Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #6

Is that one guy Zhirnovksy?

Werewolf wrote:Is that one guy Zhirnovksy?

Is this supposed to be some positive propaganda? All I see are bynch of dead guys, two alive ones and one of them still has good chances of being fu*ked...

OminousSpudd wrote:Just how quickly could Russia seal of Syrian borders with a taskforce of its own? Time would be critical, as I imagine the Empire across the way would go full-loco 100% proxy war and pour as many weapons as possible through Sultan-stan and Saudi land, as well as Golan Heights and Jordan, PR be damned. Are we talking a month-two months with a sizable taskforce? Or longer? The larger the fielded force obviously the longer it takes to deploy. Borders locked = no Afghan 2.0 and given the geography as has been mentioned a couple of times already, it's far more achievable.

Russian ground ops in Syria = Total and complete victory for USA.

In current climate it could possibly lead to the end of Russia as a country. That place improved but is still very flimsy.

Why would Russia do one thing that USA wants Russia to do?

PapaDragon wrote:

OminousSpudd wrote:Just how quickly could Russia seal of Syrian borders with a taskforce of its own? Time would be critical, as I imagine the Empire across the way would go full-loco 100% proxy war and pour as many weapons as possible through Sultan-stan and Saudi land, as well as Golan Heights and Jordan, PR be damned. Are we talking a month-two months with a sizable taskforce? Or longer? The larger the fielded force obviously the longer it takes to deploy. Borders locked = no Afghan 2.0 and given the geography as has been mentioned a couple of times already, it's far more achievable.

Russian ground ops in Syria = Total and complete victory for USA.

In current climate it could possibly lead to the end of Russia as a country. That place improved but is still very flimsy.

Why would Russia do one thing that USA wants Russia to do?

You are reading too much propaganda.. AFganistan did not crashed the soviet Union.
Russian political elite "Reforms" did it. The soviets left Afganistan orderly and the Afgans
were wiped big time by Soviets. It took 3 years the afgans with american help to take control of Afganistan after soviets left and stopped supplying weapons to them.  In the worse case Syria is lost ,it will be a major embarrassment and failure for Russia ,but Russia will no cease to exist
and their nuclear weapons will not vanish.. will continue.  The only one that could cease to be a nation is Turkey if continue its hostilities against Russia ,it will start a major war and putin is already giving hints of the use of nukes against Turkey.. if forced to do it.

Because Erdogan is in total control of US. Americans are the only thing that can help ERdogan
avoid Jail for its support to ISIS and avoid a coup against Him.. the only thing that holds him in power. So Turkey is 100% under control of US and Erdogan could do really stupid things against Russia.. effectively for Erdogan ,the criminal he is.. that do not care about its nation but only to stay in power and avoid jail... it will be better War with RUssia than be abandoned by Americans and face jail..  That said , i will be surprised if Turkey is not pushed into a full scale war with Russia. Because Erdopig the egomaniac will prefer to see Turkey destroyed than him in jail.

All said Russia will not cease to exist for a failure in Syria or IRAQ. the only way Russia can cease to exist is that Russian is invaded by NATO ,which is not going to happen..Russia on its own land is unbeatable, or that Russia economy totally collapse (as already it did in the 90s as survived) and that many republics declare independence. with the exception of Chechenia.. very unlikely to happen. No politician will support an invasion to Russia with dozen of thousand nukes . China lived for 30 years poor and did not collapse.. Syria survived for 5 years alone without any economy in an NATO terrorist invasion and did not disbanded. Nations do not cease to exist because economy or war if most people united. in short you are wrong.. its takes a lot more than failing to help a foreign country in war ,to collapse Russia.  The possibilities of US and Europe collapsing first are way bigger than RUssia, specially with the muslin invasion. and if we are to believe what American politicians and economist say with RUssia and CHINA and India no longer using dollars. US economy have its days counted ,and that nation contrary to Russia is not united. Half of the country is really angry with their government policies in middle east and the police state and unemployment and poverty. America is way more probable to collapse and disband today than any other nation in the world.

PapaDragon wrote:Russian ground ops in Syria = Total and complete victory for USA.

In current climate it could possibly lead to the end of Russia as a country. That place improved but is still very flimsy.

Why would Russia do one thing that USA wants Russia to do?

