Putin Orders Military To "Immediately Destroy" Any Threat To Russian Forces

Tyler Durden's picture

Russian President Vladimir Putin has ratcheted up the rhetoric in what appears to be one step closer to the potential for direct conflict with The West. While not detailing 'who' he was focued on, amid the obvious Turkey-Russia tensions, Putin told a session of the Defense Ministry's collegium that "I order to act extremely tough. Any targets that threaten Russian forces or our infrastructure on the ground should be immediately destroyed."

During the meeting of the most senior defense officials, ITAR TASS reports that Putin also warned against "those who will again try to organize any provocations against our servicemen."

 "We have already taken additional measures to ensure security of Russian servicemen and air base. It was strengthened by new aviation groups and missile defense systems. Strike aircraft will now carry out operations under cover of fighter jets,"

Putin said that the Russian military have caused a substantial damage to terrorists in Syria, adding that the actions of the Russian Armed Forces are worthy of praise.

"The combined operation of the Aerospace Defence Forces and the Navy, the use of newest high precision weapons systems has caused a serious damage to the terrorist infrastructure, thus qualitatively changing the situation in Syria," the president said.

The president also ordered the defense ministry to coordinate actions in Syria with Israel’s command post and the US-led international coalition.

"It’s important to develop cooperation with all countries really interested in destroying terrorists. I am talking about contacts on ensuring flight safety with the command post of Israel’s air force and forces of the US-led coalition," Putin said.

According to the official, terrorists in Syria pose a direct threat to Russia and Moscow’s actions are carried out to protect the country rather than due to abstract interests.

"Our soldiers in Syria are, first and foremost, defending their country. Our actions there aren’t motivated by some obscure and abstract geopolitical interests or a desire to train our forces and test new weapons – which is of course an important goal as well. Our main objective is to avert a threat to the Russian Federation,"

As we noted previously, The Kremlin looks prepared not only to stay the course, but to ramp up the deployment. Not only is Moscow hitting terrorist targets with cruise missiles from Russia’s Caspian Fleet, but now, Moscow is shooting at ISIS from a submarine in what can only be described as an effort by Putin to use Syria as a testing ground for Russia’s long dormant military juggernaut (after all, you don’t really need to shoot at a group that doesn’t have an air force or a navy from a sub). 

On that note, we present the following update graphic prepared by Louis Martin-Vézian of CIGeography as post at The Aviationst. It documents the scope of Russia’s operation in the Mid-East and should give you an idea of just how committed Moscow is to the fight.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
TheSheepWolf's picture

Does that mean to destroy Turkey?

Looney's picture

This dude is not afraid to take responsibility and give the actual order.


MarketAnarchist's picture

I don't see putins actions as worse than any western leader.  he is much more respectable.

The Pope's picture

 "Putin Orders Military To "Immediately Destroy" Any Threat To Russian Forces"


Well, I suppose that means that Obama's "sneakers on the ground" are safe then.

WordSmith2013's picture

Not only that --->

Putin Goes Ballistic With Nuclear Threat Against ISIS, Russia Will Not Tolerate NATO Interference


. . . _ _ _ . . .'s picture

He's armed his jets with air-to-air missles and so they can defend themselves and can attack Turkey's new aquisitions:

"Boeing has completed delivery of the last of four Peace Eagle Airborne Early Warning & Control (AEW&C) aircraft to Turkey."

According to Putin's latest, they will be blown out of the sky should they even take off.


Damn those Boeing bastards again. Boeing seems to have a hard-on for Turkey. Boeing has a hand in anti-US terror (un-interruptable auto pilot - re: Northwoods, 9/11, MH-370.)

Tejano's picture

Fucking merchants of death. To hell with the lot of them.

Occident Mortal's picture

Russia is getting ready to swat some planes outta the sky. This rhetoric is just a prequalifier to it.

Manthong's picture

Regarding.. AEW.. Peace Eagle

I’ve done that work in older platforms years ago.

You do not want to be in one of those things if push comes to shove.

They are Peace Sitting Ducks if you do not control the skies.

..or maybe turkeys.. which reminds me Vlad owes Turkey and payback is a bitch.



