Islamic State warriors blew up 3 Turkish tanks / self propelled howitzers using Metis M

[Penguin]

Russia had not money to buy them in 1992. Foreign sales also started much later. Thus actual production of Metis-M started after Javelin.

Have it your way. It doesn't matter for the points I made earlier, which you ignore. G'day.

Die ersten Modelle wurden 1992 an die russischen Streitkräfte ausgeliefert
9M131 Metis-M: Erste Serienversion ab 1992;
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/AT-13_Saxhorn-2

Meaning:
The first models in 1992 handed over to the Russian forces
9M131 Metis-M: First production version from 1992;

 

[Penguin]

* US openly says it arms and trains Kurds so not surprising they got Javelin (also probably its foreign SF among Kurds who are using them).
* Russia says it is fighting ISIS but we see modern Russian ATGM in theis hands.

Where do u see parallels here?

Go back to my original posts on the topic. I'm not going to repeat just for you.

Because Israel does not sell advanced weapons to irresponsible regimes who hand their weapons to terrorists.

Does "Iran-Contra" have any meaning to you (or are you not old enough to have experienced that period)?
Remember Israeli support for Iran during the Iran–Iraq war? Pinochet's Chile? Botha's South Africa? South Lebanese army? Responsible regimes, you say?

http://972mag.com/who-will-stop-the-flow-of-israeli-arms-to-dictatorships/114080/
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...to-fuel-conflict-in-south-sudan-10452399.html
http://mondoweiss.net/2015/12/israeli-against-demonstrators/

Kid yourself not.

Syria handed weapons to terrorists in 2006 and in response Russia sold (or more correctly gifted, since they never had money) even more advanced weapons to them.

Can you guarantee that none of the Israeli arms shipped to e.g. Iran ever ended up elsewhere, during the September 1980 to August 1988 period of the Iran-Iraq war, or after?

G'day (moving you to ignore list)

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

Afghanistan is destroyed because of American made Taliban not soviet invasion.

Syria is destroyed because of American made maniac jihadi thugs. Syrian people in territories under government control are living much better than territories under jihadis control.

You are confused.
The Taliban movement only became a significant force Years after the Soviets left Afghanistan,
and the U.S. did not maintain an interest after that.
Taliban got their support from Pakistan, if You ask me.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taliban

If I read this correctly, it is true that the SA and US funded them against the Soviet Union but it was Zia-ul-Haq that went out to garner the support for them in the first place. Of course, the alternative would have been to not support them, and then you might well have been stuck with Russia in Afghanistan for the duration.

You would need to consider later developments to fully understand the evolving relationship between these players.

See above

Read again...
The Soviet Union left Afghanistan in 1989. With them went the U.S. interest.
The Taliban, according to the link emerged in the early 1990s.
The Taliban NEVER fought the Soviets.
At that time there was a civil war between the future Northern Alliance War Lords
and Gulbuddin Hekmyatar (or whatever)'s forces.
The Talibans, trained and supported by Pakistan cleaned out.

No WAY, the U.S. supplied the Talibans with any Stingers.
The U.S. supplied the Mujahedin with plenty.
Any unused inventory may have ended up in Taliban hands after the takeover.

 

[Penguin]

Read again...
The Soviet Union left Afghanistan in 1989. With them went the U.S. interest.
The Taliban, according to the link emerged in the early 1990s.
The Taliban NEVER fought the Soviets.
At that time there was a civil war between the future Northern Alliance War Lords
and Gulbuddin Hekmyatar (or whatever)'s forces.
The Talibans, trained and supported by Pakistan cleaned out.

No WAY, the U.S. supplied the Talibans with any Stingers.
The U.S. supplied the Mujahedin with plenty.
Any unused inventory may have ended up in Taliban hands after the takeover.

Zia-ul-Haq aligned himself with Pakistan's Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam . In 1991, the Taliban (a movement originating from Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam-run religious schools for Afghan refugees in Pakistan) also developed in Afghanistan as a politico-religious force.

You might interprete this a meaning the Taliban originated in Pakistan under the rule of Zia.... (There were Taliban pre 1991, just not yet a force in Afghanistan.)

 

[ultron]

 

[500]

Go back to my original posts on the topic. I'm not going to repeat just for you.

You claim that US weapons in hands of Kurds and Russian weapons in hands of ISIS are parallel.

But US openly says it arms and trains Kurds. That means according to ur parallel Russia also arms and trains ISIS?

Does "Iran-Contra" have any meaning to you (or are you not old enough to have experienced that period)?
Remember Israeli support for Iran during the Iran–Iraq war? Pinochet's Chile? Botha's South Africa? South Lebanese army? Responsible regimes, you say?

http://972mag.com/who-will-stop-the-flow-of-israeli-arms-to-dictatorships/114080/
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...to-fuel-conflict-in-south-sudan-10452399.html
http://mondoweiss.net/2015/12/israeli-against-demonstrators/

Kid yourself not.


Can you guarantee that none of the Israeli arms shipped to e.g. Iran ever ended up elsewhere, during the September 1980 to August 1988 period of the Iran-Iraq war, or after?

G'day (moving you to ignore list)

It was during full scale war with Iraq. All weapons went to this war. Besides all kinds of weapons Israel supplied they already had before that. No new kinds of weapons.

Bottom line: while Russian propaganda tells without any proofs that Turkey is supplying ISIS, facts tell the opposite. It is not 100% proof that Russia is supplying ISIS, but good food for thought.

Another food for thoughts is that Russia (USSR) armed and trained Iraqi Baath for decades, and ISIS top consists of many Iraqi Baath officers.

