Syrian Civil War: News #9

zorobabel wrote:Inching closer to WW3. The US seems ready to make a big fuss over the bombing of the so-called 'aid' convoy in east Aleppo.

Russia should call another UN Security Council meeting to demand independent checking of any such convoys. The
US and its UN stooges cannot impose any rules they want.

zorobabel wrote:Inching closer to WW3. The US seems ready to make a big fuss over the bombing of the so-called 'aid' convoy in east Aleppo.

This is not about world war 3...
The whole point of Americans to backup ISIS and Alqaeda and other terrorist groups ,
is to be able to by proxy fight Russia and Syria.  If Americans or its allies saw they could handle Russia directly they will have not bothered to recruit Alqaeda or ISIS and simply NATO will have
invaded Syria regardless of Russia opposition and attacked Russia directly. The same is true in Ukraine. That US government the only way they can fight Russia is by hiding behind others.
All said there will be no world war 3.. the goal in Syria by US And NATO is to keep Russia locked
in a very expensive and very long war and get support world wide for a total economic isolation ,under the pretext that Russia is bombing Civilians women and children.. etc..

My guess is that the incident of the UN convoy was a false flag staged event ,that will be used
to justify the creation of a no fly zone over northern Aleppo , at least for the Syrian army ,because again NATO cannot fight Russia without going directly into a war with them.
So no Americans dont want war with Russia. they want others to do the fighting and not them.
They will like fight Russia to the last turkish and muslin in the middle east ,to the last European too. But neither Americans ,neither Israel will go directly into a war against Russia.. because
that will completely make pointless the support of Terrorist in Syria . Because in the end
is not Syria the goal , but the disintegration of Russia the objective through an economic collapse.  So the Syrian war = Economic full scale proxy war on Russia. That also seeks to discredit Russia military and Putin image ,if Syria disbanded and over Run.  

IF the so called "warhawks" Neocons were so strong as they claim , they will have used the Ukraine incident to justify war with Russia. But the whole thing ,in Syria and in Ukraine is
to fight Russia to the last muslin in middle east and to fight Russia to the last Ukrainian in Ukraine. While them providing lethal weapons.  Notice how Ukraine nulandnazis began in 2012 to directly shell villages in Russia territory. It was the intention of the white house to provoke Russia into invading Ukraine. So that later Americans can use the invasion as a pretext to demand Europe to cut all trade business with Russia. So Americans war on Russia is already happening since 2011 , is called the Arabspring and the Ukraine conflict was the ice on the cake.. that it was aiming at more directly destroying Russia economic business with Europe.
So is an economic war.  Even the CIA warmongers the best they do is saying that Obama should provide lethal weapons to Rebels to fight Russia undercovertly.  ie. .it means that Americans not even the most Rusophobics of them ,have ever suggested declaring war against Russia.  It will not happen ever. US needs to fight by proxy Russia instead through third party.. because they are not Strong Enough to fight directly Russia and manage to survive with acceptable consequences.

Remember this..
The biggest threat American Government face.. is that they do the First attack on Russia ,killing russian soldiers. and that Russia retaliates in a painful way. This is because the probabilities that Obama and US military will totally lose the support of American citizens will be
high , if Americans are seen as the one who started the fight with Russia. Something like this
will make VERY easy for Russia to solve the Syrian conflict. By submission of America into peace ,Because US will have no choice but to capitulate to the Syrian conflict or face a civil war. on top of a war with Russia ,that they know they cannot handle with acceptable consequences for its economy and nation stability.

So much Russia understand this .. vulnerability of Americans. that when they took Crimea .
and an American warship was heading in Crimea direction.. Putin himself gave the orders (he told media) to prepare its nuclear forces. and sink the warship if this one attacked them.  So Putin himself told was ready to use a nuke to stop the American warship in case of any aggression. So does a nuclear weapon was needed to sink a warship? of course not. any torpedo will have done it. then why a nuke? to create the biggest Political backlash in America to Obama and to the Pentagon ,to really make it impossible for Obama and his General to continue in power after the a warship sink consequences of their own unlawful actions.

