Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #2

Militarov wrote:

sepheronx wrote:

Regular wrote:

sepheronx wrote:

Regular wrote:Nato ground forces in Syria? Where they would come from?" Turkey?

Exactly.

So this Zbignew or whatever is clearly retarded.  But then again, many people were calling him out on his stupidity for decades.

Nato will bark and caravan will move on. The better Russians performe, the more allies will squeal. Only thing that makes me worry would be SA anti air weaponry.

Manpads are a threat to the helicopters.  Not the other aircrafts.

And if found out even more, I bet Russia would love to help those houthi's.

Actually MANPADs can be used effectively aganist varios types of jets on takeoff and landing, or during bombing runs especially those flying CAS missions like A10 or SU25. Stinger FIM-92E which is majority of US stocks atm has range nearly 8.000m that is not unsignificant asset when they atm have only ZSU-23.

Adding this in edit:

Naturally people often confuse "Max range" with "maximum altitude", range is 8000m but altitude is 3500-3600m.

I would have thought that in the discussions going on in the background between the parties that the subject of MANPADs/SAMs would have been mentioned. Possibly that Russia would have told the others that if it was attacked by new classes of weapons that had not been used against the US/NATO/Saudi etc airforces then it would regard it as a hostile act and would respond in kind.

Vann7 wrote:

Neutrality wrote:

Solncepek wrote:Russia must work with, not against, America in Syria
The Russian naval and air presences in Syria are vulnerable, isolated geographically from their homeland. They could be “disarmed” if they persist in provoking the US. But, better still, Russia might be persuaded to act with the US in seeking a wider accommodation to a regional problem that transcends the interests of a single state.

With all due respect to the man's reputation but how is he so certain about the US "disarming" a Russian base? One look at the map and it should be clear who's going to come up with a much harsher response if it comes down to provocations. This accentuates the core logic of American geopolitics. Notice how he mentions a military option before the "common interests" option? They didn't shoot at Russian paratroopers in Pristina airport, they didn't respond when the Russian navy was ramming their ships in the Black Sea and I'm positive they won't lift a finger in Syria. All talk but no walk.

Yeah the security advisor can fuck off and go to hell.. Russia will not support Illegal and Criminal proxy war in Syria.. If he thinks NATO can "disarm" Russia airbase.. they should go ahead and start doing it.. that will make things more easier for Russia because RUssia will have a legitimate right to take the fight directly to NATO states violating internationals laws ,supporting terrorism and responsible for the misery of millions.. Is people like him.. the only reason why this world is the way it is.. Arrogant ,neoliberals.. that really see themselves as superior to the rest of the world and that have the right to go and bomb nation and nation and remove governments as they please ..  Notice how the imbecile the only thing he is worried is about the image of United States..  They care nothing about the millions of lives they destroying in the world.. If it wasn't for the many good Americans that exist there ,most of population.. i will have welcome Russia to drop its entire nuclear arsenal there.. to get rid of such imbeciles and such fascist mentality in the world.

Maybe this maniac want to see world war 3 before his death. And btw, what can Russia do if this really happens? Without China he can not do much! I think!

JohninMK wrote:

Militarov wrote:

sepheronx wrote:

Regular wrote:

sepheronx wrote:

Regular wrote:Nato ground forces in Syria? Where they would come from?" Turkey?

Exactly.

So this Zbignew or whatever is clearly retarded.  But then again, many people were calling him out on his stupidity for decades.

Nato will bark and caravan will move on. The better Russians performe, the more allies will squeal. Only thing that makes me worry would be SA anti air weaponry.

Manpads are a threat to the helicopters.  Not the other aircrafts.

And if found out even more, I bet Russia would love to help those houthi's.

Actually MANPADs can be used effectively aganist varios types of jets on takeoff and landing, or during bombing runs especially those flying CAS missions like A10 or SU25. Stinger FIM-92E which is majority of US stocks atm has range nearly 8.000m that is not unsignificant asset when they atm have only ZSU-23.

Adding this in edit:

Naturally people often confuse "Max range" with "maximum altitude", range is 8000m but altitude is 3500-3600m.

I would have thought that in the discussions going on in the background between the parties that the subject of MANPADs/SAMs would have been mentioned. Possibly that Russia would have told the others that if it was attacked by new classes of weapons that had not been used against the US/NATO/Saudi etc airforces then it would regard it as a hostile act and would respond in kind.

US is famous for delivering such weapons around the globe the the groups they support. Afganistan as we all know got suplied Stingers be used aganist Soviets. Then Chad to use them aganist Gadaffi. Even Shri Lanka, Angola and reportedly even Chechens obtained some.

