Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

No New S-300 Air-Defense System To Syria Says Russia — But Maybe Old Ones

Soulskill posted about a year ago | from the i'll-take-a-few-new-ones dept.

The Military 188

An anonymous reader writes "Yesterday, Russia's Foreign Minister declared that Moscow would not sell any new surface-to-air missiles to Syria, although there is a catch. He said old contracts are being honored. Could old contracts just be code for an already signed, but undisclosed deal for the S-300? Lavarov certainly left the door open: '...when questioned in particular about the S-300, his reply was not clear if the "earlier contracts" were for the S-300 or something else.' With Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu going to the Black Sea town of Sochi early next week for talks with President Vladimir Putin, it seems they may have something to talk about."

cancel ×

188 comments

Not your problem (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43698621)

Unless you live in Russia or Syria, it's not, and shouldn't be, your problem.

Re:Not your problem (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43698699)

Just like genocide!

Re:Not your problem (0, Flamebait)

benjfowler (239527) | about a year ago | (#43698947)

Bah!

Let the goddamned savages murder each other, and then Allah can sort them out. The more they're fighting and slaughtering each other like animals, the less they'll bother us. We should only intervene to keep the fighting going, and to ensure that no faction gets overwhelmingly strong than another.

Syria is currently perfect -- it's a self-cleaning oven.

Re:Not your problem (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43699007)

I hope Putin gives the Assad regime those missiles and Israeli aircraft are shot down. Then Amerika will be drawn into war with Russia and the shit will really hit the fan.

Although I like what you said, but I would include Israel along with the "goddamned savages murder each other." Ideally America would pull out and let Israel and the ragheads kill each other, and then gas whomever's left before dropping radioactive pig shit on Jerusalem and Mecca to render them uninhabitable for the next millennium so people get a chance to forget (or lose their shattered faith) about that dumb religion thing that's the hidden root-cause of a lot of the world's problems. Welcome to the 21st century, Middle-East!

-- Ethanol-fueled

Re:Not your problem (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about a year ago | (#43699397)

Just make sure the beach is safe to surf...

Re:Not your problem (2)

Mystakaphoros (2664209) | about a year ago | (#43699621)

But.... this is Charlie's beach!

Re:Not your problem (4, Informative)

cold fjord (826450) | about a year ago | (#43699239)

One wonders what could possibly go wrong regarding Syria.

Turkey claims evidence of Syrian chemical weapons use [bbc.co.uk]
UN accuses Syrian rebels of chemical weapons use [telegraph.co.uk]
An Al-Qaeda Alliance in Syria Demands Response From U.S. [bloomberg.com]
Al Qaeda's track record with chemical weapons [cnn.com]

Even if there are chemical weapons laying around, they would still need to get them somewhere where they could be used. They would probably need help for that. Is any available?

US teen accused of seeking to join al Qaeda-linked Syrian group [nbcnews.com]
Danish jihadist killed while fighting for Muhajireen Brigade in Syria [longwarjournal.org]

Iran recruiting volunteer troops for Syria [timesofisrael.com]
Hezbollah Steps Up in Syria as Israel Tries to Ease Tension [wsj.com]

US Congressman: Hezbollah agents in US worse than al-Qaida [jpost.com]
Peter King warns: Hezbollah agents in U.S. [politico.com]

Border porous for obvious reason [washingtontimes.com]
Official: Book of suicide bombers found in Arizona desert [abc15.com]

. . .the book is published in Iran and contains biographies of Islamic suicide bombers and other Islamic militants who died while carrying out their attacks. . .

Yes indeed, what could possibly go wrong?

Re:Not your problem (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43699335)

Ah... good little propagandist.

Terrorrrrrrrrrrrists!!! Feeeeeeaaaaaarrrrr!!!! Attack!

Re:Not your problem (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43699535)

Yes, of course, it must be fear! Because there is no way to rationally make use of knowledge about terrorist activity and threats to do things like target intelligence surveillance on areas where they might travel, and bring chemical weapons with them. Or maybe sea ports or airfields where by might be transferred. And unsecured borders! Bah! No worries. If 10% of the population of Mexico can wander across the border into the United States undetected, what possible danger could there be?

Most people would get equal insight into terrorism provided by you if they simply ate a dill pickle with supper. Your comment is that useless. Hey, speaking of supper, is that your mom calling your?

Re:Not your problem (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43699593)

Yeah, it's a great plan to defend America by sending armies thousands of kilometers off US borders to "wipe out the enemies", instead of having proper border and internal security. Welcome to the Strange Ideas Induced By Pork For Arms And Mercenary Services.

Re:Not your problem (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43699771)

But wouldn't having "proper border and internal security" result in you accusing them of being fascist? It would seem so. In your mind, it there any alternative to just letting terrorists attack at will, unhindered by any precaution?

Re:Not your problem (1)

SplashMyBandit (1543257) | about a year ago | (#43700177)

Do you think it is a better idea for America to confront jihadis on its own soil? Now you can argue whether it is moral or not, but it is far more sensible to fight them in Afghanistan and Iraq than on the streets of New York (although Boston has shown us it can happen; most people are not aware of the dozens of similar cases foiled by the US security services but with the same jihadi goals, these goals are outlined in the 109 terror verses of the Qur'an http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/quran/023-violence.htm [thereligionofpeace.com] plus verses like Sura 9:29 and Sura 9:5, the hadiths etc).

Re:Not your problem (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43700277)

The best idea is not to create them in the first place.

Propping up the House of Saud and their twisted Wahabbism seemed like a great plan at the time, but blowback's a real bitch ain't it?

