Russia sending warships to the mediterranean

[Revmitchell]

Russia will "over the next few days" be sending an anti-submarine ship and a missile cruiser to the Mediterranean as the West prepares for possible strikes against Syria, the Interfax news agency said on Thursday.

"The well-known situation shaping up in the eastern Mediterranean called for certain corrections to the make-up of the naval forces," a source in the Russian General Staff told Interfax.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2013/08/29/Russia-sending-warships-to-the-Mediterranean--report

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

We have destroyers in the Med, not subs.

Russia is trying to rattle a rusty, dull saber.

 

[webdog]

We have destroyers in the Med, not subs.

Russia is trying to rattle a rusty, dull saber.

Israel has sub's armed with nukes.

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

Israel has sub's armed with nukes.

Israel isn't in the fight.

 

[webdog]

Israel isn't in the fight.

If what Syria is saying turns out to be true, they are.

 

[Herald]

Israel has sub's armed with nukes.

Actually Israel has land-based ballistic missiles with nuclear warheads. It also has nuclear bombs. Their German-built Dolphin class subs do not have ballistic missile capability but they can be converted to launch nuclear armed cruise missiles. Some military experts believe the subs have not been converted to launch these missiles. But it's Israel and its nuclear weapons program is shrouded in secrecy.

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

If what Syria is saying turns out to be true, they are.

Is this the same Syria that says Assad's government had nothing to do with deploying chemical weapons against their own people? That Syria?

OK ... :BangHead:

 

[webdog]

Is this the same Syria that says Assad's government had nothing to do with deploying chemical weapons against their own people? That Syria?

OK ... :BangHead:

save your forehead...you do realize I qualified my statement with 'if true'

 

[ktn4eg]

Just wondering if there's any remote connection to what may (and I emphasize MAY !!) be the outcome of whatever happens and that which I read in Isaiah 17:

1. The burden of Damascus. Behold, Damascus is taken away from being a city, and it shall be a ruinous heap.

9. In that day shall his strong cities be as a forsaken bough, and an uppermost branch, which they left because of the children of Israel: and there shall be desolation.
10. Because thou hast forgotten the God of thy salvation, and hast not been mindful of the rock of thy strength, therefore shalt thou plant pleasant plants, and shalt set it with strange slips:

12. Woe to the multitude of many people, which make a noise like the noise of the seas; and to the rushing of nations, that make a rushing like the rushing of mighty waters!
13. The nations shall rush like the rushing of many waters: but God shall rebuke them, and they shall flee far off, and shall be chased as the chaff of the mountains before the wind, and like a rolling thing before the whirlwind.


Don't get me wrong.....I'm not saying that what may happen to Syria in the upcoming days is a direct fulfillment of these verses.....(I've learned long ago to be cautious about making wild-eyed predictions when it comes to things regarding prophecy/"the end times"/etc.).....And I am 1000% opposed to the US intervening militarily in Syria!!.....OTOH, it does strike me as curious as to exactly what God was telling us through Isaiah about Damascus in this portion of His Word.

What are your thoughts/comments/criticisms about what we read in Isaiah 17 as it may (or may not) relate to what may (or may not) happen to Syria in the coming days?

 

[webdog]

Just wondering if there's any remote connection to what may (and I emphasize MAY !!) be the outcome of whatever happens and that which I read in Isaiah 17:

1. The burden of Damascus. Behold, Damascus is taken away from being a city, and it shall be a ruinous heap.

9. In that day shall his strong cities be as a forsaken bough, and an uppermost branch, which they left because of the children of Israel: and there shall be desolation.
10. Because thou hast forgotten the God of thy salvation, and hast not been mindful of the rock of thy strength, therefore shalt thou plant pleasant plants, and shalt set it with strange slips:

12. Woe to the multitude of many people, which make a noise like the noise of the seas; and to the rushing of nations, that make a rushing like the rushing of mighty waters!
13. The nations shall rush like the rushing of many waters: but God shall rebuke them, and they shall flee far off, and shall be chased as the chaff of the mountains before the wind, and like a rolling thing before the whirlwind.


Don't get me wrong.....I'm not saying that what may happen to Syria in the upcoming days is a direct fulfillment of these verses.....(I've learned long ago to be cautious about making wild-eyed predictions when it comes to things regarding prophecy/"the end times"/etc.).....And I am 1000% opposed to the US intervening militarily in Syria!!.....OTOH, it does strike me as curious as to exactly what God was telling us through Isaiah about Damascus in this portion of His Word.

