Syrian War: News #19

New vide of Ana news..
As always substitles have to be manually added through youtube language settings.



Is fantastic to see terrorist bombed.. day and night.. you never get tired of they being
wiped in the battlefield and with no place to hide.

Vann7 wrote:

New vide of Ana news..
As always substitles have to be manually added through youtube language settings.



Is fantastic to see terrorist bombed.. day and night.. you never get tired of they being
wiped in the battlefield and with no place to hide.

ANNA News is doing a great job covering. Unfortunate to see Russian news like RT, RT Ruptly, Russia 24 not caring much about it.

SeigSoloyvov wrote:Okay is he seriously spamming my posts now?. That is actually against the rules.

Also the Russian army isn't fighting on the frontline, the more this guy talks the more he shows his lack of understanding.

For the 100th dam time, if you CAN READ.

They are Turkish rebels and I gave a rats ass if they die.

Russian army don't fight on the frontline but the lion's share of targets are obliterated by Russian army. Like 90% of targets are destroyed by Russian army. Less than 10% of targets are destroyed by Syrian army. Also important is the intel provided by Russian army. Russian army operates military grade drones like Forpost, Orlan, Zala drones which have long transmission range and long loiter times and high powered zoom and thermal. Commercial drones like DJI drones cannot compete with military grade drones.

Indeed, before US entered WW2, Allies were losing to Axis. After US entered WW2, Allies were winning against Axis. Likewise, before Russia entered Syria war, Allies were losing against rebels. After Russia entered Syria war, Allies were winning against rebels.

SeigSoloyvov wrote:Okay is he seriously spamming my posts now?. That is actually against the rules.

Also the Russian army isn't fighting on the frontline, the more this guy talks the more he shows his lack of understanding.

For the 100th dam time, if you CAN READ.

They are Turkish rebels and I gave a rats ass if they die.

Btw.. about your argument of casualties..

If any day Syria needs more fighters.. they can get plenty of volunteers to help
from IRAQ ,IRAN.. from Russia.,and .former soviet republics ,China ,And even India..
I have seen reports even of greeks soldiers helping the Syrian army.

And Putin himself have told.. that they are in Syria ,because if they don't fight
the terrorist in Syria.. they will have to fight them in Russia. So is much better to take
the war to them ,before they go to Russia..

So Russia will never allow terrorist to grow in Syria.. because if alqaeda or isis
ever wins in Syria .. it will encourage millions more terrorist to want to join the NATO jihad
on Russia ,Iran and Syria.. after they see that they can handle a fight against Russia.
So Russia presence sends a big message to all the terorist ,all those videos of terrorist being bombed day and night every day.. will make the Alqaeda and ISIS thugs to think twicebefore going again into a war zone ,that Russia airforce will slaughter them..

Vann7 wrote:

SeigSoloyvov wrote:Okay is he seriously spamming my posts now?. That is actually against the rules.

Also the Russian army isn't fighting on the frontline, the more this guy talks the more he shows his lack of understanding.

For the 100th dam time, if you CAN READ.

They are Turkish rebels and I gave a rats ass if they die.

Btw.. about your argument of casualties..

If any day Syria needs more fighters.. they can get plenty of volunteers to help
from IRAQ ,IRAN.. from Russia.,and .former soviet republics ,China ,And even India..
I have seen reports even of greeks soldiers helping the Syrian army.

And Putin himself have told.. that they are in Syria ,because if they don't fight
the terrorist in Syria.. they will have to fight them in Russia. So is much better to take
the war to them ,before they go to Russia..

So Russia will never allow terrorist to grow in Syria.. because if alqaeda or isis
ever wins in Syria .. it will encourage millions more terrorist to want to join the NATO jihad
on Russia ,Iran and Syria.. after they see that they can handle a fight against Russia.
So Russia presence sends a big message to all the terorist ,all those videos of terrorist being bombed day and night every day.. will make the Alqaeda and ISIS thugs to think twicebefore going again into a war zone ,that Russia airforce will slaughter them..

