Putin Warns Israel Against Selling Arms To Ukraine

[Purveyor]

Source: Jerusalem Post

Russian President Vladimir Putin warned Israel on Saturday against selling weapons to the pro-Western government in Kiev as retaliation for Moscow’s recently announced weapons deal with Iran.

Speaking to official state media in Russia, Putin said that any such deals between Israel and Ukraine would be “counterproductive” and would “only cause a new round of hostility.”

“The death toll would rise, but the result would not change,” Putin was quoted as telling Rossiya, the official state-run television channel.

Israeli officials were angered by the Kremlin's decision earlier this week to proceed with the sale of sophisticated S-300 surface-to-air missiles to Iran.

Read more: http://www.jpost.com/Israel-News/Putin-warns-Israel-against-selling-arms-to-Ukraine-398497

[christx30]

1. Putin, mind your own business. n/t

[Scootaloo]

2. There's multiple levels of hypocrisy and irony here.

[QuestionAlways]

3. Just what we don't need

The Ukraine being involved in the problems in the mid-east. Not saying Russia or Israel is right, just that we are looking at a slippery slop. What would Iran use ground to air missiles for? What does Iran have to defend? And from who?

[jeff47]

5. Iran needs them to defend against Israel.

After all, Israel is threatening to bomb Iran's nuclear weapon development sites.

Israel selling weapons to Ukraine is just turnabout.

[christx30]

23. And Iran has threatened to

"wipe them off the map" at one point.

[jeff47]

36. Yep. And Israel actually did bomb them at one point.

There are no saints in this region.

[okaawhatever]

10. Iran would use those missiles to protect their nuclear sites if they decide to build a bomb. It

would also put Iran's enemies in the ME at a great disadvantage if Iran decided to attack them. There is no doubt in my mind that if Iran accepts these missiles they don't have peaceul intentions. It will lead to an arms build-up in the ME, and maybe even force a ground intervention if the world decides to take out its nuke sites.

I think the US should offer the same missiles to their enemies to try and keep a balance of power in the ME. I like the idea of everyone there only having a 50/50 chance if they decide to start a war.

Russia said they offered the missiles to Iran because of the missiles the US ig selling to the Baltic countries (after he put missiles in Kaliningrad). I think its because of Obama's new position on Cuba.

[azurnoir]

4. apparently Israel's Foreign Ministry had previously blocked sales of drones to Ukraine

The Foreign Ministry has halted a drone sale to Ukraine out of fears the deal would antagonize Russia, an ally of breakaway regions in east Ukraine, Channel 2 television reported Monday night.

In recent weeks, a Ukrainian delegation was in Israel to discuss weapons purchases, including drones that could be used against the Russia-backed separatists, Channel 2 said.

The Defense Ministry reportedly approved the deal with the Israeli maker of the unmanned vehicles, Aeronautics Ltd., but the Foreign Ministry vetoed it.

Officials from the foreign and defense ministries have declined to comment.

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/.premium-1.616031

previously Avigdor Lieberman Israel's Minister of Foreign Affairs was a fan of Vladimir Putin, perhaps that has changed due to this weeks announcement of S-300 missiles to Iran

After the 2011 Duma election, in which Russian President Vladimir Putin's party United Russia won, Lieberman was the first politician to describe them as "absolutely fair, free and democratic".[125][126] Putin has described Lieberman's own political career as "brilliant".[127] Lieberman's pro-Russian stance and perceived friendly relations with Putin have also drawn criticism from fellow Israelis.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avigdor_Lieberman

[okaawhatever]

11. Lieberman was in the ministry of Foreign Affairs and that seems to be who nixed the deal. It

was the Defense Ministry who approved it. I think you're on to something. It's been clear to me that Lieberman's loyalties are, at a minimum, divided.

[bananas]

6. We'll get to watch WWIII streamed live from GoreSat and the ISS. nt

[sulphurdunn]

7. Is there anybody the Israelis

can't piss off? Is there anybody's business they won't meddle in? It's way past time to put this roaring little mouse in its cage.

