In some respects he's right.....

Streetwise Professor: Why Don’t Journalists Scrutinize the Oracle of Syria?

avoka,

You don't seriously believe that anyone who is educated believes anything that Russia says. They have been serial liars about Crimea, Eastern Ukraine, MK-17, Georgia, Chechnya and all their other adventures.
Their propaganda might be believed in Russia but in the West only the hard of thinking give it any credence.

Here are some of the Russian lies about Syria totally exposed:
https://bellingcat.checkdesk.org/en/story/736

Eclectic:
It is not a politically-oriented thread of the forum, and I would not like to elaborate on such discussions, but all the propaganda loves to lie.
Nothing personal, just "returning the ball": here is a well-known lie about Iraq (weapons of mass destruction that later were never found there) that led to the invasion and total destruction of the country:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rp6WuTSTyS8
Obviously, Hussein, Gaddafi and may others were "must-die" monsters, but they maintained secular regimes and their brutal removal generated a much higher level of monstrosity in the region including creation of ISIS and other groups of armed thugs.

Reading and listening to what western media is now often saying/publishing about my country I lost a large portion of respect to CNN, BBC, NYT and likes. Especially when they tell "stories" about the venues that we live in.
Converting lies into rumors and then rumors into "facts"....Just see a URL two posts above about the guy who is hiding himself in your home town in UK and call himself alone smth like "Syrian observatory for human rights" speading lies about what's happening in Syria.
Having heard tons of lies about their own country, most of the Russians do not believe anything that US and UK media now say about Syria.
Giving up now with the politics and suggest to come back to military hardware. Would not mind if the moderator deletes the posts not related to the main topic.

A Van

Don't confuse what we appear to say about your media with belief in the veracity of our own media. You only have to read a few threads here to see how we believe in the creditability of the Daily Fail or the impartiality of the Garudian or Torygraph and earlier on bulletins from Truth Central (AKA Main Building or MoD)

Yours sceptically,

PN,

I think I know what you mean. I've been seeing reports of a Mig 29 shoot down by Turkish F16s all day today in both the dailies fail and excess. Both quote "reports" of this shoot down, but fail to report the source, so have no substantial foundation for their assertions. Meanwhile, no reported "NATO Outrage at Russian aggression" reported anywhere. I think I'm heading towards the camp of the "cynical old bloke" who can't see the difference between Russian or NATO bull****. Back to reality ? I wish.

Smudge

Smuj
The level of accuracy of the stories you quote were summed up for me with two 'facts' the stories contained.
A. The jets hovered above the city
B. Planes did things mysteriously.

I'd like to think that no one with knowledge of aircraft would say hover unless talking about a balloon in still air, a helicopter or a VTOL aircraft.
As for 'mysterious' I wonder if the aircraft were wearing cloaks like Zorro or a magician.

Russia are certainly trying out all their toys in Syria.
Reported deployment of Kamov Ka-50 Black Shark and Mil Mi-28 Havoc attack helicopters.

Also the "good" rebels have all united, and are now "Syrian Democratic Forces". USA airdropped 50 tons of weapons to them last night. U.S. gives 50 tons of ammunition to Syria rebel groups - CNNPolitics.com
And New Rebel Coalition Forms In Syria; Insurgents Lost Ground Over Weekend : The Two-Way : NPR

This begs several questions.
Did the shipment include MANPADs?
Will Russia try to intercept future USA airdrops? After all these weapons will be used against them. If they do what will USA do? Presumably they are running F-22 escorts.

Is it just me, or is there pretty big difference between "50 tons of weapons" and "50 tons of ammunition"?

Is a MANPAD or an ATGM a weapon or ammunition?

Let's now see whether the receivers of this "50 tonn gift" positively answer to the Al-Qaeda "daughter company" invitation :


Syria's Nusra Front leader urges wider attacks on Assad's Alawite areas to avenge Russian bombing - Telegraph

I am still trying to get my head round the "Your bombing the wrong terrorists," policy and supplying the "wronged" with weapons. The West has screwed up royally in Syria so far and seems to be determined to carry that forward. This may not be Obama's Vietnam, it may well though, be his Waterloo. The Russians are not playing games or "testing" kit.