Last time I remember there were Russian ground troops in Abkhazia, S. Ossetia, Transdnistria and Tajikistan.
And none of that happened. Russian boots on the ground in Syria (e.g. Latakia, Hama or Homs) would be quite similar.

Afghanistan was a totally different case where the locals simply did not like Soviets.

https://twitter.com/Stratfor/status/675676585144541185

Russia Boosts Its Air Assets in Syria



Satellite imagery obtained through our partners at AllSource Analysis show the continued hectic Russian presence at Bassel al Assad air base. An Su-24 can be seen on the runway ready for take off, while what appears to be an Il-20 Coot spy plane is taxiing around the air base. In addition to the Su-25, Su-24, Su-30 and Su-34 aircraft previously deployed to Bassel al Assad, we see more Su-34 aircraft that have recently arrived as reinforcements from Russia. The Su-34 is a more capable strike aircraft than the Su-24, the type that the Turkish air force recently shot down. The Su-34, with a more expansive air-to-air capability, is therefore better able to defend itself relative to the Su-24.

Additional capable air superiority fighters apart from the four Su-30s already deployed to the air base are not visible, but that does not exclude the possibility of their presence. Indeed, the Russians have bolstered their air defense capabilities, as can be seen with the deployment of the S-400 surface-to-air missile system to the air base.








As is apparent from the recent images of the Shayrat air base, there has been construction work to improve that airfield as well. Two Su-22 squadrons and one MiG-23 squadron were previously based at Shayrat, but most of their aircraft have long since been decommissioned alongside previous types operated from the base. Some of these aircraft can be seen discarded or decommissioned across Shayrat, including five aircraft on the southwest corner of the air base. With the new construction, a number of helicopters can also be seen deployed at the base. These helicopters appear operational and recently deployed to Shayrat, but it is difficult to assess whether they are Russian or Syrian.


It is clear that the Shayrat air base is gaining importance for the Syrian government and its allies, as recent construction and deployments attest. With increased operations taking place in the central-eastern Homs region, including defensive efforts aimed at preventing the Islamic State from severing the critical M5 highway running from Homs to Damascus, the refurbishment of the airfield and its use makes operational sense. As can be seen, the Russians have yet to deploy fixed-wing warplanes to the air base as recent rumors have suggested, though such an eventuality cannot be excluded.

https://www.stratfor.com/sample/analysis/russia-boosts-its-air-assets-syria

ult wrote:https://twitter.com/Stratfor/status/675676585144541185

Looks like Su-30 can use the 2nd runway/taxiway, exclusively if need arises.
That's a very good measure which will allow them to take off irrespectively of traffic on the main runway, used by strike fighers/bombers.

ult wrote:

Militarov wrote:
SAA soldier with toys behind him

If they'd have SAA crews, I'm worried that they would just leave them behind when they'll get attacked by 5-10 slippers-wearing terrorists with AK. Or will park them in the open field and go smoke some hooka...

Your worries are unfounded... the living fact of that is, we are still discussing the counter-terrorists operations carried out by SAA, and now, with Russian backing.

SAA has shown itself to be a very professional force which doesn't mean nothing can go wrong. Its a war, a high intensity counter-terrorists ops, and there are n number of things that can possibly go wrong. The tankmen have been holding their ground like any other pros out there, supporting their infantry in breaking through and in the process had to sacrifice many men. Even after having so many shortcomings, I personally have more respect for these Syrian men in uniform, considering the lonely bloody path they covered for nearly half a decade! Even the mightiest of the European army would have collapsed if they were fighting under the same circumstances.

The urban combat employing MBTs that we saw/see in this Syrian conflict only compares with conflict in Chechnya, nothing else even comes close.
All we can do is wish them GOOD LUCK and safe outing.

Militarov wrote:

SAA soldier with toys behind him

Any numbers that we have on the T-90s?
Btw, these tanks are still not "grilled" for urban areas and it was being noted on gurkhan's blog as well. Hope SAA and Russian advisers are taking the combat situation into account and doing the needful.

The earlier T-90MS report probably confused T-90s with the MS version?
If the Russian have supplied the T-90MS, then good, it will help to gain real time combat feedback.

But my personal favorite (wishlist ) was to have the T-55MV6 (its will cost) meant for urban combat with a new turret employing a 57 or 76mm cannon and single piece ammo.