So it will have been Game over for Obama.. and a lot of people ,will have ended in jail.
if he lose a warship consequences of his idiocy and stupidity. He will have been made fully responsible for the death of any Americans ,if they ordered to attack Russia and later wiped. i dont see any scenario where US will directly start a war with Russia for nothing. It will be political suicide with a civil war in america too ,not only of Obama removed,but also US military generals too. This is the reason why US government hire terrorist to target Russia and not do it directly.Because Russia will have no conclusive evidence that Americans are behind terror groups. with all the fake shows they do in Syria of bombing ISIS.

The biggest threat United States face are not even Russian nuclear weapons. Because they know Russia do have a leadership with common sense that will not use nuclear weapons unless attacked first. Aside that a first nuclear attack of Russia will not divide the nation but Unite Americans behind Obama. Reason why a false flag incident with a nuclear attack and blamed on Russia could be possible. IF they feel the civil war is already on progress. they will try to provoke a major attack on America ,and blame it on a third party nation to get unity they dont have. For Washintong DC ,what will be scary and far more dangerous , Is society united against the government.,because major civil wars disband nations in many parts.. look at the ottoman empire ,how it disbanded for a civil war. This is the worse possible thing that could happen to United States, a full blow civil war to repeat again , like the American civil war , North Vs South.  that will disband totally United States and its empire and world status  in many countries. and it will be a Huge victory for Russia. what Putin is aiming with their delaying/freezing the conflict in Syria is to discredit Americans and really destroy Obama world image.and its support by American too , and Trump have taken advantage of this negative image of Obama and CLinton over Syria.. So the biggest concern for the Neocons elite  in America is a civil war that split the country in many parts. The American elite will not be able to control a civil war if its spread nation wide and with the american military support. neither NATO can help ,if such event happens. more likely Europe will help the American opposition too ,to finally get rid of their major ally that they have humiliated them so many times.

So people should pay attention to False Flag.. (ie.. like Malasyan plane shut down by ukraine to blame Russia). I will not be surprised of another WTC 9/11 being done and blamed on Syria
Government which Russia backup , for Obama to artificially create Unity of Americans behind their government. This could be done if they feel ,they completely losing their power and very high risk of losing the control of their nation.

kvs wrote:

zorobabel wrote:Inching closer to WW3. The US seems ready to make a big fuss over the bombing of the so-called 'aid' convoy in east Aleppo.

Russia should call another UN Security Council meeting to demand independent checking of any such convoys.   The
US and its UN stooges cannot impose any rules they want.

Fucking up the fuckers in Aleppo is no mistake.

Video: Turkish Army M60T Sabra, ACV-15, Otokar Cobra, Kirpi MRAP in Al Rai, Syria

The media outlet of the Revolutionary Forces of Syria has released footage showing Turkish Army M60T Sabra tanks, ACV-15 infantry fighting vehciles, Otokar Cobra light armored vehicles, and Kirpi MRAPs near Al Rai, Syria.

The footage is claimed to be taken as the Turkish Army and the forces fighting along its side are attempting to push south.

http://echelon-defense.com/2016/09/20/video-turkish-army-m60t-sabra-acv-15-otokar-cobra-kirpi-mrap-in-al-rai-syria/

airstrike wrote:Video: Turkish Army M60T Sabra, ACV-15, Otokar Cobra, Kirpi MRAP in Al Rai, Syria

The media outlet of the Revolutionary Forces of Syria has released footage showing Turkish Army M60T Sabra tanks, ACV-15 infantry fighting vehciles, Otokar Cobra light armored vehicles, and Kirpi MRAPs near Al Rai, Syria.

