Matrix Games Forums

A number of people have been wondering why Russia wants to base fixed-wing fighter aircraft in that airbase they're building in Syria. Such fighters do not seem to have a relevant purpose against insurgent groups that have no air forces of their own. We may now have the answer:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... perts.html

Russia's purpose has never been to fight insurgents. It's shielding Assad's murderous regime and showing the West that Russia is not to be trifled with. Putin may be a megalomaniac, but he's a stone cold calculating one.

Thread lock in 5... 4... 3... [:D]

No fly zones can be created from both the ground as well as from Space. Russia's fixed wing aircraft are useless if the free world decides they are...which with the state of current western leadership, Putin can make this statement and many others.

2...1...

God Bless Russia and President Putin! Time long overdue for Syria to buy my gold! [:'(][:D]

No fly zones can be created from both the ground as well as from Space. Russia's fixed wing aircraft are useless if the free world decides they are...

Well, let's talk about the practical aspects. I assume the Western powers would have to install Patriot and other anti-aircraft missile batteries to deny Syrian airspace to Assad's air units. Where would they be located? How would they be manned and kept in supply? The easiest way would be to station warships with SAMs off the Syrian coast, but would these have the range to control the interior of the country?

The easiest way would be to station warships with SAMs off the Syrian coast, but would these have the range to control the interior of the country?

That presumes NATO even has a right to do so in the first place. [8|]

This use for the airbase was obvious right from the start.

Russia can veto anything the U.N. security council does. NATO won't do anything without the U.S. and Obama isn't going to do anything more than sporadic air sorties. Besides, Turkey, Jordan, Israel and anyone else who feels like it is flying sorties into Syria. How are ship based SAM's going to determine friend from foe in a no-fly zone?

Also, don't overlook one important point. The Russian fighters might be in position to intercept any Isreali airstrike overflying Syria on its way to Iranian nuke sites.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ ... l/iran.htm

One must remember that Russia (or USSR) have had a military base in Syria since '71.

ORIGINAL: Orm

One must remember that Russia (or USSR) have had a military base in Syria since '71.

Show us your source!

ORIGINAL: wings7

ORIGINAL: Orm

One must remember that Russia (or USSR) have had a military base in Syria since '71.

Show us your source!

Cut from: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-18616191

"Under a 1971 deal with Syria, Russia has leased the Tartus facility as part of a multi-billion-dollar debt write-off."

Russia will leave Syria the same way it left Afghanistan

Operating has it correct. Something interesting to watch: Go to youtube and search "Syria tank battles"...there are tons of videos...most show tanks destroyed by what look like TOW rockets. Tanks are already not safe in Syria, these Russian ones recently brought in wont be either.

What I was referring to as for a no-fly zone: 1. From "space"...Israel already has used targeted EMP bursts in Syria to take down the Syrian air defenses when they attacked one of their heavily defended (with advanced Russian anti-air defenses) "research" sites. The same kind of weapon could be used on any airbase flying sorties making the aircraft useless. 2. From "ground"...the use of an advanced form of Stinger (single person hand held anti-air weapon). The problem with this is that these might get into the hands of terrorists, so their dissemination would have to be limited to only trusted (non-PKK Kurds) or western special forces.

So, no need of outdated and defeatable SAM's, and the Patriot system is way long outdated. Both these systems can be "wild weaseled" by the enemy and knocked out (except those from ships)...which would make them a big waste of money.

Putin is reasserting Russian Influence in the region, filling a vacuum created by our disengagement.
Toward that end, He is looking to build a major naval base on Cyprus and looking to re-establish the influence the Soviets had in Egypt, pre Sadat.
He will begin to arm the Kurds to help fight ISIS which will simultaneously destabilize Turkey ( a key NATO member ). The Kurds will declare an independent state on the Iraq/Turkey border which will also protect and insulate Russia from Muslim extremists and probably help bring about a civil war in Turkey. It will also bring about the end of Iraq as we know it and allow Iran to control the Eastern parts while the rest gets divided up among various warring factions.
Putin is no fool. He is methodical and very well informed. And he will take advantage of any opening we leave him.

ORIGINAL: Orm

ORIGINAL: wings7

ORIGINAL: Orm

One must remember that Russia (or USSR) have had a military base in Syria since '71.

Show us your source!

Cut from: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-18616191

"Under a 1971 deal with Syria, Russia has leased the Tartus facility as part of a multi-billion-dollar debt write-off."

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ ... artous.htm

I have not heard anything about Russia wishing to assist the Kurds. If that is true, keep in mind the Kurds are not monolithic. The Iraqi and Iranian Kurds are allied on one side (somewhat pro-US...used to be very pro-US, but less so under Obama), while some of the Turkish and Syrian Kurds are allied on another (PKK Kurds are Communists...although they have made efforts to hide and distort that fact)...the Iraqi Kurds are in Syria assisting in the civil war. Its my thinking that the Kurds will accept assistance from anyone, even Putin. Also, the Kurds in Syria have made deals with the Syrian government (cease-fires, exchanges, etc...) mainly because of the ISIS/ISIL threat.

1. From "space"...Israel already has used targeted EMP bursts in Syria to take down the Syrian air defenses when they attacked one of their heavily defended (with advanced Russian anti-air defenses) "research" sites. The same kind of weapon could be used on any airbase flying sorties making the aircraft useless.

So its true that weapons are being deployed in orbit now?! [:@]

ORIGINAL: Orm

ORIGINAL: wings7

ORIGINAL: Orm

One must remember that Russia (or USSR) have had a military base in Syria since '71.

Show us your source!

Cut from: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-18616191

"Under a 1971 deal with Syria, Russia has leased the Tartus facility as part of a multi-billion-dollar debt write-off."

Thanks!

I just read that the Syrians have lost 1,800+ tanks two years into the civil war.

ORIGINAL: Jagdtiger14

I just read that the Syrians have lost 1,800+ tanks two years into the civil war.

That's interesting. Where did you read it?

Yep, I'd like a link too. It wouldn't surprise me. In the early days of ISIS, they got some quite advanced weaponry from Iraq, and are mostly in Syria rather than Iraq, and the FSA and other rebels have also been taking their toll.