Max Italy wrote:

S300 in SAA hands?

Forgot what was the location?

I said before that it will be a matter of time of False flags done by NATO and or its coalition..
to blame Russia or Assad.. here is one report of a false flag in progress by US coalition with help of QATAR.

http://www.voltairenet.org/article189607.html

Basically the buy of Russian weapons from Ukraine and later use it in civilians to frame Russia.
This bombs can be used in Syria but also in Ukraine against civilians.. to demonize Russia.

I already said if russia allows french or anyone in Syrian airspace they would sooner or later try to kill SAA like they did before and imbeciles were outraged that someone could even believe that we know who that guy is, we saw it did happen western terror nations and their ME slaves and vassals have targeted Syrian Arab Army.

Dima wrote:

ult wrote:

Militarov wrote:
SAA soldier with toys behind him

If they'd have SAA crews, I'm worried that they would just leave them behind when they'll get attacked by 5-10 slippers-wearing terrorists with AK. Or will park them in the open field and go smoke some hooka...

Your worries are unfounded... the living fact of that is, we are still discussing the counter-terrorists operations carried out by SAA, and now, with Russian backing.

SAA has shown itself to be a very professional force which doesn't mean nothing can go wrong. Its a war, a high intensity counter-terrorists ops, and there are n number of things that can possibly go wrong. The tankmen have been holding their ground like any other pros out there, supporting their infantry in breaking through and in the process had to sacrifice many men. Even after having so many shortcomings, I personally have more respect for these Syrian men in uniform, considering the lonely bloody path they covered for nearly half a decade! Even the mightiest of the European army would have collapsed if they were fighting under the same circumstances.

The urban combat employing MBTs that we saw/see in this Syrian conflict only compares with conflict in Chechnya, nothing else even comes close.
All we can do is wish them GOOD LUCK and safe outing.

i back you up, the tanks need rocket screens.cages attached, i also think TOS-1A and some T-72 converted to BMPT "terminator" needs to be supplied for urban environment, i have already seen SAA using rocket screens on BMP-1 and T-72 and this simple addition can make a big difference.

Vann7 wrote:

I said before that it will be a matter of time of False flags done by NATO and or its coalition..
to blame Russia or Assad..  here is one report of a false flag in progress by US coalition with help of QATAR.

http://www.voltairenet.org/article189607.html

Basically the buy of Russian weapons from Ukraine and later use it in civilians to frame Russia.
This bombs can be used in Syria but also in Ukraine against civilians.. to demonize Russia.

That weak BS will never work.

PapaDragon wrote:

OminousSpudd wrote:Just how quickly could Russia seal of Syrian borders with a taskforce of its own? Time would be critical, as I imagine the Empire across the way would go full-loco 100% proxy war and pour as many weapons as possible through Sultan-stan and Saudi land, as well as Golan Heights and Jordan, PR be damned. Are we talking a month-two months with a sizable taskforce? Or longer? The larger the fielded force obviously the longer it takes to deploy. Borders locked = no Afghan 2.0 and given the geography as has been mentioned a couple of times already, it's far more achievable.

Russian ground ops in Syria = Total and complete victory for USA.

In current climate it could possibly lead to the end of Russia as a country. That place improved but is still very flimsy.

Why would Russia do one thing that USA wants Russia to do?

I am against a ground deployment as well, but I think you're giving the US too much credit, I mean there's no Muhjis hiding in Pakistani caves and mountains this time, and during Afghan the US was openly backing the opposition (allowing an actual observable flow of weaponry), they can't do that here...

Anyway getting back to the point, given a hypothetical ground deployment of a Russian task force what sort of time frame would we be looking at until we had Syrian border integrity restored? Because that would be the priority, cut IS supply lines and they will asphyxiate. US can't exactly supply them from the air... I'm only hypothisising here. I consider the chances of a full-blown Russian deployment as completely moot, but for interests sake does anyone have a guesstimate on how quickly they could tie this up border-wise?

Barring some extraordinary geopolitical event, an Afghanistan size deployment in Syria is out of the question IMO, but I wouldn't exclude a limited deployment of 1-2 brigades with support elements....depends on how things develop on the ground

RE: Russian ground deployment, purpose of Russian mlitary is not to do the job of Syrian border police.