Propping up countless dictators which inevitably leads to opposition from extreme religious groups, also not the best idea. If someone managed to do the same to the US, you better believe it would be the batshittiest of the batshit crazy fundies leading the charge, and the rest of the world would tsk tsk about you crazy fucking Americans and we'd all be quoting verses from the Bible as proof.

Yeah, you aren't bright enough to figure out that you fucking created the problem.

Re:Not your problem (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43699565)

What could possibly go wrong when the Jews and the Turks are involved ? The first are running an Apartheid system (including the jail that is Gaza, where they block international trade almost 100%) while the second ones have their own civil war with the Kurdish. Now that Syria has been hosting Kurdish rebels in the past, the Turks have decided this is a good opportunity to throw petrol into this little fire and channel weapons into Syria. And host combatants for rest&reconstitute.

Turkey even tried to invade Syrian airspace, only to have their fighter jet shot down. Their propaganda made it sound as if they had been attacked by Syria.

Of course, to the Western Sheeple, this is sold as "Syrian tyrant murdering his own people" and "glorious Israelis merely dropping bombs in self-defence".

Folks, smell the coffee and look up to see the Weapons Makers circling above this carnage. Now that AFPAKIRAQ is "fizzling out", they will serve YOU the right propaganda in order to Get New Pork From Washington.

Did I mention the Saudi tyranny is sponsoring militants in Syria ? Did you know that the Sunni extremists of Saudi-Wahabistan consider Shiites and Alevites being apostates ? THAT is why they fund a war against Assad, not because they hate this tyrant. They are nasty Arab tyrants themselves and because of some buttfucking in the year 73 or so after the child-molesting-prophet (piece be upon his dick) was born, they hate Assad and his Iranian friends.

Now, the Iranians stand up to Israel's apartheid state while the Saudis fund terrorism globally except in Israel (they are too smart to offend their protector USrael in the "holy" land of the mad semite religions). So you, the sheeple, are supposed to hate Mr Assad and approve more violence from Israel and massive weapons sales to USG "to aid in this humanitarian crisis by means of armed intervention".

Re: Not your problem (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43699695)

Your post lost all credibility when you used "sheeple". I can now easily disregard everything you have said.

Re:Not your problem (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43699241)

Let the goddamned savages murder each other, and then Allah can sort them out. The more they're fighting and slaughtering each other like animals, the less they'll bother us. We should only intervene to keep the fighting going, and to ensure that no faction gets overwhelmingly strong than another.

Yeah, right, it has nothing to do with Yankee intervention. It's just a bunch of savages running wild, right?

Idiots like you are the fucking problem. You don't realize what a fucking mess your government makes (here's a hint [wikipedia.org] ) and you sit back with a smug fucking attitude referring to the victims of your fucking government as 'savages'. Hey fucktard, here's a hint - when you usurp governments, sponsor wars and promote terrorists in a region people start acting pretty fucking badly all around. But fuckwats like you get to insist "it's not your problem" and "they are just a bunch of savages anyhow".

It is your fucking problem. It's a wonder more of the world isn't blowing Yanks up everywhere. Fucktard.

We are intervening (3, Interesting)

deanklear (2529024) | about a year ago | (#43699251)

http://www.globalresearch.ca/ny-times-scrubs-mention-of-cia-arming-syrian-rebels/5302360 [globalresearch.ca]

Despite public claims on behalf of the White House that no weapons are being sent to the rebels, reports that the CIA has been doing precisely that have been circulating for months, including a recent story about CIA spies smuggling 14 stinger missiles into Syria so rebels could defend themselves with ground to air technology.

The New York Times admitted in a June 21 report that the CIA was "steering" arms to Syrian rebels from the Turkish border, but claimed the weapons were paid for by Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar.

The New York Times' decision to alter the wording of the article is another example of how NATO-aligned media outlets are concerned about overemphasizing western support for the rebels given their involvement in terrorist attacks and other acts of brutality.

I'd recommend against adding racism to your obvious ignorance, however. Even though that feeling is dependent on the possibility that you have a sense of human dignity, which is certainly slim.

Re:We are intervening (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43699305)

Yes, but we're the Good Guys In White Hats, as are the Islamist 'rebels' we're giving weapons to. The Russians are the Bad Guys In Black Hats, like the Syrians our Islamist friends are attacking.

And, you know, what could possibly go wrong?

Re:Not your problem (1)

trylak (935041) | about a year ago | (#43699259)

What is wrong with you? No compassion whatsoever?

Re:Not your problem (0)

Hentes (2461350) | about a year ago | (#43699775)

Every conflict like this leads to the strenghtening of radical Islam. Civil wars ensure that the most aggressive groups will seize power in the end. Sure, the Iraq-Iran war may have looked like a good idea at the time, but look at what happened after it was over.

Re:Not your problem (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | about a year ago | (#43699929)

We should only intervene to keep the fighting going, and to ensure that no faction gets overwhelmingly strong than another.

Congratulations, you just identified our foreign policy. You really think e.g. Israel would be more than a memory without U.S. aid?

Re:Not your problem (1)

iggymanz (596061) | about a year ago | (#43698777)

because various groups in Syria don't arm those that attack other nations?

Re:Not your problem (1)

lesincompetent (2836253) | about a year ago | (#43698921)

S-300 is an intrinsically defensive weapon system...

Re:Not your problem (5, Insightful)

alantus (882150) | about a year ago | (#43699051)

S-300 is an intrinsically defensive weapon system...

