Russia warns it will shoot down alliance jets over Syria if US launches air strikes against Assad

[MowCowWhoHow III]

Source: The Telegraph

Russian forces could shoot down coalition jets if the United States launches airstrikes against pro-government forces in Syria, the Russian ministry of defence has said.

American officials have reportedly discussed using limited airstrikes to force Bashar al-Assad’s government to halt its assault on Aleppo and return the negotiating table after a ceasefire collapsed last month.

In Moscow’s starkest warning yet against Western intervention in the war, Russia’s chief military spokesman said that any airstrikes on government-held territory in Syria would be considered a “clear threat” to Russian servicemen.

US military planners should “carefully consider the possible consequences” of such action, Major General Igor Konashenkov said in a statement on Thursday.

Read more: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/10/06/russian-air-defence-missiles-would-respond-if-us-launches-air-st/

---

Russia Warns US Not to Intervene in Syria

Russia has warned the United States not to intervene militarily in Syria against forces loyal to President Bashar al-Assad, threatening that it may shoot down any aircraft attempting to launch strikes.

In a bluntly worded statement, a spokesman for Russia's defense ministry warned that Russia and the Syrian government had deployed sufficient air defenses to block any potential attacks.

It follows rumbling in Washington that the White House may be considering launching strikes against some Syrian regime military targets as an alternative option for moving forward in the Syrian conflict after the collapse of U.S.-Russian cease-fire negotiations.

The Washington Post reported on Tuesday that the Pentagon was presenting the Obama administration with the option of strikes at meetings this week. The strikes would be intended to increase the pressure on the Assad regime and Moscow to halt assaults on civilians and to return to possible peace negotiations.

http://abc7ny.com/news/russia-warns-us-not-to-intervene-in-syria/1542247/

[MowCowWhoHow III]

1. Assad offers rebels amnesty if they surrender Aleppo

Assad offers rebels amnesty if they surrender Aleppo

Rebels holed up in Aleppo can leave with their families if they lay down their arms, President Bashar al-Assad said on Thursday, vowing to press on with the assault on Syria's largest city and recapture full control of the country.

The offer of amnesty follows two weeks of the heaviest bombardment of the five-and-a-half-year civil war, which has killed hundreds of people trapped inside Aleppo's rebel-held eastern sector and torpedoed a U.S.-backed peace initiative.

Fighters have accepted similar government amnesty offers in other besieged areas in recent months, notably in Daraya, a suburb of Damascus that was under siege for years until rebels surrendered it in August.

However, rebels said they had no plan to evacuate Aleppo, the last major urban area they control, and denounced the amnesty offer as a deception.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-syria-idUSKCN126236

[Augiedog]

2. Ahhh, World War III, what took you so long to get here?

[mahatmakanejeeves]

4. It was waiting for Mr. Right to come along. NT

[Oneironaut]

3. Why are we helping Al Qaeda?

Assad winning would be the best outcome in this mess. We only want to topple Assad because he's more favorable to Russia. The US needs to pack up and go home.

[Foggyhill]

5. It would not be the best option for civilians

Assad is a monster who
Targets hospitals
And civilians

There is also the matter of Kurds and Turkey, what will happen when Assad russia attacks them! turkey supports sunnites opposed to Assad and is in NATO, the usa supports the Kurds

Letting Russia dictate things in the region is a bad idea

[Oneironaut]

6. The monster is shadowed over by the monsters we're supporting.

They're more bloodthirsty and murderous than 100 Assads. We have no idea what we're doing. We're fumbling around and indirectly supplying Al Qaeda with weapons because we don't want to give Putin Syria. Had we given it initially, the world would be a much better place.

This is a hill no American wants to die on. It's time to pull back and choose our engagements more wisely in the future.

[Foggyhill]

7. Your hyperbole I can't take setiously

The us has very little involvement
With those in the allepo pocket
If any

I've actually helped resettle Syrian refugees
So you can the over the top bs

The US mostly care about Civilians
And avoiding war crimes

And considering Assad has bombed
All hospitals your assertion of
100x is absurd

[Oneironaut]

8. That's the official story. The US is always the good guy according to the US.

The rebels we're giving guns and aid to are all "moderate." They're so moderate that they butcher civilians, give guns to Al Nusra (if not being outright members), and yell "Allah Akbar!" in combat. If anyone believes that the US's intentions are altruistic in Syria, I have a bridge to sell them.

If the US cared about world peace and civilians, they should have put package bombs in those guns and supplies and killed our real enemies. Instead, we're building up to the next 9/11 because we're too arrogant and foolish to learn a lesson from history.

[Cayenne]

9. What do you think the CIA does?

How do you think ISIS and al Nusra Front (al Qaeda) get their copious American made weapons and TOW missiles from? That America has been supplying ISIS and al Qaeda is getting harder to suppress and deny.

Fun fact: The CIA's very first 'regime change' was '49 Syria.

[awoke_in_2003]

10. The replacements aren't any better

Russia has had a presence in Syria for a long time. It is their only ports in the Med. Do we want to risk war with Russia to take away something they've had for quite some time.