U.S. slams Russian anti-ship missiles going to Syria

Since when did Russia have morrals?

Russian "sodai gomi", they might as well leave them in Russia. They will be no use in helping Syria defend itself from the Americans or Israel. What good did the Russian weapons systems do for Iraq or Libya?

Anyone or any country who produce or sell weapon can not even talk morals to others !! Think about in Mann .

Since when did Russia have morrals?

Since when did USA have morals? Seriously, the country behind Guantanamo had no moral right to lecture Russia on human rights. What a bunch of hypocrites.

Can't help wondering if General Dynamics, Boeing, Lockheed Martin and the other members of the US Military Industrial Complex were peeved at missing out on sales?

Russia is in the business to keep American busy with M.E. for their own advantage. Look at the way Putin won the election and runs his government would explain all about their viciousness, and do not count too much about peace accord with Japan soon. What happen to team Obama, especially JOHN kERRY (Juan Kerry in French)? Well, it is all about lip service, isn't it?

tokyobakarao: no moral right to lecture Russia on human rights.

LOL. Of course people can form their opinion about Russian human right just as you have formed your own.

SuperLib

Please, can you quote my full sentence? I said:

The country behind Guantanamo (read USA) had no moral right to lecture Russia on human rights.

Anyway, thank you for showing me again how sensitive are USA when they are being reminded all their dirty business (weapons to other dictators in the world) and how hypocrite they are when they lecture other countries on human rights while keeping eyes closed on Guantanamo.

Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye?.

“So we continue to work with the Russians on their interests and everything we can do to convince the powers that are involved in the region to be careful with escalation of military options and equipment,” he said, adding that the U.S. was planning for every military contingency."

Says a top-level representative of the most prolific arms exporter in history...

tokyobakayaro: Anyway, thank you for showing me again how sensitive are USA when they are being reminded all their dirty business (weapons to other dictators in the world) and how hypocrite they are when they lecture other countries on human rights while keeping eyes closed on Guantanamo.

OK. So how do you personally feel about Russia sending missiles to Syria?

OK. So how do you personally feel about Russia sending missiles to Syria?

Why shouldn't Russia honor its contracts to deliver weapons to a sovereign country. Syria has every right to defend itself from these foreign terrorists (aka rebels, who is arming them?).

Maybe if Israel would stop attacking Syria, they wouldn't need this defense system.

Dempsey also warned specifically about the surface-to-air missiles, saying they provide Syria with defenses at higher altitude and longer range, and with better tracking capability.

At least the American side is acknowledging that this is a defense system. Oddly, they remain opposed to it.

Syria has never been threatened by ships of any nation. So why are they getting anti-ship missiles? Do they want them, or has Russia told them they need them?

And why are the US upset about it, unless they have some plan to send warships down the Mediterranean in support of a no-fly zone.

Thus do we read behind the news?

Assad has chemical weapons, but hasn't used them, probably. If the other side had them, they would use them, probably, especially the Al Qaeda connected folks.

Actually, the other side HAS used them; and the west continues to back them! Odd how the so-called Al Qaeda never seems to attack Israel, interesting that!

According to UN's Carla del Ponte, the evidence points towards the "rebels" having used chemical weapons. The West is dying to have Syria cross the "red line", I am sure someone nearby could have provided a copter, if that is indeed what was used.

It just does not make sense for Syria to use chemical weapons. They are winning and they know very well that the west is itching for a fight; that is also why they haven't responded to the israeli provocations. There are certainly many in the region who would like us to believe that the Syrian government used chemical weapons. This reminds me of the very beginning of the conflict, when immediately before the UN was to meet to discuss what to do with Syria, innocent civilians were killed by snipers, and we were all told (and some continue to believe) that they were government snipers!

BlueScript: Why shouldn't Russia honor its contracts to deliver weapons to a sovereign country.

Well that's certainly a well sanitized statement.

Syria has every right to defend itself from these foreign terrorists (aka rebels, who is arming them?).

Other Middle Eastern countries are arming them. It's about religion, as it always is.

Maybe if Israel would stop attacking Syria, they wouldn't need this defense system.

Israel is largely irrelevant to the situation.

zichi Farmboy,

The rebels might have used chemical weapons too, but were did they get from?

Where did they get other weaponary?

The same supplier

zichi Not according to some of the reports by BBC World News which have shown actual victims including young children

Sorry - BBC - UK agency

And UK is NOT neutral in this conflict ...

denounced Russia on Friday for providing Syrian President Bashar Assad’s regime with anti-ship missiles

ANTI - SHIP missiles !!!

So "rebels " have their own fleet ?

One more time - these missiles can't be used in ground battle....

What's the problem ?

It's against intervention from sea !

Olegek. Russia, Iran and China are clearly one-sided "in this conflict" as you call it, and quite open about supplying one side.

Sunni Arab states have been supplying the rebels.

The US, Turkey, France, the UK etc., have been struggling month after bloody month to stay neutral, and the slaughter continues. People like you accuse the western powers of lack of neutrality.

Look elsewhere first, please.

The US, Turkey, France, the UK etc., have been struggling month after bloody month to stay neutral,

No - they have organised this "rebellion" and provided political& informational support from the beginning...

@zichi

That might be so but I have watched BBC World News reports showing both the gov't and rebel actions.

You can show the same thing in thousand different ways ....

Don`t trust mainstream media. These are nutcases, many who want a muslim state of tyranny. Assad is a bad lot but not as bad as these people. These are the same types who have made Libya more dangerous and poorer, the same types funded by the CIA in Afghanistan, the same types who kill those who do not agree with them.

Ok, I won't trust the mainstream media. I'll trust some guy on a message board.