Just like a shield is a defensive device, it is meant to be use together with an offensive one.
An advanced surface-to-air missile system can be used to protect a military nuclear facility, just like the one Syria had until it was taken out by Israel [wikipedia.org] . Just think about what have happened would happen if Syria had continue the development of nuclear weapons at the time, and they fall under the wrong hands, which is quite possible given the current situation.

Re:Not your problem (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43699649)

Just think about what would happen if you did not believe the Jewish lies and propaganda. They might be forced to stop running an Apartheid system and leave the Arabs they hold hostage alone. And free to international trade. Imagine how HORRIBLE that would be !

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaza_Strip#Following_Hamas_takeover_.282007-present.29

Re:Not your problem (2)

khallow (566160) | about a year ago | (#43699999)

Just think about what would happen if you did not believe the Jewish lies and propaganda.

Propaganda isn't necessarily false. Similarly, one could wonder how bad things could get if Israeli nukes got into the wrong hands due to a similar civil war. The problem with your complaint is that Syria is the country with the civil war not Israel.

Re:Not your problem (2)

SplashMyBandit (1543257) | about a year ago | (#43700229)

Apartheid? against who? you are aware that there are 1 million Arab Israelis, including Muslims, yeah? These Palestinian Arabs get more rights in Israel than they do in the Palestinian Territory, Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, or Gaza (hint: apart from Gaza I've been to all these places, so I *know* you are completely full of sh!t). How about you stop spreading the provably false propaganda. As soon as someone mentions apartheid in the context if Israel it simply proves: a) they don't know what South African apartheid really was like, and b) they don't have the foggiest clue about the substantial Arab minority that live in Israel with full rights and three Members of Knesset (since 1948). If Israel really was an apartheid state I'd condemn it too, but it simply isn't even close. So stop spreading falsehoods that some other no-nothing told you without either of you checking the facts.

Re:Not your problem (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43700325)

Oh look, the hasbara propaganda machine, SplashMyBandit, is back.

Do you do it for pay or jump because you're a racist?

Re:Not your problem (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43700521)

[...] no-nothing [...]

That's something, isn't it?

Re:Not your problem (1)

shutdown -p now (807394) | about a year ago | (#43700329)

By "the wrong hands", do you mean al-Nusra Front?

It would seem that ensuring that nothing nasty happens to fall into those hands would be easy enough, if we only stopped supporting those guys.

Re:Not your problem (1)

iggymanz (596061) | about a year ago | (#43699131)

it can back up an offensive strike; it can shoot down civilian craft

Re:Not your problem (1, Insightful)

SplashMyBandit (1543257) | about a year ago | (#43700235)

Actually, the most likely use would be for Hezbollah to use their tens of thousands of Iranian supplied ballistic missiles and rockets to start a war that commits the war crime of targetting Israeli citizens exclusively. That's what the S-300 battery will be used for.

Re:Not your problem (1)

dbIII (701233) | about a year ago | (#43700543)

And those old Iranian rockets Hezbolla has are going to fit in the device in exactly what way?
For some reason you've missed the fucking obvious that there is a war going on and weapons are getting used in that war. Take the 1/10 of a second to think about what's happening with a new weapon instead of trying to fit it into the unrelated barrow you are trying to push.

Re:Not your problem (2)

SplashMyBandit (1543257) | about a year ago | (#43700201)

S-300 is an intrinsically defensive weapon system...

What do you think Hezbollah are going to do under an umbrella of the most advanced missile family the made by the Soviets ... er, Tsar Putin's Imperial fiefdom ... er, Russia ? (note: the S-400 is just an improved S-400).

That's right mostincompetent, they are going to launch the tens of thousands of ballistic missiles and rockets on Israeli *citizens*, aggressively initiating yet another war whose modus operandi is *war crime* and whose sole intent is *war crime*. Don't be such a doofus.

Re:Not your problem (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43699263)

You mean like Hezbollah which arose because Lebanon was attacked and occupied by Israel? A legitimate political party?

Brainwashed moron. Go back to CNN/Fox/MSNBC.

Re:Not your problem (1)

SplashMyBandit (1543257) | about a year ago | (#43700255)

Actually, it was Amal who did most of the fighting. Hezbollah was a late player who were funded by the imperial theocracy of Iran, but took all the glory. ps. Lebanon was attacked by Israel because the PLO had moved from Tunis to Jordan (where they were kicked out after trying to overthrow the Jordanian monarchy in "Black September") then moved to Beirut and set up base there - where they conducted a global campaign of terrorism (eg. the Munich massacre, numerous hijacks etc). The Israelis came in to Lebanon to rid that weak state of the PLO, and they succeeded. The Israelis then withdrew to South Lebanon and set up a buffer zone with Christian militias. Amal and Hezbollah fought Israel claiming it was because they were in Lebanon. When Israel eventually left Hezbollah refused to disarm and continued their campaign against Israel in Israel. Now Hezbollah holds Lebanon and conducts terror attacks across the globe (eg. Buenos Aires, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Georgia, India, Thailand [where they were caught], etc). Having evil Hezbollah under a Russian S-300 umbrella and supplied with Iranian nuclear weapons (which they could use on Israel, Europe or the EU) is a nightmare scenario.

Re:Not your problem (1)

phantomfive (622387) | about a year ago | (#43698971)

Unless you live in Russia or Syria, it's not, and shouldn't be, your problem.

Unfortunately problems in other parts of the world can become large and really hurt if you just ignore them. Kind of like when your neighbor is running a meth lab. If you ignore it, you're going to have problems.

I'm not saying we should do anything about Syria right now (although we have a lot of options besides attacking/invading), but we need to watch carefully and make sure things don't happen that will bite us later.