Supplying people with armament that you have no control over, other than where you think, and hope it may be used is plain madness especially given you are dealing with Russia.

This is already ugly and appears to be getting dangerous.

According to the Torygraph, the Americans are supplying to the good rebels that Russia is attacking. Now in Vietnam the Americans were supporting the good guys (sic) and the Russians supporting the baddies (sic).

The Americans however were careful to try and avoid actually shooting at Russians. Now, with Russians in the front line and . . .

Oh s**!

Agree to a point Orac, but the comment below the story that "Modern journalists don’t like to do the foot-trudging required to find out stuff for themselves any more" fails to take into account the reality of being an independent (unembedded) journalist in today's conflict zones, where all sides see you as a tool of the enemy (either by accident or by design) and treat you accordingly.

Of course, this hasn't been helped by the rise over recent years of pseudo-journalists from RT and elsewhere who really are instruments of their state, and who tar the rest with the same brush.

Pontius,

As ever bang on the money, well said.

I think (well, believe) that it is not that bad as it was in Vietnam. It was said several times here, in Russia, that US and Russian military established a communication link to prevent accidents in the airspace. Hope it will work.
The fact that US and Russia support different groups of "bad guys" is sad, but actually nothing new, and serious people do not take it as a considerable escalation. Just a couple of extra sorties to destroy these newly supplied weapons if they are used not against ISIS, Nusra front and likes.
I still wonder why not to jointly (i.e. US and "their" rebels on one side and Russia + Syrian governmental forces on the other side) vaporize all those totally mad bloody ISIS & Co. maniacs and then jointly decide how to establish an acceptable secular regime in Damascus. As far as I heard, "baby Assad" was ready to study a compromise that would allow his head remain on its place while giving most of the power to a sort of a yet-to-be-defined "democratic" regime (whatever it may mean in that campus). IMHO, personal ambitions on all sides prevent coordinated "taking arms against the sea of troubles".

A Van I doubt very much that either side are telling each other what they are "really" up to, and given the number of reported close encounters that appears to be true. An hours notice (if true) of Russia's first air strikes is not a lot of notice for anyone to de-conflict is but one example.

As you say why not team up and wipe out ISIS, we can sort out if Assad stays after.

A Van, the Americans were a little irritated that Russian missiles were fired at them by Vietnamese.

I hope the Russians will be similarly only slightly irritated if American missiles were fired at them by . . .

PN:
You wrote: "I hope the Russians will be similarly only slightly irritated if American missiles were fired at them by . . ."


I hope so. It actually already happened in Afganistan in 80's when first Stingers arrived to those who are now Taliban. And though many helicopters were shot down, it was not a "casus belli".


"A la guerre comme a la guerre" as our French friends say...

cruise missles
 

Almost as an aside, someone wrote a letter yesterday that civil flights were at hazard from Russian cruise missiles flying over Iran.

Today the EU has issued an advisory.

BA has made no change to its routing over Iran.

Someone knows little about cruise missiles.

Not sure who doesn't read Sun Tzu, he's required reading at the staff college I attended, run by the US Army.
Maybe our pols ignore him.

@ Pontius Navigator: Very well played on The Aim and the cross purposes at which the US and Russian are working in Syria. Obama went on record as deciding that Assad had to go in 2011. How remains in the "we'll know it when we see it" category, but at least his Aim's been consistent. Putin backed Assad then, and is backing him more now. Putin's Aim has been consistent, and he's decided to pursue it through to success.

The UK: is there an Aim necessary in the person of Assad for the UK's national interest? Does it really matter if he's in power or not? I can't speak to UK geostrategy.

Aside: I think BA has it sorted, the EU not so much.