[Xolodno]

8. They should heed the warning...

...Iran isn't the only country Russia can "sell" weapons to. Syria (part being governed by Assad), Lebanon, etc. But knowing the Nut, he will do it anyway. Because a heavily armed Syria or Lebanon = Elected forever....never mind the cost in lives.

If military profits were taxed at 100%, a lot of wars would end.

[okaawhatever]

12. Russia has already been selling weapons to Syria. Lots and lots of them, actually. nt

[Xolodno]

14. But....

...not the ones that shoot down planes. That's the major difference. It's one thing to sell Assad arms for the civil war...another to sell SAM systems that can down Israeli jets.

[NuclearDem]

15. Syria's had one of the best air defense systems in the Middle East for decades now.

They already have the weapons to shoot down Israeli aircraft.

Russia's been selling that stuff to them for decades.

[Xolodno]

18. Sorry...don't know how to put this lightly...but...thats utterly Bull Shit.

If what you say was true...

1. This would have failed for Israel instead of success: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Orchard

2. Syria does not have the S-300, system...much less the even more coveted S-400 system: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syrian_Air_Defense_Force If you note, most of their air defense dates back to the Soviet Era...with a couple of arms that are current, but don't add much. Long story short, they have a great air defense if this was World War II.

3. The best air defense system in the Mid-East, currently belongs to Israel. Although, Iran will now give them a run for their money: http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/04/13/us-iran-nuclear-russia-idUSKBN0N40YX20150413

So...your statement doesn't stand in the light of reality. But does stand in "American Media"....which doesn't cut the mustard.

[NuclearDem]

19. ...

1. This would have failed for Israel instead of success: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Orchard

The air defense network protecting the reactor was ordered to stand down.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/feb/04/syrian-rebel-raids-military-strongholds?CMP=twt_gu

Abu Mohammed, now a senior member of the rebel movement in the north of the country, broke the glass. What followed, he said, were the most puzzling 10 minutes of his military career.

"I shattered the glass and answered the phone," he said. "There was a brigadier on the other end from the strategic air command in Damascus. He said: 'There are enemy planes approaching, you are not to do anything.'

"I was confused. Do nothing? This is what we were waiting for. We couldn't see them on our radars. And then our radars were jammed. The missile base nearby could not have fired even if it was allowed."

Until last week, the Israeli raid in 2007 that destroyed what the International Atomic Energy Agency concluded was a nuclear reactor at al-Kibbar, north of Deir Azzor, was the last time Syria's much-vaunted air defence system was tested.

3. The best air defense system in the Mid-East, currently belongs to Israel. Although, Iran will now give them a run for their money: http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/04/13/us-iran-nuclear-russia-idUSKBN0N40YX20150413

"One of the best" does not mean "the best."

I am a former RJ backender. I know what Syria's air defense capabilities are.

[Xolodno]

25. Well then...since your the expert...tell me how Syria could have countered Israel's attack without..

..more modern equipment? Plus, using that equipment would have made them easy targets...but they stood down. Why? Could it because they knew their goose was cooked so why sacrifice scarce resources? Or some crazy tin foil thing?

The S-300 if deployed in Syria, would have create casualties....and you haven't refuted that they do not have the S-300. Only stated "they have one of the best in the Mid-east"...which isn't saying much....other than sensationalizing the information.

[NuclearDem]

27. ...

25. Well then...since your the expert...tell me how Syria could have countered Israel's attack without..
..more modern equipment?

They couldn't have if they wanted to. Electronic warfare attacks against the radar systems makes trying to get a lock on aircraft nearly impossible, which is exactly what the Israelis did during Orchard. It's also possible they had snuck a kill switch into the Syrian air defense network ala Stuxnet.

Neither the S-200 nor S-300 would have been able to resist a concentrated network attack like that.

Plus, using that equipment would have made them easy targets...but they stood down. Why? Could it because they knew their goose was cooked so why sacrifice scarce resources? Or some crazy tin foil thing?

Or it could have been the nuclear reactor there they weren't supposed to have. Or Olmert telling al-Assad that if bout countries remained mutually hush about it, Israel would still be interested in peace talks with Syria.

That the Israelis managed to beat a country's defenses in a tightly-planned attack doesn't mean that country's defenses aren't otherwise strong.