Re:Not your problem (1)

Stickerboy (61554) | about a year ago | (#43698987)

Unless you live in Russia or Syria, it's not, and shouldn't be, your problem.

And if a large majority of Syrian citizens are against further arming Assad's regime? Whose problem does it become? If they ask or beg for the UN to impose a no-fly zone [npr.org] to counteract the Assad regime's airstrikes, whose problem does it become, these new(er) anti-aircraft missiles?

Was Rwanda and its internal affairs [wikipedia.org] just a problem for Rwanda and Uganda? Was the breakup of Yugoslavia [wikipedia.org] merely a problem for the Serbs, Croats and Muslims to duke it out?

Just curious at how far regimes can descend, before action is taken. Is it a utilitarian argument, where the balance of lives saved must outweigh the lives lost in escalating the rebellion or outright toppling the regime? Is it an argument for means justifying the ends, that there's a tipping point where offensive military action or aid is justified (Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey already think so)? Does it change the equation if not stopping the Syrian conflict will inevitably draw Lebanon, Israel and probably Iran, Turkey and the United States into a wider and messier conflict? Would it change the equation if Assad had 10,000 artillery pieces aimed at Istanbul?

The point of all these questions is foreign policy is difficult and nuanced. No two situations are alike, and although we'd like it to play out like a domestic law enforcement problem, it never does and it necessarily can't be. Leaders and nations following simple rules to a fault, such as "Unless you live in Russia or Syria, it's not, and shouldn't be, your problem" tend to make a fucked up mess of things, either through gross inaction or not-well thought out action, like George W. Bush.

Re:Not your problem (1)

Mystakaphoros (2664209) | about a year ago | (#43699589)

Does it change the equation if not stopping the Syrian conflict will inevitably draw Lebanon, Israel and probably Iran, Turkey and the United States into a wider and messier conflict?

Good point, and especially as Assad sees fewer options left to him, he may see more and more incentive in provoking neighboring powers to create the biggest mess possible. Thankfully he hasn't shot down a Turkish plane in the past few months, but it has seemed at times that he wants to provoke outsiders as an excuse to solidify his base.

Re:Not your problem (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43699663)

Excellent regurgitation of Turkish propaganda !

As a matter of fact, the Turks invaded Syrian airspace and got a hit into their ass. Rightfully so. Now they decided to channel weapons into Syria in retaliation for Assad supporting Kurdish rebels in Turkey.

Re:Not your problem (1, Interesting)

SplashMyBandit (1543257) | about a year ago | (#43700291)

The problem with arming the Syrian rebels is that it was already tried and US and Qatari-bought weapons quickly passed through the secular SLA to the Al Qaeda units called "Al Nusra". The rebels should not be supplied with arms. Note: It is likely that the Obama Administration did not provide military assistance to the Ambassador and SEALs in in Benghazi, which got them killed after 8 hours of assaults, in order to hide the gun running that did get to Al Qaeda; either that or it was a botched attempt to swap the pro-Islamist Ambassador Stevens for the Blind Sheik [as the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt had been working on] - we won't know until the current investigations get past the stone walls put up by the White House and State Department. Supplying the terrorist hosting Iranian-proxy Assad is also a bad move too.

Re:Not your problem (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about a year ago | (#43700465)

Those stone walls are protecting highly classified information. This is the business we have chosen... A show investigation can go nowhere, and only serves as a diversion.

Re:Not your problem (4, Insightful)

shutdown -p now (807394) | about a year ago | (#43700347)

It's interesting that you bring up Yugoslavia. When Western troops got involved, they were generally pretty happy to let Croats and Bosniaks duke it out on Serbs, but for some reason not the other way around. So the siege of Sarajevo was treated as a war crime, but Operation Maslenica and Operation Storm were pretty much ignored. Ditto Kosovo, where NATO intervened on behalf of KLA (and US even went so far as to remove them from the list of terrorist organizations for the duration - usually it goes the other way, "freedom fighters" becoming "terrorists" later, this was a rare case of the other way around), but KFOR did nothing when de-facto independent after the war Kosovar communities started driving the few remaining Serbs out, burning down Orthodox churches etc.

So if Yugoslavia is your example of a successful humanitarian intervention, I very much hope that nothing of a kind takes place in Syria.

Re:Not your problem (0)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | about a year ago | (#43699027)

Only if you're an amoral monster with a heart as dead and black as a lump of coal. If only they were standing next to you instead of on the other side of the planet, or better yet, a bunch of WASPs, you might see things differently.

Government slaughter of civilians should be everyone's problem.

Re:Not your problem (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43699507)

Or perhaps they realize that getting involved in other peoples' civil wars is a bloody stupid thing to do.

Re:Not your problem (1)

cold fjord (826450) | about a year ago | (#43699643)

Government slaughter of civilians should be everyone's problem.

It is a long standing problem in Syria.

Hama 1982 – The Syrian massacre you never heard about [abovetopsecret.com]

In 1982 the Syrian government killed 30,000 – 40,000 of its own citizens. Assad leveled an entire city with an air bombardment followed by artillery and tank fire. Why? They were anti Baath party, and apparently in 1982 in Syria that was a death sentence

CAUTION: Graphic descriptions of atrocities in the article

You can take that caution seriously if you are of delicate constitution. The SS didn't really have anything on the Syrian army.

Hama makes an interesting counterpoint to the frequent claims of massacre or genocide made against Israel by various Arab groups and their allies. Those claims generally prove to be false, misleading, or exaggerated, once exposed to scrutiny.