That's right. Anyone who thinks the 100,000 or so people who live in Idlib without electricity, running water, sanitation, medicine, fuel, gas, modern agriculture have more MEN than SAA has is out of his mind.

Iran has already deployed tons of men to the river bank.

But they haven't sent anything to Idlib, given their dire situation right now they aren't in any shape to mass fighters in Idlib.

Iraq, the only ones who would help are the PMU's the general population there isn't going to war in idlib for Assad. Still the PMU's won't enter Syria,.

Russia? sides from some Mercs they sent all they will send.

Syria will not get much help bodies wise from these countries and it hasn't in the past.

Putin doesn't care if the rebels exist long has turk's keep them in check, he doesn't want to liberate all of Syria. That's what Assad wants.


There is running electricity and water in Idlib not everywhere sure. Have you ever been to a third world Muslim country? I don't think you have. Those people find a way to get by.

Also, I'll remind you, Russia themselves gave the estimate there is over 30k Rebels there.

AND about this silly argument, the rebels are dying in Masses.

Around 1100 Rebels are confirmed dead so far and guess how many government forces around 1200. The loses so far are fairly even SAA has lost much more equipment then the rebels.

So yes the Rebel still has tons of manpower to spare. if Assad keeps losing guy for guy his army will be depleted.

So both Van and Warrior do not waste my time with your absurd rants.

SeigSoloyvov wrote:
Iran has already deployed tons of men to the river bank.

But they haven't sent anything to Idlib, given their dire situation right now they aren't in any shape to mass fighters in Idlib.

Iraq, the only ones who would help are the PMU's the general population there isn't going to war in idlib for Assad. Still the PMU's won't enter Syria,.

Russia? sides from some Mercs they sent all they will send.

Syria will not get much help bodies wise from these countries and it hasn't in the past.

Putin doesn't care if the rebels exist long has turk's keep them in check, he doesn't want to liberate all of Syria. That's what Assad wants.


There is running electricity and water in Idlib not everywhere sure. Have you ever been to a third world Muslim country? I don't think you have. Those people find a way to get by.

Also, I'll remind you, Russia themselves gave the estimate there is over 30k Rebels there.

AND about this silly argument, the rebels are dying in Masses.

Around 1100 Rebels are confirmed dead so far and guess how many government forces around 1200. The loses so far are fairly even SAA has lost much more equipment then the rebels.

So yes the Rebel still has tons of manpower to spare. if Assad keeps losing guy for guy his army will be depleted.

So both Van and Warrior do not waste my time with your absurd rants.

Iran initially wanted to back Islamist rebels to take over Syria and extend Islamist rule from Iran to Gaza strip. However, Iran being Russia's CLIENT state had to back Assad under Putin's order. Other than fighting ISIS in 2017 in eastern Syria, Iran decided not to participate in Idlib battle.



All of Greater Idlib will be brought back under Assad control. Putin is coming for Joulani's head and there's no stopping that. The Turkey controlled Bab and Afrin regions might stay out of Assad control for a while longer, but hey, keepers payers. Turkey want to support them, then Turkey has to pay for them. Once Erdogan is out of power then yes they too will go back under Assad control.

Idlib might have some electricity but only the very wealthy can afford that. There is no power plant in Idlib and there is no fuel either. Sure they can GET BY, but Idlib can only support up to 100,000 people tops.

SeigSoloyvov wrote:
Iran has already deployed tons of men to the river bank.

But they haven't sent anything to Idlib, given their dire situation right now they aren't in any shape to mass fighters in Idlib.

Iraq, the only ones who would help are the PMU's the general population there isn't going to war in idlib for Assad. Still the PMU's won't enter Syria,.

Russia? sides from some Mercs they sent all they will send.

Syria will not get much help bodies wise from these countries and it hasn't in the past.

Putin doesn't care if the rebels exist long has turk's keep them in check, he doesn't want to liberate all of Syria. That's what Assad wants.