Older FIM 43 was given to Croatians and Bosnians to be used aganist Serbs, Nicaraguans... List is probably even bigger coz we do not know all the cases. US actually even supplied Chinese and Russian built derivates of Strela and Igla to certain organisations and armies coz they did not want their technology to be obtained by third party of to hide their direct involvment.

There are already Manpads in Jihadi hands in Syria and it's just about certain that more will arrive. I don't think they'll be a game changer though

After only 4 days of air strikes terrorists are aready getting eviscerated and Russia has promised 4 MONTHS of this firestorm!

To think that they managed to do this with just a couple of dozen aircraft is amazing!



Also, it is a shame that we can't see pics of marines guarding Latakia air base but I guess it falls under heavy OPSEC.
I do hope that someone bothered to take some photos for historic reference...

Not sure if this has already been mentioned....

Russian Navy sends reconnaissance ship to Syrian coast - source

The Baltic fleet's reconnaissance ship Vasily Tatishchev has left Baltiysk for the eastern part of the Mediterranean, a military source told Interfax-AVN on Oct.5.


- http://asia.rbth.com/news/2015/10/05/russian_navy_sends_reconnaissance_ship_to_syrian_coast_-_source_49813.html)

Neutrality wrote:

Solncepek wrote:Russia must work with, not against, America in Syria
The Russian naval and air presences in Syria are vulnerable, isolated geographically from their homeland. They could be “disarmed” if they persist in provoking the US. But, better still, Russia might be persuaded to act with the US in seeking a wider accommodation to a regional problem that transcends the interests of a single state.

With all due respect to the man's reputation but how is he so certain about the US "disarming" a Russian base? One look at the map and it should be clear who's going to come up with a much harsher response if it comes down to provocations. This accentuates the core logic of American geopolitics. Notice how he mentions a military option before the "common interests" option? They didn't shoot at Russian paratroopers in Pristina airport, they didn't respond when the Russian navy was ramming their ships in the Black Sea and I'm positive they won't lift a finger in Syria. All talk but no walk.

Due respect to the man's reputation?

Brzezinski?
The big Z?

He doesn't deserve any respect at all.

And his suggestion of 'disarming' Russian bases is absolutely insane. He's basically calling for Russia to accept all US demands and agendas for Syria, or be prepared to see its military presence there destroyed - seeings as he seems to term Russia targetting Al-Nusra as a 'provocation' towards the US. No deal, Brzezinski, back to the asylum with you.

flamming_python wrote:

Due respect to the man's reputation?

Brzezinski?
The big Z?

He doesn't deserve any respect at all.

And his suggestion of 'disarming' Russian bases is absolutely insane. He's basically calling for Russia to accept all US demands and agendas for Syria, or be prepared to see its military presence there destroyed. No deal, Brzezinski, back to the asylum with you.

In all honesty, I thought this was Carter who wrote this not that insane Pole.

Neutrality wrote:

flamming_python wrote:

Due respect to the man's reputation?

Brzezinski?
The big Z?

He doesn't deserve any respect at all.

And his suggestion of 'disarming' Russian bases is absolutely insane. He's basically calling for Russia to accept all US demands and agendas for Syria, or be prepared to see its military presence there destroyed. No deal, Brzezinski, back to the asylum with you.

In all honesty, I thought this was Carter who wrote this not that insane Pole.

Carter is a lot more levelheaded and wouldn't entertain such inflammatory suggestions.

Read the blurb at the bottom; it says adviser to Carter; not Carter himself.

Dunno why Solncepek left the author's name out though.

On-topic: delivering high. tech manpads is going to be terribly difficult this time around. Again, let's take a closer look at the map. How is Israel going to react when they find out that their ally is planning to deliver high. tech weaponry to those who they consider enemies? So several years later someone impersonating Hezbollah shoots down a couple of F16s with these? Putin and Netanyahu are basically on the same page in this conflict and let's not forget how the USA backstabbed them on Iran's nuclear deal.This option IMHO is out of the question. Turkey might play ball but how exactly are they going to smuggle such high profile material through the border? ISIS and the Kurds, also Turkey's enemies, are right across the border. Plus Iranian and Iraqi intelligence are swarming that place and I doubt anything is going to get through. Air drop? Not going to happen with Russian AA and ECM units having locked down the entire air space.