Have a Rotten Eggroll, Mr. Goldstone [commentarymagazine.com]
Fighting the Lies Harder Than Fighting the War - Israel does not "deliberately" target civilians. [nationalreview.com]
Palestinian Myth Machine [nationalreview.com]

Re:Not your problem (1)

SplashMyBandit (1543257) | about a year ago | (#43700327)

Hama makes an interesting counterpoint to the frequent claims of massacre or genocide made against Israel by various Arab groups and their allies.

Ah, but the Islamists and their Leftist allies always accuse their opponents of things they want to do themselves. Now you know that is one of their tactics you will be able to spot it when it occurs. It is quite common once you have your antenna up and active (and this is after confirmation bias has been filtered out).

Re:Not your problem (2)

fredgiblet (1063752) | about a year ago | (#43700185)

"Government slaughter of civilians should be everyone's problem." So we get involved.

If we ship weapons over to the rebels then atrocities will be committed with them at some point and we will be painted as the bad guys (probably by you).
If we send troops over we'll get another Vietnam where we spend billions (trillions?) and end up with lots of dead Americans, lots of mistakes that get made by our troops that get international attention and we end up being painted as the bad guys (probably by you).
If we just yell at them and impose sanctions it won't actually do anything and we'll be painted as the bad guys (probably by you).

Getting involved is a no-win situation, partially because it's a fucking mess and partially because ANY mistakes that are made will be treated as if they were intentional murders of civilians, regardless of the truth of the situation. There is no way for us to win, the closest we can get is to not get involved.

Re:Not your problem (1)

SplashMyBandit (1543257) | about a year ago | (#43700313)

Government slaughter of civilians should be everyone's problem.

True. But assisting the rebels means that you will be supplying heavy weaponry that will make its way to "Al Nusra", which is Al Qaeda's branch in Syria and currently running Aleppo. Do you think arming Al Qaeda is a good idea? I don't. In Syria doing anything at all is a lose-lose proposition. What the US is doing is trying to arm and train Syrian secularists in Jordan, but this is a dodgy gamble too. I'm a supporter in the US using its might to promote freedom and democracy around the world, to take out tyrants (Iraq, Afghanistan) and oppose Islamic jihad everywhere. But in the case of Syria what the US is already doing is best. Arm and train secularists and wait until both the jihadis and Iranian-proxies are exhausted before sending a strong secular militia to control the end game. Intervention is necessary, but cannot be to early if you want to to win (against a depleted Al Nusra). Yes, civilians will be killed in the mean time - but put the blame where it is deserved - on Assad's regime and the equally brutal Al Qaeda forces fighting him.

Re:Not your problem (1)

The Grim Reefer (1162755) | about a year ago | (#43699137)

Unless you live in Russia or Syria, it's not, and shouldn't be, your problem.

Yes, 150 years ago you'd be right. However the world is a little more interconnected now. The up side is that most wars tend to remain relatively small because of it. The disadvantage is that events in countries that were of no consequence now effect the economy globally.

Re:Not your problem (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43699529)

Thanks for the insight, Neville.

Re:Not your problem (1)

Mystakaphoros (2664209) | about a year ago | (#43699555)

I'd suggest that the families of the 43 people who died in blasts in a Turkish border town today probably consider it a problem. http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/death-toll-rises-to-43-as-explosions-hit-turkish-town-on-border-with-syria.aspx?pageID=238&nID=46682&NewsCatID=341 [hurriyetdailynews.com]

Re:Not your problem (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43699717)

I suggest you write about the little war of Turkey against their own Kurdish people. Turkey is full of shit like the Jews and your common opponent is Assad. You try to smoke him out so that you can continue your respective Apartheid regimes.

Re:Not your problem (1)

SplashMyBandit (1543257) | about a year ago | (#43700333)

Racist.

Re:Not your problem (4, Insightful)

SplashMyBandit (1543257) | about a year ago | (#43700391)

Turkey and the Muslim Brotherhood are aligned. Turkey would very very much like for the US to intervene on the Turkish side (Turkey, the African Muslim Brotherhood nations like Egypt Libya etc, and the Syrian Al Qaeda called "Al Nusra"). So there is a possibility that this could be a "false flag" operation - in the same way that Al Nusra used chemical weapons on its own civilians in the last fortnight and accused Assad of doing this (hoping the US would leap in an help Al Qeada out, again).

In fact, The Muslim Brotherhood have cleverly worked out that they can use the power of the US to further their agenda as long as they claim to be moderate. See:
http://frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/how-obama-lost-his-big-muslim-brotherhood-gamble/ [frontpagemag.com]
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2013/05/the-united-states-has-become-a-tool-of-muslim-brotherhood-expansionism.html [jihadwatch.org]

The Muslim Brotherhood is very very smart/cunning. After seeing NATO intervene on the side of the Bosian Muslims and Albanian Muslims in Bosnia and Kosovo respectively the MB realised it could manipulate the US into doing its dirty work. That is exactly what is happening, and the US goes along with this because it believes the MB is a counter to Al Qaeda. Of course, the Muslim Brotherhood is merely the "good cop" role while Al Qaeda plays "bad cop"- their methods differ (non-violence versus violence) but their goals are completely aligned: all nations subjected to the Muslim political order under Sharia.

The US should let Assad crush the rebels (yes, this is bad, because Iran is involved, but it is far far better than letting the Muslim Brotherhood get another country for their restored Caliphate plan).

Re:Not your problem (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43699603)

US missile deals with in Israel/Poland/Turkey
THIS IS AWFUL!

Russia missile deals with Syria/Iran
SO WHAT?

