Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #7

AlfaT8 wrote:It seems like Russian Robots have indeed been deployed (1:38), there job is mostly recon though.

PapaDragon wrote:
Side effects...  

''Hezbollah's Russian Military Education in Syria''

http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/view/hezbollahs-russian-military-education-in-syria

flamming_python wrote:

PapaDragon wrote:
Side effects...  

''Hezbollah's Russian Military Education in Syria''

http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/view/hezbollahs-russian-military-education-in-syria

So much unfounded BS and conjecture

Reports indicate that joint Hezbollah-Russian operations rooms have been established in Latakia and Damascus

Which reports?

During the 2006 Lebanon war, a joint Syrian-Russian intelligence post located in Syrian territory passed intelligence reports to Hezbollah.

Pretty sure Israel would have raised some noise if the Russians passed on intel to Hezbollah. The only subject Israel brought up in fact was the precense of Kornet rockets in the Hezzie arsenal, that were earlier supplied by Russia to Syria.

Russian forces have extensive urban warfare experience, so they likely have many pointers for the group, including how to organize an effective command-and-control structure, how to choose different weapons for different scenarios, how to create additional targets after entering a battlefield, and how to maintain logistical routes.

We know that the Russians have advisers training regular Syrian forces, but I don't think Hezbollah needs to be taught how to fight. The Russians are probably only involved with training Syrian units, not the other foreign detachments in the country.

Recently, for example, reports indicated that Hezbollah has acquired SA-22 surface-to-air missiles

Again, which reports?
First Israel alleged that Hezbollah was given Syrian Buks, blew them up, then Yakhonts, blew them up, now Pantsir-S1s.
Syria doesn't have the resources to give out its limited quality of state-of-the-art weaponry; particularly that which concerns its already compromised air defence network - to Hezbollah.
And Hezbollah certainly doesn't have the intel, specialists, logistics, or anything really - to be able to use such sophisticated systems with any level of effectiveness; although to some degree it would be able to (e.g. like rebels in the Donbass)

Recent history has also shown that whatever Hezbollah learns, its partners in crime will soon follow suit. Numerous terrorist organizations have studied and implemented the group's military tactics -- in some cases, Hezbollah even sent trainers to help certain proxies upgrade their capabilities

First I heard about any of this, I'm sceptical to say the least. Hezbollah are Iranian allies, but most terrorist organizations are Sunni ones.

High-ranking Hezbollah veterans also reportedly trained Houthi forces in Yemen, who are now showing significant capabilities in their fight against the Arab coalition.

Citation needed



TL, DR - this looks like a straight up think-tank propaganda piece, or intentional misinformation.

Kadmos45 wrote:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Washington_Institute_for_Near_East_Policy

Founder: Martin Indyk - former deputy research director for the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), a pro-Israel lobbying group in Washington.

Washington Institute's advisory board included (among others):

John R. Allen - ISIS tsar
Henry Kissinger - self explanatory
Richard Perle - former Assistant Secretary of Defense (and a psycho)
Condoleezza Rice -  former Secretary of State (also a psycho)
Joe Lieberman (former VP candidate) recipient of CUFI's Award "Defender of Israel Award".
CUFI - Christians United for Israel

And so on, and so on.


Nothing more really to say.

Elijah J. Magnier
‏@EjmAlrai
Russia informed the USA that its military operation against terrorists in Syria will continue regardless any deal
http://www.alraimedia.com/ar/article/special-reports/2015/12/27/645546/nr/syria

flamming_python wrote:

PapaDragon wrote:
Side effects...  

''Hezbollah's Russian Military Education in Syria''

http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/view/hezbollahs-russian-military-education-in-syria

So much unfounded BS and conjecture

GarryB wrote:An important thing to keep in mind is that there is a significant difference between a land based robot and a UAV.

Most land based robots would need to find their own way across the terrain and deal with problems like culverts and fences and walls... and even steps. Most of the time they avoid such obstacles but they will need remote controllers to identify valid targets and to authorise opening fire.  Keep in mind people are not stupid... an intruder could take a hostage with them... if that hostage gets shot then the system fails. Equally ROBOT DEFENCE SYSTEM KILLS TWO SIX YO UNARMED BOYS is also a bit embarassing too and would be considered a failure.

A UAV has waypoints to fly to its operational area and can fly there on autopilot with no interference from the operator. It is only when it gets to its operational area that an operator might manipulate the cameras or weapons... they probably wont fly the UAV themselves like a plane but might command a zig zag flight pattern or oval flight pattern to keep the UAV over enemy territory so enemy postions can be studied in detail and targets targetted when needed (either weapons launched or targets marked or positions noted for future attacks by other platforms).

For a ground robot tasks like fire support during an attack or just moving back and up high to get good view of the battlefield perhaps with an auto grenade launcher or machine gun fitted to provide fire support. It might also be used for moving forward under enemy fire or might even be used to take the injured back from front line positions to where they can get help.

ult wrote:0:20

Cyberspec wrote:

flamming_python wrote:

PapaDragon wrote:
Side effects...  

