AEGIS "AEGIS systems, used on U.S. Navy and many NATO vessels, the European PAAMS, used by the Royal Navy, French and Italian navies and Israel's new Barak 8 ship air defense system are designed to match such treats."http://defense-update.com/20100920_yakhont_in_syria.html
 
2013-05-17 11:41:47 AM  

Mr_Fabulous: Well shucks... the impressive consistency of your coyness and duplicity have won me over, by Jove!
Send in the U.S. Marines! Let the blood flow!

Seriously, who do you think you're fooling?


farking duplicitous jews, always trying to get good non-Jewish Americans to fight their wars for them

Seriously, who do you think you're fooling?

MmmmBacon: So we should just unleash Israel and park ships off of their coast, telling the rest of the ME that reprisals against Israel will not be tolerated. Syria, Hezbollah, theseare all immediate threats to Israel, not to the US. We should not put our forces on the line in what is not our direct fight. We can neither afford it, nor do we have the forces to spare.


Al-Nusra is Al-Qaeda and they are absolutely a threat to Europe and America, not Israel at all, in fact.
 
2013-05-17 11:42:44 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...


Syria is in the Russian sphere of influence. This is likewise, why we--as in the US--didn't intervene in Ossetia, despite some strongly worded letters from the UN, and the rumblings of the start of ethnic cleansing--which oddly enough is EXACTLY why the Ossetians helped the Bolsheviks in the first place.

I understand that Israel really likes to throw the US and our influence around as back up, but in this case, Syria is pretty much a no go. Until the Russians sign off on any action, it's not going to happen. Unless Israel wants to go it alone, because otherwise, Europe has zero interest in clashing with anyone close to the Russian border. The Turks aren't exactly happy with things either, but Syria is too close to the border, and has too much interest in that region. That is their bailiwick, and until the Russians sign off on anything, it's not going to happen. And moreover: Israel knows this. Moreover, supporting the rebels is a no joy situation. Supporting Assad is no joy as well. This is a situation that has the potential to be far worse than Bosnia and Somalia, but without more UN support, it's not going to happen, because the Russians aren't moving, save to keep things shored up enough that it doesn't spill over. The Turks aren't real happy with it, Iran is certainly not happy with it, but until the Russians say, "Yeah, let's do this" it's not going to happen. If things get too dicey, the Russians will dismantle the whole damn country, and leave it for the UN to clean up, and probably blame Turk peacekeepers as quickly as possible, but you already know this, so playing cheerleader for the US to do anything is only so much noise making.

It's not that folks don't care. It's not that folks don't understand the situation. The problem is that folks do understand it, and understand that there is no joy in going in there, and no amount of shaming and finger waggling is going to change the facts.
 
2013-05-17 11:43:35 AM  
More likely for Hezbolla to take out an Israeli frigate.   Time to drop a few thousand missles on Damascus I think.   Let Israel do it.
 
2013-05-17 11:44:32 AM  
Sell missiles to Syria
Sell the technology to knock out the missiles to NATO

Double French Exocet Profit Achieved!

I know Russia would never sell the technology to knock any new Russian missiles down. Old ones, why not? "Oh dear. It seems NATO has figured out how to destroy your missiles. Well, they can't knock down these new ones. How many would you like? Nope. No trade-ins.
 
2013-05-17 11:46:38 AM  
woooh! We got a bad ass over here!
 
2013-05-17 11:48:01 AM  
If Sryians want to kill each other, why does the US care? Whoever wins won't be out friend.
 
2013-05-17 11:48:14 AM  
Remember, this America's version of a world map is satirical:
ct.fra.bz
It's funny because it's true that American's oversimplify the world...
 
2013-05-17 11:48:19 AM  

The Stealth Hippopotamus: woooh! We got a bad ass over here!



Now with picture goodness!!

img5.imageshack.us
 
2013-05-17 11:50:15 AM  

Vectron: My God these poor rebels need silverware! nsfw


Daaaamn. That's hardcore.
 
2013-05-17 11:50:56 AM  
i1.kym-cdn.com

I actually had a boss who had this map up in his office... suffice it to say, we did not get along.
 
2013-05-17 11:50:57 AM  
Vladimir Putin to Bashar al-Assad: "Dance puppet, dance!"
 
2013-05-17 11:50:57 AM  

NostroZ: Remember, this America's version of a world map is satirical:
[ct.fra.bz image 604x341]
It's funny because it's true that American's oversimplify the world...


Oh right and people don't do that, like say the way Europeans or Middle-Easterners see America and Americans.
 
2013-05-17 11:53:05 AM  
Assad's check must have cleared.
 
2013-05-17 11:54:55 AM  
Ah, it's this thread again.  It's like Mad Libs.
 
2013-05-17 11:54:56 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.


As a totally libby liberal - I'm in favor of an intervention. I don't side with the rebels nor do I side with the regime. They're both doing terrible things to each other. Someone needs to be the goddamned parent.

Aside from the argument of ethical roles and obligations (in which there are no winners) - it's going to spark an international problem. You've got more than 1 million refugees that have fled Syria and the conflict is spilling outside of the border.
 
Displayed 50 of 172 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 »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report