Re:Not your problem (1)

rossdee (243626) | about a year ago | (#43700337)

"Unless you live in Russia or Syria, it's not, and shouldn't be, your problem."

I disagree - if you happen to be a country that is next to Syria (eg Turkey) then it could be your problem. They have already fired across the Turkish border.

And i am sure that one other of Syria's neighbours regards it as a problem, but if they are older missiles not an insurmountable one.
Those missiles are likely to be "in HARMs Way"

Netanyahu to Visit Putin, Discuss S-300 Sale (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43698671)

Netanyahu to Visit Putin, Discuss S-300 Sale
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/167922#.UY7gcnDlN0M

The Real Reason (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43698677)

He is meeting with Putin because Putin has told him that any more Israeli strikes will have him land S 300PMs, I believe that's the one, the next day in Syria.

  Since he said that there have been no more strikes.

So, umm... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43698697)

Do these S-300s run Linux or something?

Re:So, umm... (2)

JustOK (667959) | about a year ago | (#43699215)

imagine a beowulf cluster of them

Re:So, umm... (2)

Thor Ablestar (321949) | about a year ago | (#43700625)

Maybe they run MSVS (Modulnaya Sistema Vooruzhennyh Sil - Modular Armed Forces System). I hadn't tried it but it is somewhere in my collection. Full Disclosure and Disclaimer: It was on rutracker.org so I do not disclose any Russian state secrets not disclosed earlier.

Why is this on Slashdot? (3, Informative)

couchslug (175151) | about a year ago | (#43698709)

They make MILITARY news sites for this sort of thing.

Hey, much love on my part for modern weapons tech, but on Slashdot this is clutter.

Any techies who are interested know how to keep track of such events.

Anyone interested also knows any missile systems sold to Syria can be countered by standoff weapons launched from outside Syrian airspace in most cases. Extended range JDAMs and Spice kits mean expensive anti-aircraft missiles would have to be used against small, relatively inexpensive, "smart bombs".

Those can also be used to destroy Syrian aircraft in their shelters as well as SAM sites.

http://defense-update.com/20130505_israeli-standoff-attack-capability-against-terrorists.html [defense-update.com]

Re:Why is this on Slashdot? (2)

Rob_Bryerton (606093) | about a year ago | (#43698907)

This is on Slashdot because it is profitable for them to post troll stories. You might notice that the stories that get the most replies have either a political, religious, or the current all-time favorite: the patent-related slant to whip the unsuspecting into a reading/posting frenzy generating ad revenue.

Contrast the FUD stories with the few articles posted about hard science, and sadly they typically get about 5% of the replies as say an Apple/MS/Samsung/Google patent troll-the-readership type story. As a Ferengi would say, there's just no profit in that. I'm sure this business model is somehow described in some way among the 285 Rules of Acquisition, but I digress.

Like it or not, Slashdot has degenerated into using the same trolling and scare tactics that is business as usual in the main stream media. The same thing happened to Ars Technica and countless other sites that started off as legitimate community-driven, hobbyist type sites that became popular, then sold off to Big Money. Tell me I'm wrong. (And to be honest, I'd do the same damn thing because, well, I'm just greedy like that.)

I suspect the spelling and grammar errors in the titles and summaries are mostly intentional as well. NOBODY is that lazy and incompetent.

Re:Why is this on Slashdot? (2)

dreamchaser (49529) | about a year ago | (#43698931)

It is on Slashdot because it falls under the 'stuff that matters' category.

Re:Why is this on Slashdot? (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about a year ago | (#43699365)

Only if you have investments in the arms trade...

Re:Why is this on Slashdot? (1)

dreamchaser (49529) | about a year ago | (#43699411)

Or care about ongoing oppression.

Re:Why is this on Slashdot? (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about a year ago | (#43699543)

Look, it's strictly business. Make peace more profitable than war, and there will be peace.

Re:Why is this on Slashdot? (1)

SplashMyBandit (1543257) | about a year ago | (#43700407)

Look, it's strictly business. Make peace more profitable than war, and there will be peace.

Nope. Syria has spiraled into an Islamic sectarian conflict. The Shia Iranians are backing their man (Assad, who is secular) against a coalition of Sunni Muslim nations (Turkey, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Al Qaeda in Syria "Al Nusra", and the US Obama Administration who is pro-Sunni for the reasons outlined here: http://frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/how-obama-lost-his-big-muslim-brotherhood-gamble/ [frontpagemag.com] ).

The "military industrial complex" meme you trot out without doing any analysis of what is really going on in Syria is a typical move by those on the political far Left (who want to dismantle capitalism). Stop parroting nonsense and look at the facts on the ground and Syria and the reasons why each side is fighting *in their own words*. By deflecting a true assessment of what is going on in Syria you inadvertently support Al Qaeda/Al Nusra. Stop it please.

Re:Why is this on Slashdot? (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about a year ago | (#43700513)

Hah, listen to you! talking about parroting...'political far left'? You're a hoot, you know that? You are a smooth talker I'll give you that. Could even write a few pro war editorials for the Times there..

You really think these people do all of this for free? War is a business, buddy. A dirty business... If you're swimming in it, I wouldn't expect you to notice.

Re: Why is this on Slashdot? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43699537)

These were 3D printed right?

Re:Why is this on Slashdot? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43699141)

DICE new motto: News for eyeballs, stuff that sells ads!

Re:Why is this on Slashdot? (2, Insightful)

aaarrrgggh (9205) | about a year ago | (#43699355)

This is news for nerds. You specifically add to the conversation by adding useful knowledge in the matter for non military nerds, and provide a source for additional information.

And get off my lawn.