Bring the Gold's picture

Meanwhile, if this is fake they got a god damn Kubrick clone. If real, which it appears to be then...well...holy fuck. This just came out so hard to verify. I'd heard the rumors but god damn. Not surprising yet mind blowing all the same.


CheapBastard's picture
Thousands of Donald Trump supporters wait in line to see Republican candidate






Herd Redirection Committee's picture

I have looked A LOT into this Kubrick/Apollo program 'conspiracy'.  Well, let me just say the forum where I posted all my information is no LONGER ONLINE!  Yeah.  Coincidence.  Hmmm...  There is A TON of info showing Kubrick's NASA connections, showing the hints he left in his films (I'll give you two, The Shining was released 11 years after Apollo 11, and Eyes Wide Shut was released on THE 30 year anniversary of the Apollo 'manned' Moon landing).

In 'The Shining', the famous line is: "All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy."

Kubrick = Jack. All work = A11 Work (Apollo 11)

A11 work and no play makes Jack a dull boy.  There are dozens more.  Fuckin fantastic.

Bring the Gold's picture

Seems like this will be a game changer in terms of people's confidence/trust in government. Even I had next to none and now even that little whisper of confidence is gone. This is the biggest news piece in the past 50 years and IMO might blow open everything from 9/11 to JFK and beyond. How can one believe a thing anymore?! That's fucking Kubrick admitting it on freaking video!!!! Non-disclosure agreement for 15 years after his death. He completes Eyes Wide Shut and then does right after.

Eyes Wide Shut broke open the elite ritual sex party stuff before the IMF guy who was accused of rape admitted to those kinds of parties. His name escapes me at the moment but holy shit is my mind blown!!!

Herd Redirection Committee's picture

Dom Strauss Kahn.

Yep, Kubrick even used a Rothschild mansion for the orgy scene, so that people who had that kind of thirst for knowledge would find a 'trail of crumbs'.  And supposedly Kubrick was "obsessed with conspiracy theories" (the anecdote comes from his daughter, who says he bought him essentially a conspiracy encyclopaedia).

Bring the Gold's picture

Yeah, well it's looking like this video is a fake with an actor. Doesn't make moon landing legit, but it's annoying that it seems fake. His widow is denying it's real. God damn it.

Herd Redirection Committee's picture

Well, his wife is the niece of Veit Harlan, Nazi propagandist (Jud Suss, etc). She has blood connection to a famous government propagandist, and she married a man who ("allegedly") was hired to fake the manned Moon landing, which if true, is the greatest propaganda victory in human history.  She wants to live, so she will deny it.

Between what happened to Stanley's daughter (kidnapped by Scientology) and Vernon Walters, there is enough to go on without this interview, but it looks real enough to me.  Show me the actor they used, though, and I am open to the possibility this was just more muddying of the waters/disinfo.

Vernon Walters: Deputy Director of CIAfrom 1972-1976 (i.e. right when the final 'manned Moon landings' occurred)

He was fluent in French, Italian, Spanish, Portuguese as well as his native English

Died a couple days after giving an interview, the interview was then included in a 'mockumentary', Dark Side of the Moon. 

Herd Redirection Committee's picture

Vernon Walters:

On February 9, the day before his death [New York Herald Tribune, February 15, 2002] he gave an interview (in French language) to William Karel.

Wow...  Coincidence... He even says in the interview "This could cost people their life"

Yep.  His life!

Bring the Gold's picture

I will check that out. Thanks for the info. Cheers! I have an open mind. I just like to verify info well. :)

jeff montanye's picture


among the points snopes makes is the may date of the original interview is two months after kubrick's death, the interviewer gives acting instructions to the interviewee about 14 minutes in and the alleged kubrick doesn't match the actual kubrick accepting an award about a year earlier.

you decide, but i've always thought it, faked moon landing, was used to undercut jfk doubters and more recently 9-11 sceptics.

. . . _ _ _ . . .'s picture

I think it's over-edited crap.

Just cause they faked some pictures doesn't mean they didn't go.

