Russians in Syria

[delete1]

"coalition operation is a hell of a lot bigger, and hence, potentially more effective in practical terms"

Well, we can see how effective a lot bigger previous operation was in practical terms considering the mess that practically the entire region is in right now.

As mentioned earlier here and very well posted: "Nevertheless, Syria (And the middle east in general) is a sad situation, created by us, made worse by us..."

"Right now the strikes are for political value"

Right now, right in the future and right in the past. It is all of political value, always. Either bigger or smaller operations. Every player, good and evil, is always moving his pieces in the cheessboard called geopolitics.

The last bigger coalition had/has also its own agenda that pursue its own particular interests, not better or prettier than this "smaller" one. Dont forget that the last bigger coalition had and has some good pals in the region that are as crap as Assad, to say the least.

Lets see how things unfold...and above all...lets hope for the best and hope that in this complex geopolitical net and battles of interests, that all is based on, some fragments of peace and prosperity are left for the regular people in the future.

Cheers,

[TheWombat_matrixforum]

Well, that's why I said "potentially" greater effectiveness. I'd agree the coalition strikes done about, well, squat so far. But theoretically there's more capacity there to effect change than the Russians have on the ground. Of course, how and where force is applied is as important as the quantity. And yes, all military action is for political purposes. In this case, the Russians are much better at aligning the quantity and type of force with the desired political results than the west is. Western efforts have way too much force committed for too little and too poorly defined aims.

Though the Russians are not without blame here either. Their unwavering support for Assad in the beginning of the civil war, despite the well-documented atrocities of his regime, and Moscow's stubborn unwillingness to lean on Assad to compromise didn't help this thing. They miscalculated and thought Damascus could easily suppress this latest round of discontent, and they were wrong, just as the West was wrong in thinking the opposition was going to be, this time, really effective.

[delete1]

Agreed Wombat. The situation is a mess due to this battle of interests of the parties involved. That includes obviously the Russians and the Syrian government. As I mention before, if we consider particularly the region as whole and the main players objectives involved, either Russia or US-led allies, at minimum those real objectives are equally ugly or not pretty, or to blame. As Russia is aligned with Assad regime, US-led coalition at the other hand is aligned with regimes as Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, Oman and Bahrain. sheikhdoms that are among most repressive regimes in the world. I would say as crap as Assad's.

This is my entire point in this thread and others like this one. If you want to blame a responsible for a situation, consider clearly all parties involved. Specially in the complex world of geopolitics.

Cheer,

[Tazak]

Take this with a BIG pinch of salt, but if there's an ounce of truth in the article then things are about to heat up

Russia to send ground forces

[Stimpak]

That website seems full of clickbait and meaningless sensationalism.

[TheWombat_matrixforum]

Yeah, that particular site is...oy vey. But there are far more reasonable folks speculating that Moscow will, at some point, commit some ground forces to help Assad's army carve out a bit more space for itself. That's certainly possible. 150,000? Um, no; that's like USSR Afghanistan levels of force, and I doubt Russia today could even afford a fraction of a force that size in Syria.

[Stimpak]

Yeah, the Russian ground forces are busy enough in Ukraine as it is [;)]

[ivanov]

RBK-500-SPBE-D cluster bombs hitting Aleppo

[ivanov]

Mi-24P's in action

The pilots don't seem to be very risk averse [X(]


Some more:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X1eA_1j ... e=youtu.be

[ivanov]

DP ICM in Action ( launched by BM-21 )


None can say that there was no warning [8|]




subir gif

[delete1]

Why every side in Syria has a hidden agenda

October 9, 2015 Georgy Bovt, special to RBTH

Russia’s bombing campaign in Syria against so-called ISIS targets has been met with widespread criticism by the other international parties with an interest in the region, but a closer glance reveals that each of the stakeholders is in pursuit of their own aims.

(...) A week has passed since the beginning of the Russian Air Force's air strikes on the positions of Islamic terrorists in Syria, and the resonance of a few dozen attacks has proved louder than that of a few thousand carried out by the U.S.-led coalition over several months. Furthermore, the response of the West to Russia’s attacks has been far less consolidated than it was on Moscow's actions in Ukraine.

(...) The U.S. is also criticizing Russia for hitting the "wrong targets,” implying the moderate rebel groups opposed to Assad. However, Washington is avoiding naming these "moderate" groups. Representatives of the Pentagon and the White House do not like to answer questions about whether the U.S.-led coalition is carrying out strikes against such formations as that very same Jabhat al-Nusra (which, in turn sometimes clashes with ISIS) or Ahrar Al-Sham – also nothing short of a terrorist group, which is part of the Islamic Front coalition, or the Army of Islam, which gained notoriety, in particular, for an ISIS-like massacre in the industrial town of Adra, near Damascus – because the U.S.-led coalition does not carry out such strikes.