Re:Why is this on Slashdot? (1)

DNS-and-BIND (461968) | about a year ago | (#43700119)

You know, no matter how many irrelevant non-nerd articles appear on this site, someone is going to take your stance that "oh it's relevant in some off-the-wall way, missiles are technology, now TAKE THAT!" This news is the kind of crap I'd expect from mainstream media politics and has zero relevance to Slashdot.

Re:Why is this on Slashdot? (1)

SplashMyBandit (1543257) | about a year ago | (#43700429)

Dude, the S-300 is the "supercomputer" of the SAM world. The US has the Patriot and the USSR/Russia as the S-300/S-400 system. Some people are interested in this and it is appropriate for Slashdot. If you don't like it, then skip the fscking article. Despite what your mommy still tells you, the world does not revolve around *you*.

Re:Why is this on Slashdot? (1)

poity (465672) | about a year ago | (#43699641)

Tinder for 900+ reply flame thread

Re:Why is this on Slashdot? (1)

fredgiblet (1063752) | about a year ago | (#43700195)

According to The Wiki depending on the model S-300 missiles have up to 120 mile range. I don't think glide bombs go that far.

Re:Why is this on Slashdot? (1)

Frosty Piss (770223) | about a year ago | (#43700253)

Maybe there's a smartphone involved - S-300 Missile Defense on a smartphone. Patents could be involved, you know.

If Syria got these (1)

purnima (243606) | about a year ago | (#43698753)

they would turn them into surface to surface targeting rebel donkey carts transporting CIA supplied surface to air missiles come surface to surface missiles that in turn target government donkey carts. In general the only things that will blow up are innocent Syrian kids and donkeys.

Re:If Syria got these (1)

Thor Ablestar (321949) | about a year ago | (#43700647)

Only our friends from Israel could use Iron Dome rockets (US$40000 each) to target pieces of Palestinian water plumbing filled with fertilizer - and consider it profitable :-)

Talking... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43698801)

With Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu going to the Black Sea town of Sochi early next week for talks with President Vladimir Putin, it seems they may have something to talk about.

Well that's not surprising, they have been practically pleading with the Russians not to go ahead with these sales. Usually the Israelis are pretty defiant but they have been unusually spooked at the prospect of S-300s sales to Syria.

Re:Talking... (5, Interesting)

TapeCutter (624760) | about a year ago | (#43698991)

Usually the Israelis are pretty defiant but they have been unusually spooked

Unusual? How quickly we forget the cold war. Nations are standing back and watching Syria because in my youth Syria was to the east what Israel was to the west, nobody wants to be seen to be militarily supporting one side or the other since that risks dragging everyone into a much broader conflict. Both sides of the old "east/west"political divide want to contain the fighting within the borders of Syria much more than they want to their "dog" to win. This is why Israeli strikes on Syria and arms supplies to either side in Syria spook everyone.

UN voting patterns on subjects concerning Syria and Israel still more or less follows the patterns established during the cold war. Saddam was politically simple by comparison, he was our loose cannon and the old "red team" of nations didn't mind us taking him out, Gadaffi was dead the minute the revolt erupted, he had no powerful friends left, much less an influential voting block in the UN watching his back.

Re:Talking... (2)

SplashMyBandit (1543257) | about a year ago | (#43700441)

UN voting patterns on subjects concerning Syria and Israel still more or less follows the patterns established during the cold war.

It does this because the Red-Green Alliance of the Cold War is still active. The Organization of Islamic Cooperation has joined with 'Non-Aligned States' to form a voting bloc that supports either Islamist or ex-communist causes. Because it is one-vote-per-country democracy in the UN (that is, mob rule), this system invented in the Cold War still works to the advantage of Islamists and communists - that is why you see the voting patterns you do, even two decades after the collapse of the Soviet socialist system.

This system is slightly off topic, but explains this "Cold War" voting bloc very quickly. I hope it is enlightening to you (and shows you why the United Nations no longer works towards its founding purpose):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j7Mupoo1At8 [youtube.com]

Re:Talking... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43699679)

You mean, actually somebody challenges their god-given right to drop bombs on other nations ?

Re:Talking... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43700205)

Ordinarily I could see Russia pushing to go ahead with the SAM deal, because Russia like the USSR is historically short on hard currency. But since they've been showing a good net on natural gas, break even on basic foods, I'm guessing Putin wants some leverage for other reasons. For that matter, although it might not help them all that much in the long run, they have a big hammer in the threat to let loose with some of their diamonds and gold. They could destroy the diamond market, and wreak damage to world financials with the gold. Last I looked Israel economy is more sensitive than most to those two things.

Gotta sell 'em something (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about a year ago | (#43698833)

It's the only way to keep the war going.. peace would be a real disaster in this business.

But not Great Old Ones (2)

JoshuaZ (1134087) | about a year ago | (#43698845)

I may have read to much H.P. Lovecraft and Charlie Stross, but when I first read the headline, my initial reading was that Russia would be given shoggoths to Syria. That would have been interesting. It will be interesting to see if any deal does go through, and the fact that Syria wants these is interesting given that the rebels have had little access to aircraft. Syria probably wants it to help prevent intervention in the ongoing civil war.

Re:But not Great Old Ones (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43699629)

* deter ?

RE (1)

ralphlaurena (2892633) | about a year ago | (#43699075)

yes I think so they would turn them into surface to surface targeting rebel donkey carts transporting CIA supplied surface to air missiles come surface to surface missiles that in turn target government donkey carts. In general the only things that will blow up are innocent Syrian kids and donkeys.