What are your thoughts/comments/criticisms about what we read in Isaiah 17 as it may (or may not) relate to what may (or may not) happen to Syria in the coming days?

entirely plausible given Is. 19 may be also happening, and with the number of nations getting involved, maybe Ps. 83 too.

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

Just wondering if there's any remote connection to what may (and I emphasize MAY !!) be the outcome of whatever happens and that which I read in Isaiah 17:

It's already been done -- twice. It's walls were demolished, its houses pulled down, and its people carried off captive by Tilgathpilneser, King of Assyria, (2 Kings 16:9). It had been a very ancient city (Genesis 15:2) and the head of the kingdom of Syria, (Isaiah 7:8), Though it underwent this calamity, it was rebuilt again, and was a city of great fame when it was again destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar in Jeremiah 49:24, 25, after which it was raised up again, and was a thriving major city in the apostles' time (obviously, as Paul was on his way there at the time of his conversion).

The prophecy may be a candidate for "double fulfillment," meaning Isaiah prophezied its destruction in his near future, as well as a future no one of his generation could even conceive of, much less see. However, this pending attack is not that destruction. For one thing, our milquetoast Great Pretender hasn't the stomach to devastate an enemy -- any enemy -- including one that is slaying its own people. Two, such "double fulfillments" are reserved exclusively for times at or near the writing of the prophecy, with the second fulfillment coming only in the Tribulation period.

 

[webdog]

It's already been done -- twice. It's walls were demolished, its houses pulled down, and its people carried off captive by Tilgathpilneser, King of Assyria, (2 Kings 16:9). It had been a very ancient city (Genesis 15:2) and the head of the kingdom of Syria, (Isaiah 7:8), Though it underwent this calamity, it was rebuilt again, and was a city of great fame when it was again destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar in Jeremiah 49:24, 25, after which it was raised up again, and was a thriving major city in the apostles' time (obviously, as Paul was on his way there at the time of his conversion).

The prophecy may be a candidate for "double fulfillment," meaning Isaiah prophezied its destruction in his near future, as well as a future no one of his generation could even conceive of, much less see. However, this pending attack is not that destruction. For one thing, our milquetoast Great Pretender hasn't the stomach to devastate an enemy -- any enemy -- including one that is slaying its own people. Two, such "double fulfillments" are reserved exclusively for times at or near the writing of the prophecy, with the second fulfillment coming only in the Tribulation period.

Their demise wouldn't come at our hands but of Israel's.

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

Their demise wouldn't come at our hands but of Israel's.

Nope. The next destruction of Damascus, as will be the destruction of all the cities and regions prophesized in the Bible for destruction, will be by the hand of God.

 

[Crabtownboy]

And what if Turkey blocks the Dardanelles and England blocks Gibraltar. Russia could not enter the Med if these two areas were blocked and it would be very easy to do just that.

 

[ktn4eg]

entirely plausible given Is. 19 may be also happening, and with the number of nations getting involved, maybe Ps. 83 too.

Isaiah 19 refers primarily to Egypt, and (as webdog mentioned) could very well refer to Egypt's manifold troubles.

IMHO Psalm 83 is more of a general imprecation against Israel's enemies past, present and future......OTOH I really like what verses 14 - 18 have to say:

(14) As the fire burneth a wood, and as the flame setteth the mountains on fire; (15) So persecute them with thy tempest, and make them afraid with thy storm. (16) Fill their faces with shame, O LORD. (17) Let them be confounded and troubled for ever; yea, let them be put to shame, and perish: (18) That men may know that thou, whose name alone is JEHOVAH, art the most high over all the earth.

:thumbs::applause::applause::jesus:

 

[webdog]

Nope. The next destruction of Damascus, as will be the destruction of all the cities and regions prophesized in the Bible for destruction, will be by the hand of God.

False dichotomy. Of course it is God's doing, but Israel will be the means through which it is done.

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

False dichotomy. Of course it is God's doing, but Israel will be the means through which it is done.

Not if it is done during the Tribulation. There is no power on earth other than that of the antichrist at that time, and why would he want Damascus destroyed?

 

[Zaac]

Is this the same Syria that says Assad's government had nothing to do with deploying chemical weapons against their own people? That Syria?

OK ... :BangHead:

 

[HankD]

WWWIII coming soon to your neighborhood.


HankD