USA can supply ISIS from more than just one direction. They control entire Iraq and there is always Lebanon and Israel even if you somehow make Turkish border airtight.

They only need to kill one Russian soldier per day. Two months later watch chaos unfold at home...

PapaDragon wrote:
RE: Russian ground deployment, purpose of Russian mlitary is not to do the job of Syrian border police.

USA can supply ISIS from more than just one direction. They control entire Iraq and there is always Lebanon and Israel even if you somehow make Turkish border airtight.

They only need to kill one Russian soldier per day. Two months later watch chaos unfold at home...

I'm against a regular ground deployment too, but it seems to be happening in limited numbers. Not to do the SAA's job for them but rarher to make sure they keep on winning.

Spetsnaz operatives have been there for years now and they have probably increased their presence ever since the VKS started flying overhead. Good chance that Spetsnaz operatives are the ones marking up targets for the VKS behind enemy lines along with Syrian Special Forces.

Regular units have been spotted outside Latakia and Tartus acting as advisers and whatnot too. I am willing to bet that T-90 we saw in Aleppo a few weeks back was manned by a Russian crew. There was also that story two or three weeks ago where a few Russian soldiers (Marines if I remember correctly) went in "very professionally," captured and removed kebab from a strategically important hill with no casualties. There was in fact a hill that did get captured by pro-government forces right before that story became known so that story could very well hold merit. Not to mention there was that map followed by reports of a Russian Artillery division using MSTAs to provide fire support for the SAA.

I'm personally not a fan of having troops risking their lives for a war that isn't ours. We are in Syria on the gesture of goodwill to Assad and the people of Syria. With all that said, it is understandable that in order to ensure a quicker victory there must be some presence on the ground. Russian military today is almost in no way similar to the Soviet Army that fought in Afghanistan or even the Russian Army in Chechnya. Russia's leadership isn't throwing away the lives of their soldiers anymore. As long as the troops come home alive and well, let them do their thing.

Interesting video by Paul Craig Roberts , that if true his sources information ..
then means Russia have some tricks under the sleeve in terms of technology in Syria..
that do not use frequently but that when they do it.. annoy a lot US and its coalition.



What is interesting is that they "don't know" what it is?.. but it shut down satellites/radio communications.   . it looks like Russia have some tricks to harass their NATO partners in Syria and deny any kind of communications between any technology ,including satellites whenever they flip a switch somewhere. MAybe is just the Same counter electronics hardware they deployed more than a month ago.and Paul is not aware of it.

Russian boots on the ground dont make sense. They provide intelligence, CAS and indirect. Air cover as well. For Syria to truly liberate itself from this ISIS mess - SYRIA needs to stand up, as a nation and army. And I personally believe that is going on.

Regarding EWS deployed in Syria - I am beginning to think the Donald Cook - Su 24M story was true after all.

And yes, this is going to turn into a proxy war real soon - An Iraqi MP said that US has planned the deployment of 10K US troops and 90K Arab troops to Iraq. This comes AFTER Turkey took over an AFB in Iraq.

Any intel on where the Su 25 conducted CAS ??

Heh, I think most of you missed my point. I wasn't saying there will be a deployment of any sizable ground contingent, it certainly is not necessary at this time, probably never will be as the goals Russia set out to achieve, are being achieved. I was simply wanting a guesstimate ETA on how quickly a Russian contingent could mop up the bearded yahoos.

OminousSpudd wrote:Heh, I think most of you missed my point. I wasn't saying there will be a deployment of any sizable ground contingent, it certainly is not necessary at this time, probably never will be as the goals Russia set out to achieve, are being achieved. I was simply wanting a guesstimate ETA on how quickly a Russian contingent could mop up the bearded yahoos.

A sizeable force could take over all major urban centres that they control fairly quickly but would likely still face a guerilla resistance

OminousSpudd wrote:Heh, I think most of you missed my point. I wasn't saying there will be a deployment of any sizable ground contingent, it certainly is not necessary at this time, probably never will be as the goals Russia set out to achieve, are being achieved. I was simply wanting a guesstimate ETA on how quickly a Russian contingent could mop up the bearded yahoos.

Depends on the ROE and if they care for civilian life. They wont fight like Syrians - they'll do it like the second Chechen war - remember the Assault on Grozny ? Yes - like that - but faster.