Oh Dear (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43699077)

Putin and Netanyahu (for non-Isrealie speak 'net in yahoo') have something other than sex to talk about .... Lovely !

LOL old systems? (1)

NetNinja (469346) | about a year ago | (#43699457)

How about once the Syrians and that's a big if they ever get them up and running, they don't want Stealth fighters making mincemeat out of their so called technological advantage or the newest systems falling into CIA hands to be dissected and a new generation jamming pod being developed.

A Passing Thought... (2)

some old guy (674482) | about a year ago | (#43699475)

Might this not be an opportune time for the US to stop living up to its image overseas as a big, blundering, international bully and just let the locals fend for themselves?

With a millions of Islamic loonies on their doorstep, and their own disasters in Afghanistan and Chechnya to remind them, one would think that the Russians would have better sense than to keep exacerbating and encouraging Middle-Eastern instability.

No, I suppose both powers' energy and defense industries are more important than anybody else's self-determination.

Economic and political pragmatism trumps idealism every time.

Re:A Passing Thought... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43699795)

The Russians are merely helping their Arabs against your Arabs. You know, YOUR Arabs are funding the nastiest Islamic terror of all - the Sunni/Wahabist terror. The Wahabists have been making war in the Caucasus, in New York and in Boston recently.

Chechnya alone would justify the Russians to equip both Syria and Iran with nuclear weapons and threatening to nuke out the Saudis. Russia is actually stupidly pacifist in reacting to the destruction of their allies by the Saudi-financed Terror.

Always good to see who the Bedfellows of the Jews are. For minuscule advantage the Jews collaborate with Wahabist Terrorism. I can't wait to hear their whining when the Wahabists turn against the Jews one day and massacre quite a few of that "smart nation". Smart my ass, the Jews are the dumbest people that ever lived on earth, otherwise they would aim for long-term peace instead of short-term gain. But hey, they are money-changers, what do you expect ??

Re: A Passing Thought... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#43700179)

Israel in fact did sign peace deals with Egypt, Jordan, and the Palestinians. The latter have since backed down, and the former are considering it.

Re:A Passing Thought... (1)

kermidge (2221646) | about a year ago | (#43700231)

don't know about the rest of your message but the Wahabi are sure a nasty bunch

Re:A Passing Thought... (1)

tibman (623933) | about a year ago | (#43700307)

I'd say the Shiite are more "ours" than Sunni. Just look at Iraq.

Re:A Passing Thought... (1)

SplashMyBandit (1543257) | about a year ago | (#43700455)

How have the Jews collaborated with Wahabbi terrorism? The US collaborates and arms Wahabbis but Israel does not. Israel was careful to bomb sites that are useful to Hezbollah (who are Shia, not Sunni Wahabbis). So, it has to be said that your post is not only stupidly racist, it is also ignorantly false. No wonder you posted as an AC - I'd be ashamed of putting such falsehoods on the Web too.

Re:A Passing Thought... (1)

fredgiblet (1063752) | about a year ago | (#43700221)

The problem is that if we don't get involved people will complain about how we're standing by while people are slaughtered. Of course if we DO get involved people (many of them the SAME people) will flip out if a single civilian dies by the hands of our soldiers and start screaming about how our soldiers are murderers. It's a no-win situation, but on the whole the balance clearly favors letting them kill each other.

I for one would like to see us completely avoid getting involved except for working (both politically and if needed militarily) to keep the issue contained to Syria.

Re:A Passing Thought... (2)

shutdown -p now (807394) | about a year ago | (#43700361)

Russia doesn't have a problems with Shia Islamic loonies on their doorstep. It has a good relationship with Iran, trade and otherwise. It has an okay relationship with Azerbaijan, the other Shiite country in the region (though that one is firmly in the Turkish sphere of influence). Its problems with militant Islam are mainly with Wahhabi/Salafi extremist forms of it, and those are coming from countries like Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. Coincidentally, they happen to be exactly the countries which Iran is heavily opposed to, and also the ones that are engaged in the proxy war in Syria on rebel side.

So, geopolitically, Russia would actually have a lot to gain from helping establish Iran as a regional superpower on Middle East, dominating over the neighboring Sunni states (and taking over the Shia majority / Sunni ruled ones like Iraq or Bahrain). Diminishing the influence of Turkey would also be helpful, seeing how the latter is the biggest blocker to a stronger Russian naval presence in Mediterranean.

Re:A Passing Thought... (2)

SplashMyBandit (1543257) | about a year ago | (#43700473)

Might this not be an opportune time for the US to stop living up to its image overseas as a big, blundering, international bully and just let the locals fend for themselves?

Won't work. Look at history, in 1914 the US stayed neutral in World War I until someone came out and sank on of their ships. The World didn;t seek war with Hitler, but it came to them. In World War II the US was officially neutral (although did a lot of business in arms) until the Japanese came and pounded Pearl Harbour. The US didn't seek the war in Korea, the North Koreans did. The US didn't seek war in Vietnam, the Communist Vietnamese did. Th World didn't seek war with the Warsaw Pact, but the conflict by proxy was there. The US didn't seek war in Lebanon, the Islamists did. The US didn't seek war in the Middle East, the Iraqis invaded Kuwait. The US did seek war in Iraq and Afghanistan after 9/11 (Saddam did not sponsor the 9/11 attackers, but he did support other terrorist groups; and the Taliban were hosting Al Qaeda).

So you see, the historical facts show your premise is false. If the US persues a path of appeasement and disengagement trouble will still find it out - it just won't be on terms advantageous to the US when it comes. Your proposed solution of sticking your head in the sand like an ostrich will do nothing to dispel the hyenas that are circling.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...