The footage is claimed to be taken as the Turkish Army and the forces fighting along its side are attempting to push south.

http://echelon-defense.com/2016/09/20/video-turkish-army-m60t-sabra-acv-15-otokar-cobra-kirpi-mrap-in-al-rai-syria/

Turkish Doğan News Agency has announced that two Turkish soldiers taking part in Turkey's Operation Euphrates Shield have been killed in northern Syria.

http://echelon-defense.com/2016/09/20/two-turkish-soldiers-killed-in-northern-syria/

IMO Russia should deploy ground forces like Turkey does. Bad people don't dare fight Russian ground forces and will run away. Aleppo could be taken with minimal casualties.

I agree. Syria is the testing ground for all the VKS toys, old and new, so might as well bring in some ground forces while they're at it. It would also be the first time that the so called 'New Look' brigades see action outside of exercises, so thats another plus. The entry of 4000+ fresh troops could be decisive at any battlefront in Syria. And if those 4000 troops happen to be trained, well-equipped and disciplined Russians with organic artillery and dedicated air support??

ali.a.r wrote:I agree. Syria is the testing ground for all the VKS toys, old and new, so might as well bring in some ground forces while they're at it. It would also be the first time that the so called 'New Look' brigades see action outside of exercises, so thats another plus. The entry of 4000+ fresh troops could be decisive at any battlefront in Syria. And if those 4000 troops happen to be trained, well-equipped and disciplined Russians with organic artillery and dedicated air support??

Please do not feed the troll.

ultimatewarrior wrote:Russia should not deploy ground forces to Syria until T-14 is ready.

ultimatewarrior wrote:IMO Russia should deploy ground forces like Turkey does.

How come such fundamental change of opinion occured to you in just 1 day?

Walther von Oldenburg wrote:

ultimatewarrior wrote:Russia should not deploy ground forces to Syria until T-14 is ready.

ultimatewarrior wrote:IMO Russia should deploy ground forces like Turkey does.

How come such fundamental change of opinion occured to you in just 1 day?

Because he does that. He is our most loathed troll that keeps appearing here like a bloody Hydra headed homing missile.

Please don't feed him. Many on here have already got him on ignore, as per the last time he/she/it was here.

DEIR EZZOR ATTACK ENABLES THE “SALAFIST PRINCIPALITY” AS FORESEEN IN THE 2012 DIA ANALYSIS


https://southfront.org/deir-ezzor-attack-enables-the-salafist-principality-as-foreseen-in-the-2012-dia-analysis/


Anyone have the latest details on Deir Ezzor?

kvs wrote:

Even if it was marked, so what? Russian aid convoys to the Donbass are checked by Kiev regime border guards at the border.
But somehow in the case of Syria this is not required. What independent guarantee is there that these are not fake and actually
supply aid instead of weapons and fuel? In the case of Ukraine there is such a guarantee.

It's big story, don't brush it off.

To me it looks like the convoy unloaded it's aid then caught fire. No sign of air strike or shelling twisted metal and craters. A lot of the burnt out trucks shown by AFP have tires let down, intact fuel tanks, and driver compartments.

So what exactly was burning if they had finished unloading?

My gut feeling is this is a false flag designed to distract media attention from the US bombing of the SAA the other day.

But lets wait and see what info comes out.

Erk wrote:

kvs wrote:

Even if it was marked, so what?  Russian aid convoys to the Donbass are checked by Kiev regime border guards at the border.
But somehow in the case of Syria this is not required.   What independent guarantee is there that these are not fake and actually
supply aid instead of weapons and fuel?   In the case of Ukraine there is such a guarantee.

It's big story, don't brush it off.

Oh please, put a sock in it.

To me it looks like the convoy unloaded it's aid then caught fire. No sign of air strike or shelling twisted metal and craters. A lot of the burnt out trucks shown by AFP have tires let down, intact fuel tanks, and driver compartments.

So what exactly was burning if they had finished unloading?

My gut feeling is this is a false flag designed to distract media attention from the US bombing of the SAA the other day.

But lets wait and see what info comes out.