Bring the Gold's picture

Man that's Kubrick saying he did it. That's like Cheney coming forward saying he did 9/11. If that video of what sure fucking looks/sounds like Kubrick is real then holy fuck. Also he's saying they didn't go in 1969, not that they didn't go ever.

Flagit's picture


There was a faked moon landing, because at the time they felt that releasing any kind of footage that could benefit the Soviets was not an option.

That was the conclusion I got after watching Kubrick's Odyssey.

Kubrick's Odyssey: Secrets Hidden in the Films of Stanley Kubrick; Part One: Kubrick and Apollo
ebear's picture

"There was a faked moon landing, because at the time they felt that releasing any kind of footage that could benefit the Soviets was not an option."

So, those three guys who died on the ground was fake too?

How about the emergency return of Apollo 13? Was that also fake?

Then there's the subsequent missions, including rover footage, and of course the fake moon rocks with substantially different isotopic signatures. Probably used a nuclear reactor to fake those, am I right?

I'm more inclined to believe they kept what they they found on the moon a secret, just like in the film 2001, but hey... whatever works.

What about China's plan to land a man on the moon? Who's going to fake that for them?

Flagit's picture

Instead of trying to tear me down, why don't you go watch the film?

Draw your own conclusions. I wasn't there.

SilverTech's picture

These Stanley Kubrick interview videos are very disturbing. He admits faking the moon landings.

It's one thing to discuss the possibility of faked moon landings, quite another to watch him calmly discussing it.

I wonder how long it will be up on youtube. Download it if you can.



. . . _ _ _ . . .'s picture

"I wonder how long it will be up on youtube."


o r c k's picture

OH YES !!  We went to the Moon and set up 6 fake landing sites with all of the concomitant gear laying around on the surface to make people believe we NEVER WENT THERE !!  Full Retard surpassed at light speed. ( sorry, I know you guys are just playing on a cultural joke)

o r c k's picture

Also, don't you guys have elderly parents or relatives who are occasionally "out of touch with reality?" Maybe not.

Herd Redirection Committee's picture

Gear on the Moon is not proof of landing MEN on the Moon.

The Soviets also have 'gear' on the Moon, and no one is saying they landed MEN on the Moon.

o r c k's picture

In that case I wonder who made those thousands of fake footprints encircling all that gear? Some say that we sent the REAL C3PO from Star Wars. I have the deepest of faith that they are right. (very few are aware that Star Wars was a documentary-disguised as a fable)

nosam's picture
nosam (not verified) o r c k Dec 11, 2015 10:04 PM

Is there any independant proof that these exit? Not from fake NASA?

conscious being's picture

Why doesn't NASA do a fly-by? They've sent space craft by the Moon since. Here, I can go to GoogleEarth and see the leaves growing outside my house. The Moon has no atmosphere to defract light. The Moon's a lot smaller. Where are these hi-rez or any-rez pictures of the "landing sites" after the fact?


. . . _ _ _ . . .'s picture

Click here for pictures of the moon (apollo) landing sites

Most pictures taken by Japanese moon probe - third party verification.

I will admit, though, that some of the pictures look like the LEM is still attached. The shadows are quite a bit taller/longer than they should be. Could be the topography, could be time of day...

Socratic Dog's picture

Enlighten me please, how do you know there's gear and footprints?

Mr.BlingBling's picture

Bring the Gold

If the US faked the moon landings, wouldn't it have been in the USSR's interest to expose the fraud? 

Why would we have needed to fake the moon landings?  In other words, exactly what aspect of manned space flight was NASA unable to overcome? 

(To save time, if you're going to say the Van Allen Belts, then consider that it took 73 hours to traverse the 235,000 miles to the moon, meaning that the average speed was about 3,200 MPH.  The VAB are about 3,000 miles thick, so the astronauts probably spent a maximum of two hours in the VAB.  And unless the dose was enough to immediately kill them, I'd bet that NASA would have sacrificed them even if it knew they would all get cancer in a few years.) 

With a telescope it was easy to spot the S-IVB in orbit, so they couldn't have just stayed in low earth orbitfor a week to avoid the VAB, without anyone learning about it.