Let's pretend they do get through and a Russian jets ends up destroyed. The Russians will point all their fingers to ISIS (it won't even matter who, ISIS or someone else) and blame the United States for delivering weapons to a group of people that even their allies consider enemies. Then we'll have Putin openly attacking Obama at the UN for repeating the same mistake from the 80s when a certain "moderate" revolutionary was provided weapons. So again, I don't believe the US administration can be this stupid. At least I hope so.

flamming_python wrote:

Neutrality wrote:

Solncepek wrote:Russia must work with, not against, America in Syria
The Russian naval and air presences in Syria are vulnerable, isolated geographically from their homeland. They could be “disarmed” if they persist in provoking the US. But, better still, Russia might be persuaded to act with the US in seeking a wider accommodation to a regional problem that transcends the interests of a single state.

With all due respect to the man's reputation but how is he so certain about the US "disarming" a Russian base? One look at the map and it should be clear who's going to come up with a much harsher response if it comes down to provocations. This accentuates the core logic of American geopolitics. Notice how he mentions a military option before the "common interests" option? They didn't shoot at Russian paratroopers in Pristina airport, they didn't respond when the Russian navy was ramming their ships in the Black Sea and I'm positive they won't lift a finger in Syria. All talk but no walk.

Due respect to the man's reputation?

Brzezinski?
The big Z?

He doesn't deserve any respect at all.

And his suggestion of 'disarming' Russian bases is absolutely insane. He's basically calling for Russia to accept all US demands and agendas for Syria, or be prepared to see its military presence there destroyed - seeings as he seems to term Russia targetting Al-Nusra as a 'provocation' towards the US. No deal, Brzezinski, back to the asylum with you.

No kidding, the Zbig guy single-handily caused the clusterf*ck in Afghanistan, someone should pay for lobotomy surgery for this senile old piece of dog excrement!

Neutrality wrote:On-topic: delivering high. tech manpads is going to be terribly difficult this time around. Again, let's take a closer look at the map. How is Israel going to react when they find out that their ally is planning to deliver high. tech weaponry to those who they consider enemies? So several years later someone impersonating Hezbollah shoots down a couple of F16s with these? Putin and Netanyahu are basically on the same page in this conflict and let's not forget how the USA backstabbed them on Iran's nuclear deal.This option IMHO is out of the question. Turkey might play ball but how exactly are they going to smuggle such high profile material through the border? ISIS and the Kurds, also Turkey's enemies, are right across the border. Plus Iranian and Iraqi intelligence are swarming that place and I doubt anything is going to get through. Air drop? Not going to happen with Russian AA and ECM units having locked down the entire air space.

Let's pretend they do get through and a Russian jets ends up destroyed. The Russians will point all their fingers to ISIS (it won't even matter who, ISIS or someone else) and blame the United States for delivering weapons to a group of people that even their allies consider enemies. Then we'll have Putin openly attacking Obama at the UN for repeating the same mistake from the 80s when a certain "moderate" revolutionary was provided weapons. So again, I don't believe the US administration can be this stupid. At least I hope so.

I've posted this countless times already, KRET has developed serious 'force-multipliers' to protect Russian aircraft. Combined with DIRCM's, Russian aircraft will be far better protected then people realize, and in fact orders of magnitude better protected than they were in the 80's Afghan theater:

magnumcromagnon wrote:Excellent news, Richag-AV ECM suite designed for helicopters, and developed by KRET, is a very capable system...

1.) ECM is effective against ground targets from 50-200 km away!

2.) Can jam up to 8 targets simultaneously!

3.) ECM is effective against air targets up to 300 km away!




...So with this system you can defeat grounds targets with a ECM sphere that is 400 km in diameter, and for air targets that is 600 km in diameter!

Dozens of Saudi Clerics Call for Jihad Against Iran and Russia in Syria

The West Fears Russia’s Success in Syria - Not Its Failure

The threat from MANPADS is only relevant for the Su-25s/helis and aircraft taking off/landing Assuming they're SM standard the threat would be even less (I wonder if they've got SM3 there in some form or other ). The logistical problem for terrorist forces in actually getting any form of AA anywhere near close to the Latakia base makes it pretty safe. I wouldn't be too worried. Not saying the VKS shouldn't prepare for it though, which clearly they are/have.

Su-34s and Su-24s are doing majority of bombing from a gajillion feet up, so no worry for them while on mission.

If the US gives modernised FIM-92s to ISIS then there will be hell to pay, and they'll be caught with their pants down and (small) balls flapping in the wind, no one believes their "moderates" story any more, not even the sheeple.

JacquesdeMolay wrote:

Maybe this maniac want to see world war 3 before his death. And btw, what can Russia do if this really happens? Without China he can not do much! I think!