This "aid" convoy is a legitimate target and you just expose your NATO-trained "values". The UN cannot guarantee the contents and
the distribution of this "aid". Even if it is actually civilian there is no assurance it is going to civilians and not to jihadis. You are the
one brushing off this critical aspect. It is a war zone and some schmaltzy Hollywood BS about "humanitarian aid" does not cut it. The
ceasefires are designed to allow civilians to get aid but the ceasefires are ignored by the jihadis who control this pocket of Aleppo and
elsewhere in Syria. So the the SAA is supposed to:

1) Pretend that these convoys are not military aid to jihadis.

2) Stop any military action to make sure that they reach their destination even though there is no ceasefire. In other
words, these convoys force one-sided ceasefires on the SSA.

Washington, NATO and their MSM mouthpieces can go and f*ck themselves.

About that convoy:

No craters = no HE bombs

No shrapnel damage = no cluster bombs

Little fire damage and no deformed metal = no incendiary bombs

This kids is what we around here call ''Markale routine''. Basically, you simply kill plenty of your own cockroaches and make sure you have CNN on speed dial to tell sheep what to think. It was used plenty of times here to great effect but the problem with that approach is that it only works on countries below certain size.

Clowns who did this are probably same ones or who worked the Balkans or are in contact with them and they stick with what they think will work.

Russia should have expected this the moment USAF screwed the pooch at Dier ez Zorr but they seem to be surprised with this turn of events. I guess there is no substitute for experience.

But fortunately for them they are not some micro nation so what they need to do now is just ignore the noise and keep frying the vermin.

KiloGolf wrote:

OminousSpudd wrote:
I don't know what missiles the TELs are loaded with, but halving to 40-50km? So you're implying S-400 only has an effective range of 80-100km? Am I missing something?

Pretty much.
Also maximum =/= effective and usually these quoted numbers represent more of promotional interests rather than true performance.

magnumcromagnon wrote:Again more arse pull conjecture

Atmospheric conditions are there, always. No point in debating this further, especially at your quoted level.

You said that Murmansk-BN couldn't handle atmospheric condition fluctuation at long range (without any evidence), while it was proven the contrary (with evidence), but your right...there's not point debating a brick wall on this topic, but the debate is just like the last one we had with strategic SAMS...you weren't able to prove the contrary with empirical evidence, you weren't able to rebuke the empirical evidence presented against you, and you resorted to grasping straws. Some things never change.

MoD releases video showing technical towing mortar using aid convoy as cover. Insane.


This is where your blown up aid convoy came from. These jihadis can drive straight up to these things unchallenged, throw an IED, and voila there's your "Russian Airstrike".

GarryB wrote:

Also maximum =/= effective and usually these quoted numbers represent more of promotional interests rather than true performance.

SAMs are not AAMs... you can't boost performance by giving figures for high speed high altitude launch at a closing target.

Soviet and Russian SAMs have been shown at various defence shows shooting down all sorts of targets at extended ranges...

If anything it is a serious area of weakness in comparison with western marketing where max figures are given even though they are contradictory.

An F-16 can carry 7 tons of weapons at mach 2 for thousands of kms only in western land...

S-400 was designed to engage targets at 400km range... that was its purpose.

Marketing goes both ways, always. Brochure SAM figures cannot be taken at face value, especially by those drawings with fancy red circles on a map. The few deployed S-400s are not by any stretch of imagination a flight denial weapon for Russia. 400 km goes well with that -400 and that's where it ends.

magnumcromagnon wrote:You said that Murmansk-BN couldn't handle atmospheric condition fluctuation at long range (without any evidence), while it was proven the contrary (with evidence), but your right...there's not point debating a brick wall on this topic, but the debate is just like the last one we had with strategic SAMS...you weren't able to prove the contrary with empirical evidence, you weren't able to rebuke the empirical evidence presented against you, and you resorted to grasping straws. Some things never change.

They do affect any such system, there was no proof presented on the contrary. Allegations, sure. But I go beyond that. Empirical evidence etc, well none of that was shown.