Herd Redirection Committee's picture

Probably radiation (even when you are outside the VAB, you are still subject to solar radiation) plus getting a payload that size to the Moon and back (not just into orbit) plus re-entry.

If you go to the moon at 3200 mph, that means you come back to Earth at 3200 mph.  Thats coming in hot.

"we present to you, the first man who walked on the Moon!"

*Opens capsule*:  "Uuuh, we present to you a charcoal crisp body of the man who first walked on the Moon!"

At the time the trajectory taken to the Moon was secret, giving NASA a lot of time to fabricate one (what is currently available to the public).  Same with re-entry.  They now claim they 'skipped' off the atmosphere...  I have yet to see the science for how one bounces off the atmosphere with a heat shield (no thrusters).

Herd Redirection Committee's picture

My guess is the Soviets were bribed, and also, they were unable to conclusively prove that NASA did not land MEN on the Moon.  Allegations, accusations, don't get you far, esp. not in the midst of a propaganda war. 

As the line in "Training Day" goes:

"It's not what you know it's what you can prove."

nosam's picture

The Soviets were in on it. The cold war was fake.The soviets received a lot of their rocket technology from the US.

conscious being's picture

If the Moon landings were fake, which I think they were, there is something strange about why the USSR then, and Russia now, did not/ does not expose the major Achillies heel problem in the Western narrative.

Question: Does anyone in touch with President V.V.P read these pages?

Abbie Normal's picture

Because the Soviets faked the first man in space, Yuri Gagarin.  The U.S. knew that and kept it quiet, having the Soviets return the favor a decade later.


Clashfan's picture

TY for sharing. True or not? I am certainly curious. His wife is on record as saying this is true. Hard to know.

7.62x54r's picture

It's a fake. Kubric was coaching one of the actors doing 2001 A Space Odyssey during that video clip. Some tard added lunar conspiracy nuttery to it.

BarkingCat's picture

US would very likely be happy if Russia took one or two of those in a turkey hunt. It would mean another order for Boeing. Good for profit.

wizteknet's picture

Hope Russia backs up there talk with action, alls I been hearing is a bunch of shit talking... Besides I like the concentration of enemy forces all in the middle to be crushed all at once, attitude!

DeathMerchant's picture

You are talking the CIA and ISIS right??

Blankone's picture

Just read all the posting about how Putin's Gonna Do It Now. 

... posted that Putin said he is gonna shoot down AEW&C as soon as it take off.  Funny, cannot find that reported anywhere.

The US, a few days ago, flew jets into Syria and bombed a Syrian military base.  No actions taken by Putin.  And we were told Putin had a no-fly zone in effect using his S400.  Guess not.

Turkey shot down Putin's jet in Syria and now had placed troops in Syria and taken positions.  No actions by Putin.

CIA/Massad took down Putin's airliner.  No actions by Putin.

Turkey is taking over a key portion of Iraq and now states their troops will not leave but will establish a base.  No actions by Putin.

The US is building a airbase in NE Syria.  No actions by Putin.

Previously were Putin's orders NOT to take action when Russia's forces were attacked?

Putin is upping the talk, bluster and displays because he is getting pushed out.  But he wants to keep HIS infrastructure and forces in Syria.  In other words Putin wants to keep his naval and air base on the west coast.  He hopes to make enough noise that they will let him keep at least that.  They will not.    Putin is paying for being a coward and not establishing a no-fly zone at the same time he started bombing.  By no being bold the day has been lost for him.  NATO may be preparing to put boots on the ground in Iraq and Syria and once they do it is theirs.  Putin will make statements about how it is not right or fair of NATO but they know his fear and he will not act.

HEZBOLLAH!!  Look back at how Russia/Putin has hung out and set up their allies in the ME.  Including Syria.  Putin has lured you away from home and will not protect you if NATO starts a campaign against you on behalf of Israel. 

Putin, do another tough guy photo opp riding a horse with no shirt.  That will scare them.

. . . _ _ _ . . .'s picture

"... posted that Putin said he is gonna shoot down AEW&C as soon as it take off.  Funny, cannot find that reported anywhere."

That's not what I meant and you know it. If not, please re-read. Did you see any quotation marks?