There is running electricity and water in Idlib not everywhere sure. Have you ever been to a third world Muslim country? I don't think you have. Those people find a way to get by.

Also, I'll remind you, Russia themselves gave the estimate there is over 30k Rebels there.

AND about this silly argument, the rebels are dying in Masses.

Around 1100 Rebels are confirmed dead so far and guess how many government forces around 1200. The loses so far are fairly even SAA has lost much more equipment then the rebels.

So yes the Rebel still has tons of manpower to spare. if Assad keeps losing guy for guy his army will be depleted.

So both Van and Warrior do not waste my time with your absurd rants.

30,000 rebels? Doubt it. Maybe if you include their women and children. Even Ukraine army in 2014 had 50,000 soldiers and that's a country of 40 million. Idlib has less than 100,000 people left by now. It takes a lot of people to support 1 soldier. Maybe a few thousand rebel soldiers. In any event, they only have a few hundred pickup trucks and hundreds of those have already been destroyed by Russia. Without pickup trucks they don't have any offensive power. You can't carry an ATGM with you. It's too heavy. Weighs more than 100 lb.

SeigSoloyvov wrote:So both Van and Warrior do not waste my time with your absurd rants.

Mods, this Russia hater deserves a month ban. He has been trolling and insulting other members for far too long.

ultimatewarrior wrote:

SeigSoloyvov wrote:So both Van and Warrior do not waste my time with your absurd rants.

Mods, this Russia hater deserves a month ban. He has been trolling and insulting other members for far too long.

Oh this coming from a spammer, a guy who has made tons of false claims about me even when I said that's not true and broken a few other rules?.

Let's be honest you want me banned because you cannot stand my opposing view. I guess all you types want is a place you can freely post your non-sense where no one will call it out for what it is.

Calling someone's rant Absurd isn't an insult at all, PS I am far from the only one who considers Vann's rats absurd.

SeigSoloyvov wrote:
.....SAA has lost much more equipment then the rebels.

With Russian help at least they're replaceable. Several times in the past, Russia has replaced high syrian losses.

if Assad keeps losing guy for guy his army will be depleted.

It has revived from costly wars before.

starman wrote:

SeigSoloyvov wrote:
.....SAA has lost much more equipment then the rebels.

With Russian help at least they're replaceable. Several times in the past, Russia has replaced high syrian losses.

if Assad keeps losing guy for guy his army will be depleted.

It has revived from costly wars before.

To a degree, they are yes.

It would revive sure but the question is if they fail now will they try again in 20 years once they rebuild?, will it turn into another Golan heights? etc. There is just too many unknowns to suggest what the fate of Idlib would be if Assad fails to take it.

SeigSoloyvov wrote:

starman wrote:

SeigSoloyvov wrote:
.....SAA has lost much more equipment then the rebels.

With Russian help at least they're replaceable. Several times in the past, Russia has replaced high syrian losses.

if Assad keeps losing guy for guy his army will be depleted.

It has revived from costly wars before.

To a degree, they are yes.

It would revive sure but the question is if they fail now will they try again in 20 years once they rebuild?, will it turn into another Golan heights? etc. There is just too many unknowns to suggest what the fate of Idlib would be if Assad fails to take it.

Idlib is going under Assad. If Turkey wanted to save Idlib they would have used Turkish army and Syrian National Army to take over Idlib like they did to Bab and Afrin. Fact they didn't is so Assad reconquer Idlib. Idlib in its current state only have about 100,000 people left. Less than 10,000 soldiers. They cannot hold against Russian drones, airstrikes, heavy artillery strikes. Maybe a few months. Maybe a few years. But Idlib's fate is sealed.

If you think Idlib is stronger than ISIS you are delusional. ISIS was way bigger than Idlib, many times the size of Idlib and they were no match for Russian army, US army.

ultimatewarrior wrote:
If you think Idlib is stronger than ISIS you are delusional. ISIS was way bigger than Idlib, many times the size of Idlib and they were no match for Russian army, US army.

Think it would have been a bit more accurate if you had put "they were no match for the locals supported by Russian and US forces."