Meanwhile, the Islamic Front, just like the Army of Islam, is hatching plans for building an Islamic state in Syria under Sharia law and enjoys the support of the Saudis. They can only be considered "moderate" at a stretch. The Syria Revolutionaries Front, another Islamist organization that recently claimed to be seen as "moderate," is close to the Islamic Front. However, before being recognized as "moderate," it made an alliance with ISIS.

Most often when the West talks of "moderate" groups it is referring to the Free Syrian Army (FSA), created at the beginning of the war with the aim of opposing Assad by officers who had deserted from the government army. However, the FSA, which has always featured a variety of small groups, Islamist ones among them, was from the very start strongly influenced by the ideology of the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood, which enjoyed the covert support of the Turkish government of Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

Since the spring of this year, the FSA has effectively disintegrated as a combat structure. However, many small and independent combat local groups operate under its "umbrella," including those entering into tactical alliances with the Islamists, even from ISIS. Those who are arming these groups should take into account the tendency of militants to cross from one structure to another and understand that these weapons may end up in hands of ISIS (...).

http://rbth.com/opinion/2015/10/09/why_ ... 49969.html

[delete1]

James Foley originally kidnapped by ‘moderate’ Obama-funded Free Syrian Army

Posted on August 21, 2014 by Joe Newby

As it turns out, James Foley, the journalist recently beheaded by ISIS terrorists, was originally kidnapped by a group aligned with the so-called Free Syrian Army, the allegedly “moderate” group embraced by John McCain.

http://conservativefiringline.com/foley ... rian-army/

[ivanov]

Russian hardware waiting for transport in the port of Novorossiysk. Most likely destination - Syria.


subefotos


imagen jpg

[Tazak]

we may see howTOW stands up against T72/T90 (will the Russians deploy the T-14 Armata??)

While we try to avoid overly political threads (yea right[:)]) lets not forget the human cost behind wars regardless of which side they fought for.

[ivanov]

ORIGINAL: Tazak

we may see howTOW stands up against T72/T90 (will the Russians deploy the T-14 Armata??)

61 ATGM launches in first 15 days of October 2015


Are the Stingers next, if you know what I mean? [;)]

[IronMikeGolf]

I wonder what model of missile was sent. That could make a difference.

[delete1]

Some interesting footages of the air missions activities in Latakia Air Base...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sVoAX2V7Ea8

This is impressive, the powerful Hind in action...we can see how they dive after the attack.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p_KnT2yTsLI

[delete1]

Russian fighter approaching U.S. plane in Syria was not intimidation action

15:53 October 14, 2015 Interfax

A fighter plane from the Russian aviation group approached a U.S. plane in Syrian air space on Oct. 10 to identify it and it was not an intimidation action, Russian Defense Ministry official Igor Konashenkov said.

"While heading to the area the radiation warning system, which is installed in all our planes, registered radiation from an unknown flying object. Our fighter approached it at a distance of some 2-3 kilometers, not with the purpose of intimidating anyone, but to identify the object and its affiliation. After that, the Russian Sukhoi Su-30SM returned to the combat group to fulfill its routine tasks," Konashenkov told reporters on Oct. 14.

He said the two planes met on October 10, when a group of Russian planes under the cover of a Su-30SM fighter were on a combat mission to destroy an ISIL facility in the Aleppo province.

"That was not the first such situation. Our pilots often see in the air space over Syria not only flights by U.S. planes, but also drones, including attack drones," Konashenkov said.

He said Russia does not understand why U.S. Air Force officials are surprised by this situation, which occurred on Oct. 10.

"Firstly, Russian combat planes are in Syrian air space absolutely legally at the request of the official administration of the Syrian Arab Republic. Moreover, all the flights by our planes are approved by the relevant authorities of this country," Konashenkov said.

- http://rbth.com/news/2015/10/14/russian ... 50067.html)

[Stimpak]

ORIGINAL: Tazak

we may see howTOW stands up against T72B/T90

The TOW will be just as deadly against them if the Russians end up employing the same tank tactics that arabs do.

Otherwise, depends on the version. If the rebels have the TOW-2A and later, then the Russian tanks will be in trouble. Otherwise, I think their old K-1 and newer K-5 will stand a fair chance against older TOWs.

(will the Russians deploy the T-14 Armata??)

A prototype? Deployed into a warzone? No, I don't think so.

[ivanov]

ORIGINAL: Iron Mike Golf

I wonder what model of missile was sent. That could make a difference.

Interesting question indeed. Apparently the TOW's have been shipped to the rebels by the Saudis, who operate few versions of that ATGM. However it's worth remembering, that most of the SAA tanks don't have even first generation ERA ( not to mention any kind of APS ) and represent 70's-80's level of protection. So in most of the cases TOW's shouldn't have any problem with achieving a kill.