PS. "strategic SAMS"

Looks like Russia got tricked by Turkey and the US again. Putin thought he saved Erdogan's life. Putin let Erdogan get into Syria near Aleppo city. Expect huge battle coming up between Turkey and Russia. Russia should trust Greece, not Turkey. Greece is Christian Orthodox. Turkey is radical Islam.

https://twitter.com/RT_Erdogan/status/778310868949958658

KiloGolf wrote:

They do affect any such system, there was no proof presented on the contrary. Allegations, sure. But I go beyond that. Empirical evidence etc, well none of that was shown.

PS. "strategic SAMS"

Good lord man your argument has stooped to this level? Your argument is devolving to nothing short of a laughing stock....  I already provided that the Zapad-2013 exercise demonstrated that Murmansk-BN could nullify OTH radars at long range (2,500 km) in the severe atmospheric conditions of the Kola peninsula, but of course your attention span and reading comprehension of a 3 year old prevents you from allowing those facts to sink in. Go ahead, provide the evidence that Murmansk-BN couldn't be effective at long range in severe atmospheric conditions like you falsely claimed...I'm still waiting for you to provide a shred of evidence to the contrary.

magnumcromagnon wrote:

KiloGolf wrote:

They do affect any such system, there was no proof presented on the contrary. Allegations, sure. But I go beyond that. Empirical evidence etc, well none of that was shown.

PS. "strategic SAMS"

Good lord man your argument has stooped to this level? Your argument is devolving to nothing short of a laughing stock....  I already provided that the Zapad-2013 exercise demonstrated that Murmansk-BN could nullify OTH radars at long range (2,500 km) in the severe atmospheric conditions of the Kola peninsula, but of course your attention span and reading comprehension of a 3 year old prevents you from allowing those facts to sink in. Go ahead, provide the evidence that Murmansk-BN couldn't be effective at long range in severe atmospheric conditions like you falsely claimed...I'm still waiting for you to provide a shred of evidence to the contrary.

It's not about atmospheric conditions being severe or not.
They vary randomly over time and over such great distance (i.e. over x500 times the horizon). Any such system is affected and thus hampered.

KiloGolf wrote:
Marketing goes both ways, always. Brochure SAM figures cannot be taken at face value, especially by those drawings with fancy red circles on a map. The few deployed S-400s are not by any stretch of imagination a flight denial weapon for Russia. 400 km goes well with that -400 and that's where it ends.

To quote Mr. Asshole Hitchens, "What can be assumed without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence." So far you have stated that the S-400's effective range is well below that stated for the advertised 400km+ 40Н6Е with zero evidence provided, except for uncompelling strawmen.

Now say we were to talk about PAC-3 Patriots, there would be a viable argument given its service record. If we are to speculate and detract without evidence from official specifications every time a new system is unveiled then you might as well jump down the rabbit hole with Alice.

KiloGolf wrote:
It's not about atmospheric conditions being severe or not.

What...

Atmospheric conditions don't effect OTH radar... the longer waves used are less effected by weather.

[quote="OminousSpudd"]

KiloGolf wrote:To quote Mr. Asshole Hitchens, "What can be assumed without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence." So far you have stated that the S-400's effective range is well below that stated for the advertised 400km+ 40Н6Е with zero evidence provided, except for uncompelling strawmen.

Now say we were to talk about PAC-3 Patriots, there would be a viable argument given its service record. If we are to speculate and detract without evidence from official specifications every time a new system is unveiled then you might as well jump down the rabbit hole with Alice.

There are different ways in appreciating the effectiveness of a system than the marketing brochure and indicated missile range. I tend to go beyond that. The viability of instituting of an NFZ covering more than half of the country, by a dozen or so of those SAMs (the issue at hand) was/is a very unrealistic scenario.

GarryB wrote:Atmospheric conditions don't effect OTH radar... the longer waves used are less effected by weather.

They are to a degree. And the longer the distance the more such effects are maximised.