JohninMK wrote:

ultimatewarrior wrote:
If you think Idlib is stronger than ISIS you are delusional. ISIS was way bigger than Idlib, many times the size of Idlib and they were no match for Russian army, US army.

Think it would have been a bit more accurate if you had put "they were no match for the locals supported by Russian and US forces."

Locals were fervently pro ISIS. Actually, ISIS faced the least insurgency. Hell, even Idlib is facing more insurgency than ISIS ever did. You know what? Flesh is no match for bombs. Same was true for ISIS. Same is true for Idlib.

Turkey wastes 100,000 USD Kornet missile bought from Russia on a cheap 57 mm gun.

https://twitter.com/QalaatAlMudiq/status/1161334883177959424

Price doesn't really matter on the battlefield... a guy that fires a Javelin at a sniper or machine gun post doesn't care that he just launched a quarter million dollar missile to kill one guy.

The thing he cares about is that that guy was a real problem for him and was killing his mates.

A Kornet is well worth using against a 57mm gun if the 57mm gun is doing serious damage to your forces and stopping you from moving or operating in that area.

Having said that first of course a stationary target they could have used something rather cheaper for the job like a mortar or even an ancient ATGM like an AT-3 and saved the Kornets for something that needs more power.

GarryB wrote:Price doesn't really matter on the battlefield... a guy that fires a Javelin at a sniper or machine gun post doesn't care that he just launched a quarter million dollar missile to kill one guy.

The thing he cares about is that that guy was a real problem for him and was killing his mates.

A Kornet is well worth using against a 57mm gun if the 57mm gun is doing serious damage to your forces and stopping you from moving or operating in that area.

Having said that first of course a stationary target they could have used something rather cheaper for the job like a mortar or even an ancient ATGM like an AT-3 and saved the Kornets for something that needs more power.

57 mm is worthless these days. SAA only uses 122 mm at the least. 57 mm lacks range and firepower.

Su-22 shot down near Khan Sheikhon today. They say Turkey gave MANPADS to HTS. If so, time to use Smerch and switch tactics. Planes never kill any terrorist anyway because they hear it coming and scatter before bombs can hit. Smerch don't give any early warning. Smerch is super sonic.

If it is just a link to a twitter account then please post in the other thread provided.

If you can post the video that is OK, but links only to the other threat please.

57 mm is worthless these days. SAA only uses 122 mm at the least. 57 mm lacks range and firepower.

I suspect from that comment you have never been fired at by a 57mm gun... they are powerful enough to make VIEDs pointless and ineffective, and take out rooms of buildings from significant distances.

They are vastly more powerful than HMG or light automatic cannon... if you can see it you can probably reach it with these weapons.

The militants losses west of Khan Shaykhun.







https://southfront.org/new-videos-expose-militants-losses-west-of-khan-shaykhun-18/

SAA lost their gains on the East Side of Khan but made good progress on the West Side if they can hold it from the counter-attack, they are in a position they can start to raid the city.

From my understanding , Russia and SAA are using standard equipment mostly attack aircraft and Tanks. To soften up the target before assault by troops. This is having an effect. I heard they liberated 1000 Square kilometres. With some loss of troops on SAA side. So they can calculate, how much extra forces needed to liberate entire IDLIB. They can plan. Regarding loss of SU 22. No need to abandon present tactics. Just make sure plenty of IR countermeasures during operation and fly higher if possible. To minimise losses then be creative. The rats have streanghts. True. But they have weaknesses too. They are essentially fighting a static Trench war with limited means. They are human and have weaknesses. Trenches are terrible places. Full of Rats and they can get flooded. IDLIB topography may allow flooding of front line trenches and fox holes. Softening of target can be done by means other than air war. Sound can be used. To deny sleep. ROV can be sent to search trenches and buildings instead of soldiers risking life. If you don't want to spend blood, then spend treasure. If you don't want to spend treasure, then spend grey matter. But in the end you have to spend of what you have most.