If a crazy American or Turkey general orders bombing of Latakia Russian base with many dozens combat planes ,in a coward attack, And people die.. lets say a few hundreds Russians.. Then Russia will retaliate sinking a warship or aircraft carrier of them and using a nuclear warhead.
It will be a legitimate retaliation ,tit for tat..  The west kill 100 , Russia kill 5,000.   The end result after that will be emergency meetings to stop the war..and guess in which side will have major unrest in the cities ,riots on the streets ,demanding their president to step down? with a potential coup to the president for causing the death of thousands of soldiers?  Russia will not be..  

Russia was invited to Syria to help save the nation from terrorism..Americans and its coalition was not invited. Russia have the public opinion and the international support on their side..The American Government not..moral of the story is public support is very important in times of war.. if you have no public support you risk a major civil war. Risk losing allies.. Look at the coalition of Americans bombing "ISIS" in Syria.. Most of Nato countries are not there. and mostly gold dictators are.. shows how little support US have.


So Russia have a Big political ,moral and legal advantage in Syria that should not be underestimated

It was public opinion against Obama what stopped US navy cruise missile attack on Syria.
They stopped the attack precisely because the entire world was opposing US to bomb Syrian government using as pretext a questionable report of chemical weapons.. Public Opinion is what can make the difference between a civilian major uprising or civilians backing their government.

Public Opinion is what can make an entire nation to stand up in support of its government if
things go badly..or to overthrow it.. as happened to Egypt . and without firing a shot. It was Public Support what allowed RUssia to take Crimea also without firing a shot..  you have 2 examples there.. This is why NATO ,Ukraine cannot talk about Russia without mentioning the words.. "Russia Agression" ,"Russian Invasion" , and recently "Russia hostile invasion of Turkey territory" all those messages are aimed to the general public ,to brainwash them ,to think Russia is "evil" , and doing something wrong and needs to be stopped.  It seeks to create
a coalition to fight back "Russia agression " Russia..

So as long Russia have international public support..the moral standing.. but also in Russia the support of Russian citizens.. they will be on good shape to survive any political crisis.. if something really goes wrong.

sepheronx wrote:Russian aircraft briefly entered Turkish airspace due to bad weather — defense ministry

I don't get it.  Su-30SM has Glonass Navigation, does it not?  If so, then wouldn't, in bad weather, they would be able to keep an eye on the glonass and figure it out their position?  Or is that how they figured out to correct their positions?

Most aircraft, even military do not like to fly straight into weather formations, not always a great idea with munitions too. Most likely swerved to avoid and ended up crossing very slightly.


Also remember that Turkey targets things within five miles of its borders, which started after a Turkish jet was shot down...

sepheronx wrote:Russian aircraft briefly entered Turkish airspace due to bad weather — defense ministry

I don't get it.  Su-30SM has Glonass Navigation, does it not?  If so, then wouldn't, in bad weather, they would be able to keep an eye on the glonass and figure it out their position?  Or is that how they figured out to correct their positions?

There are many reasons for that happening even with Glonass/GPS navigation. Maybe they were not using it? What if they were flying on inertial or ground navigation at that moment, maybe signal was out, or pilot did not pay attention, you never know what might have happened. When i served we had incident when fighter from neighbouring country was sent to intercept unknown small turboprop two seater that was just leaving our airspace and he ended up penetrating our airspace by 20 or so km due to bad navigation he was recieving from the ground by radio. MiG 21 was in question if you wonder about it, and yes it was equiped with GPS navigation from Elbit.

From the Kurds and their allies

http://sputniknews.com/middleeast/20151005/1028038570/syria-fsa-command-asks-russia-for-help.html

The representative of the Euphrates Volcano command of the FSA and the Kurdish YPG told Sputnik that the command supports Russia's operation against ISIL and requests military help.

The Eurphrates Volcano (Burqan al-Furat) command of the Free Syrian Army (FSA) supports Russia's military operation in Syria and for help in battling ISIL, the command's official spokesman Servan Devrish told Sputnik.

@magnumcromangnon:

http://zagopod.com/blog/43532536810/zvonok--zapadnogo-zhurnalista

rough translation wrote:Western Journalist: How do Russian Armed Forces distinguishes moderate rebels from radical terrorists ?

Russian military officer: We Russians strictly abide by the international law and principle of justice. All of our munitions fall into two categories: conventional and moderate. Against the usual terrorists, we use only conventional munitions. Against moderate rebels, we use only moderate ammunitions. We do consider the moderation of some of the rebels and deal with them justly.

W: Is it true that you only use the moderate ammunitions against moderate rebels ?

R: You have my words as a Russian officer.

W: Could you tell me what is the difference between the conventional and moderate ammunitions ?

R: The nature of conventional and moderate ammunitions strictly correspond with the nature of conventional terrorists and moderate rebels. That is, the moderate ammunitions are painted with lighter color and moderate tones.

IL18 over Damascus yesterday.