[Xolodno]

29. Okay...Not even going to bother dignifying this with a response...

...I'm really losing faith in DU as of late.

Point example, as a socialist...I can tell you Hilary is better than what the Repubs put out. But many here say I should not vote for her....and you say Syria stood down at the chance to stand toe to toe on equal footing with Israel. I give up. This just isn't worth it. I'm educated, in demand, etc. I can pull an Einstein if necessary.

[NuclearDem]

30. What on earth are you going on about?

and you say Syria stood down at the chance to stand toe to toe

Actually, the former major who was in charge of air defense for that region said that, not me.

I'm educated, in demand, etc. I can pull an Einstein if necessary.

The fuck? That ranks as one of the greatest cop outs I've ever read here on DU.

[Xolodno]

33. Yeah...be happy...

you won an argument on the internet, despite never really addressing anything. Cop out...okay, you can say that. I really don't care...whatever gives you that warm and fuzzy feeling inside.

[okaawhatever]

20. Definitely. They don't have SAM issiles, but they do have some anti-aircraft capabilities. nt

[NuclearDem]

21. You're not talking about Syria are you?

Because they have tons of surface to air missile capability.

[Xolodno]

26. So does Hamas if you consider their "rockets" surface to air...

....but they would be lucky to hit a drone from an hobbyist.

You're spouting about how they have "surface to air" capability....but haven't pointed out once, how they could down an F4 Phantom much less an F-15, F-14, etc. Nor have you provided evidence of their Surface to Air capabilities...Only Syria "have tons of surface to air missile capability"....whatever. If they can't hit a blimp on a clear day...I think that speaks for itself.

[NuclearDem]

28. You're not actually alleging that Syria has no surface to air missile capability, are you?

Because that would be fucking hilarious.

http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/view/syrian-air-defense-capabilities-and-the-threat-to-potential-u.s.-air-operat

Prior to the war, the regime's air defenses included 22 early-warning sites, 130 active SAM sites, around four thousand air-defense guns, and a few thousand man-portable air-defense systems (MANPADS). This allowed for dense coverage of major cities and economic centers closest to Israel, especially the coastal region, central-western Syria (Homs, Hama), the Damascus area, and the south. Northern and especially eastern Syria, which are much less heavily populated, were less heavily defended.

Syria has had and still does have plenty of SAM capability. Yes, it's been weakened by the civil war, but saying they don't have SAM capability is laughable.

how they could down an F4 Phantom

Except for the Turkish F-4 a Syrian surface to air missile shot down in 2012.

[Xolodno]

31. No...I'm implying its weak.

You are giving the all or nothing, zero sum implication. If everyone listened to you, a stealth bomber couldn't get into Syria. But as I said in another post. I'm done. Oh...and you still haven't pointed out where Syria has acquired the S-300 system....that undermines all of your arguments despite the fluff you keep spouting.

[NuclearDem]

32. What on earth?

Oh...and you still haven't pointed out where Syria has acquired the S-300 system....

Yeah, I never asserted that. Nice try.

that undermines all of your arguments despite the fluff you keep spouting.

Something I never asserted weakens my argument because you say it does.

Whatever you say.

Though I did notice you completely ignore how Syria shot down a Turkish F-4. It's almost like that statement you made was complete bullshit or something.

[Xolodno]

22. That's the point I'm making.

Against F-15's and 16's...they don't stand a chance. But with modern Russian equipment...which they don't have...

[okaawhatever]

24. Oh, thanks for clarifying. nt

[geek tragedy]

9. For whom to root? Tough call. nt

[NuclearDem]

16. Nobody to root for.

But if Russia can sell weapons to Iran to protect against Israeli aggression, then Israel can sell weapons to Ukraine to protect against Russian aggression.

[geek tragedy]

17. Yes, but that too will have consequences. nt

[BumRushDaShow]

13. Is Bibi going to get all up in Putin's face

They are 2 peas in the same pod.

[JonLP24]

34. Map & numbers of countries the US & Russia traffics arms too

http://www.businessinsider.com/arms-sales-by-the-us-and-russia-2014-8

[MisterP]

35. "also, stop helping an-Nusra"