''Hezbollah's Russian Military Education in Syria''

http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/view/hezbollahs-russian-military-education-in-syria

So much unfounded BS and conjecture

I think it's ridiculous to assume there is no contact or coordination between Russia and Iran/Hezbolah representatives just because there isn't widespread media reports about it.

And yes Hezbolah did receive intelligence support from Russia in 2006 probably indirectly via the Syrians....there was a big media storm about it at the time


_____________

A couple of convoys hit a few days ago (videos are from 23rd Dec)

Maarat Al-Nassan


Deir Ezor province

Cyberspec wrote:I think it's ridiculous to assume there is no contact or coordination between Russia and Iran/Hezbolah representatives just because there isn't widespread media reports about it.

And yes Hezbolah did receive intelligence support from Russia in 2006 probably indirectly via the Syrians....there was a big media storm about it at the time

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Three months into his military intervention in Syria, Russian President Vladimir Putin has achieved his central goal of stabilizing the Assad government and, with the costs relatively low, could sustain military operations at this level for years, U.S. officials and military analysts say.

That assessment comes despite public assertions by President Barack Obama and top aides that Putin has embarked on an ill-conceived mission in support of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad that it will struggle to afford and that will likely fail.

"I think it's indisputable that the Assad regime, with Russian military support, is probably in a safer position than it was," said a senior administration official, who requested anonymity. Five other U.S. officials interviewed by Reuters concurred with the view that the Russian mission has been mostly successful so far and is facing relatively low costs.

The U.S. officials stressed that Putin could face serious problems the longer his involvement in the more than four-year-old civil war drags on.

Yet since its campaign began on Sept. 30, Russia has suffered minimal casualties and, despite domestic fiscal woes, is handily covering the operation's cost, which analysts estimate at $1-2 billion a year. The war is being funded from Russia's regular annual defense budget of about $54 billion, a U.S. intelligence official said.

The expense, analysts and officials said, is being kept in check by plummeting oil prices that, while hurting Russia's overall economy, has helped its defense budget stretch further by reducing the costs of fueling aircraft and ships. It has also been able to tap a stockpile of conventional bombs dating to the Soviet era.

Putin has said his intervention is aimed at stabilizing the Assad government and helping it fight the Islamic State group, though Western officials and Syrian opposition groups say its air strikes mostly have targeted moderate rebels.

Russia's Syrian and Iranian partners have made few major territorial gains.

Yet Putin’s intervention has halted the opposition's momentum, allowing pro-Assad forces to take the offensive. Prior to Russia's military action, U.S. and Western officials said, Assad's government looked increasingly threatened.

Rather than pushing back the opposition, Russia may be settling for defending Assad's grip on key population centers that include the heartland of his minority Alawite sect, said the U.S. intelligence official.

Russia is taking advantage of the operation to test new weapons in battlefield conditions and integrate them into its tactics, the intelligence official said. It is refining its use of unarmed surveillance drones, the official added.

"The Russians didn't go blindly into this," said the U.S. intelligence official, adding that they "are getting some benefit out of the cost."

QUAGMIRE?

Russia's intervention also appears to have strengthened its hand at the negotiating table. In recent weeks, Washington has engaged more closely with Russia in seeking a settlement to the war and backed off a demand for the immediate departure of Assad as part of any political transition.

Obama has suggested as recently as this month that Moscow is being sucked into a foreign venture that will drain its resources and bog down its military.

"An attempt by Russia and Iran to prop up Assad and try to pacify the population is just going to get them stuck in a quagmire and it won't work," Obama said on Oct. 2.

On Dec. 1, he raised the prospect of Russia becoming "bogged down in an inconclusive and paralyzing civil conflict."

The senior administration official denied any contradiction between Obama's statements and private assessments that Russia's campaign has been relatively effective so far.

"I think the president's point has been...it's not going to succeed in the long run," the official said. The Russians "have become bound up in a civil war in a way that's going to be extremely difficult to extricate themselves from."

U.S. officials have not publicly defined what a quagmire would look like for Russia. But Obama has raised the Soviet Union's disastrous decade-long Afghanistan occupation from 1979.

U.S. officials said Russia's military footprint is relatively light. It comprises a long-time naval facility in Tartus, a major air base near the port city of Latakia, a second under expansion near Homs and several lesser posts.

There are an estimated 5,000 Russian personnel in Syria, including pilots, ground crews, intelligence personnel, security units protecting the Russian bases and advisers to the Syrian government forces.

Russia has lost an airliner to an Islamic State-claimed attack over Egypt that killed 224 people, and an Su-24 supersonic bomber shot down by Turkey. It is also allied with an exhausted Syrian army that is suffering manpower shortages and facing U.S.-backed rebels using anti-tank missiles.

"It’s been a grind," said the intelligence official, adding that in terms of ground gains, "I think the Russians are not where they expected to be."

Russian casualties in Syria have been relatively minimal, officially put at three dead. U.S. officials estimate that Russia may have suffered as many as 30 casualties overall.

Vasily Kashin, a Moscow-based analyst, said the war is not financially stressing Russia.

"All the available data shows us that the current level of military effort is completely insignificant for the Russian economy and Russian budget," said Kashin, of the Center for Analyses of Strategies and Technologies.

"It can be carried on at the same level year after year after year," he said.