 

[ultron]

But US openly says it arms and trains Kurds. That means according to ur parallel Russia also arms and trains ISIS?

Kurds do not have US arms. Neither TOWs nor Javelins. The US has never armed Kurds.

 

[Jamaal Yelmaaz]

ISIS continou to fire Katyusha rockets to Turkish border towns..Yesterday one more civilian died and the casualty toll of civillians passed 20 in Kilis....

The day before, ISIS atacked police building by suicide car bomb in Gaziantep killed 2 police and wounded 25 ...

 

[T-Rex]

Another food for thoughts is that Russia (USSR) armed and trained Iraqi Baath for decades, and ISIS top consists of many Iraqi Baath officers.

That's the real point Russian supporters hide.

 

[Natan]

ISIS continou to fire Katyusha rockets to Turkish border towns..Yesterday one more civilian died and the casualty toll of civillians passed 20 in Kilis....

Iron Dome batteries could possibly provide protection to these towns. But, unlikely under Erdogan rule.

 

[ptldM3]

That's the real point Russian supporters hide.

Yes, yes because several top Isis leaders are former Iraqi military, Russia must be responsible for Isis....if anyone actually takes this as complacency....then frankly they are retards.


High ranking Isis leaders are from all over the Middle East. Your propaganda tells you that Russia is not bombing Isis, yet I can list countless offensives in which Russian aircraft as well as soldiers took part in. Of all the bitching that comes from the gulf states and Turkey, how many of them did anything meaningful against Isis? While Russian aircraft and soldiers drove Isis out of Palmyra, gulf leaders sat on their asses, same thing happened during the siege of the Quaris base, Deir ez zoir.

 

[Penguin]

You claim that US weapons in hands of Kurds and Russian weapons in hands of ISIS are parallel.

But US openly says it arms and trains Kurds. That means according to ur parallel Russia also arms and trains ISIS?

I've alredy indicate I'm done discussing this.

It was during full scale war with Iraq. All weapons went to this war. Besides all kinds of weapons Israel supplied they already had before that. No new kinds of weapons.

So, that makes it any different? And how about those other cases I mentioned (Pinochets Chile, Botha's South Africa)? No to mention the Argentina of the Generals. A plethora of Africa nations. South Sudan etc. Blah on you.

Bottom line: while Russian propaganda tells without any proofs that Turkey is supplying ISIS, facts tell the opposite. It is not 100% proof that Russia is supplying ISIS, but good food for thought.

Another food for thoughts is that Russia (USSR) armed and trained Iraqi Baath for decades, and ISIS top consists of many Iraqi Baath officers.

You believe what you want. If you choose to be unnuanced, that's your choice. Meanwhile your position has already shiften from ' supplied by Russia' to 'not 100% proof'.

Israel trained Iranians during the war with Iraq, and police and military in the other countries I indicated. So?

 

[500]

I've alredy indicate I'm done discussing this.


So, that makes it any different? And how about those other cases I mentioned (Pinochets Chile, Botha's South Africa)? No to mention the Argentina of the Generals. A plethora of Africa nations. South Sudan etc. Blah on you.

None ended in hands of terrorists.

You believe what you want. If you choose to be unnuanced, that's your choice. Meanwhile your position has already shiften from ' supplied by Russia' to 'not 100% proof'.

I never claimed it is supplied by Russia. I merely pointed on fact that while Russia talks without any proofs that Turkey supplies ISIS, in reality we see how ISIS repeatedly attacks Turkey with modern Russian missiles.

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

Zia-ul-Haq aligned himself with Pakistan's Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam . In 1991, the Taliban (a movement originating from Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam-run religious schools for Afghan refugees in Pakistan) also developed in Afghanistan as a politico-religious force.

You might interprete this a meaning the Taliban originated in Pakistan under the rule of Zia.... (There were Taliban pre 1991, just not yet a force in Afghanistan.)

The Issue is if the U.S. supplied the Taliban with Weapons, especially Stingers.
With the Soviets long gone, before they emerged in Afghanistan - it is stupid to support that idea.

 

[T-Rex]

Yes, yes because several top Isis leaders are former Iraqi military, Russia must be responsible for Isis.

It's good that you've admitted that most of the ISIS commanders are former baath army officers who were trained and inspired by the Russians. Those baath army officers have transformed themselves into ISIS terrorists committing terrorism taught by the Russians. So, it is a fact that ISIS terrorists got their training from the Russians. In the past they committed terrorism in the name of suckularism and now they are doing it in the name of Islam, this is the only thing that has changed. Their mental faculty as formed by the notorious KGB, remains the same.

High ranking Isis leaders are from all over the Middle East. Your propaganda tells you that Russia is not bombing Isis, yet I can list countless offensives in which Russian aircraft as well as soldiers took part in. Of all the bitching that comes from the gulf states and Turkey, how many of them did anything meaningful against Isis? While Russian aircraft and soldiers drove Isis out of Palmyra, gulf leaders sat on their asses, same thing happened during the siege of the Quaris base, Deir ez zoir.

Those ISIS terrorists blew up a few Turkish tanks the other day. If Turkey was not doing anything to piss them off why would they do such a thing? It is now an open secret that Russia portrays FSA as ISIS so that they can claim that they are bombing ISIS terrorists. Russia is not in Syria to crush ISIS that is just a convenient excuse, matter of fact, there's evidence that there's an understanding between the asad regime and the ISIS terrorists in the battle field. Russia is in Syria to crush democracy. So, stop your Russian propaganda.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...-sky-n/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter