Syrian Civil War: News #9

This Plan B is described in point form below based on excerpts from the article:

1. Turkey is in a military and political position to intervene in Aleppo due to it being affected by refugees. This takes into consideration a veto at the Security Council by Russia.
2. A support role played by NATO particularly UK and US, who both have SF on the ground, while the main manpower comes from the Turks.
3. A no fly zone to protect land corridors for humanitarian aid for the flow of people into and out of Aleppo
4. Withdrawal of Assad forces to a line between Hama and Aleppo.
5. Its politically covered as a "Humanitarian Operation"
6. Russian agreement with Nato on a military to military basis.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/sep/30/peace-syria-possible-turkish-forces-nato-russia

storm333 wrote:This Plan B is described in point form below based on excerpts from the article:

1. Turkey is in a military and political position to intervene in Aleppo due to it being affected by refugees. This takes into consideration a veto at the Security Council by Russia.
2. A support role played by NATO particularly UK and US, who both have SF on the ground, while the main manpower comes from the Turks.
3. A no fly zone to protect land corridors for humanitarian aid for the flow of people into and out of Aleppo
4. Withdrawal of Assad forces to a line between Hama and Aleppo.
5. Its politically covered as a "Humanitarian Operation"
6. Russian agreement with Nato on a military to military basis.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/sep/30/peace-syria-possible-turkish-forces-nato-russia

Somebody at guardian/nato is living in a different solar system for sure.

storm333 wrote:This Plan B is described in point form below based on excerpts from the article:

1. Turkey is in a military and political position to intervene in Aleppo due to it being affected by refugees. This takes into consideration a veto at the Security Council by Russia.
2. A support role played by NATO particularly UK and US, who both have SF on the ground, while the main manpower comes from the Turks.
3. A no fly zone to protect land corridors for humanitarian aid for the flow of people into and out of Aleppo
4. Withdrawal of Assad forces to a line between Hama and Aleppo.
5. Its politically covered as a "Humanitarian Operation"
6. Russian agreement with Nato on a military to military basis.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/sep/30/peace-syria-possible-turkish-forces-nato-russia

Russia is sending more SU 24, SU 25 and SU 34, so I don't think we will see that happening.

A short video explains what's happening in Syria.

https://southfront.org/comparing-actions-of-russian-and-us-air-forces-in-syria-video/

Just watched a bit of the news on TV for the first time in ages.

The hysterical shrieking and bleating here in the west must mean that the moderate head-chopping throat-slitting terrorists funded by the politicians here are losing.
I've rarely seen such obvious and crude/simplistic propaganda in my life.

The shrieks from West Media have been an every increasing crescendo since last fall. With SAA and RuAF working hard on taking back Aleppo Da West is so apoplectic they are in extreme danger of causing seepage in one of their multitudinous hemorrhoids. I only read west news when I want some comic relief but never on a full stomach. I've never seen the like of what is going on now.

You think it's bad now, wait until Aleppo is fully liberated.

auslander wrote:

storm333 wrote:This Plan B is described in point form below based on excerpts from the article:

1. Turkey is in a military and political position to intervene in Aleppo due to it being affected by refugees. This takes into consideration a veto at the Security Council by Russia.
2. A support role played by NATO particularly UK and US, who both have SF on the ground, while the main manpower comes from the Turks.
3. A no fly zone to protect land corridors for humanitarian aid for the flow of people into and out of Aleppo
4. Withdrawal of Assad forces to a line between Hama and Aleppo.
5. Its politically covered as a "Humanitarian Operation"
6. Russian agreement with Nato on a military to military basis.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/sep/30/peace-syria-possible-turkish-forces-nato-russia

Somebody at guardian/nato is living in a different solar system for sure.

The writer is an ex-politician, in fact the Foreign Secretary or Minister.

Reports from the Syrian Arab Army's High Command indicate that the jihadist rebels of Jaysh Al-Fateh (Army of Conquest) have amassed thousands of militants in preparation for their large-scale counter-offensive against the government forces and their allies in southern and western Aleppo.

Lifting the siege on the east Aleppo neighborhoods is one of Jaysh Al-Fateh's main objectives during this upcoming offensive; it will also require a large number of military personnel to break-through the Syrian Arab Army's defenses again.

According to local reports from the Aleppo Governorate, Jaysh Al-Fateh, specifically Jabhat Fateh Al-Sham (formerly Al-Nusra Front), has prepared at least 20 VBIEDs (vehicle borne improvised explosive device) for this upcoming offensive, along with amassing thousands of fighters.

Not to be outdone, the Syrian Armed Forces have sent a large number of reinforcements from the Tartous Governorate to Aleppo City in order to combat the upcoming jihadist offensive.

This might be the last chance for the jihadist rebels reestablish themselves in the Aleppo Governorate because they have lost a considerable amount of territory over the course of three years.
https://www.almasdarnews.com/article/mother-battles-approaches-aleppo-jihadist-rebels-amass-thousands-militants/

There's a huge propaganda push happening right now in the Western media regarding Russia's role in Syria. Continuous reports of Russia's 'brutal' bombing (despite the fact more civilians were killed by the US in the first 3 weeks of the war in Iraq than have been killed by Russia over the past year in Syria). Usually that means the US is laying the groundwork for some kind of escalation.

zorobabel wrote:There's a huge propaganda push happening right now in the Western media regarding Russia's role in Syria. Continuous reports of Russia's 'brutal' bombing (despite the fact more civilians were killed by the US in the first 3 weeks of the war in Iraq than have been killed by Russia over the past year in Syria). Usually that means the US is laying the groundwork for some kind of escalation.

Could this be an October surprise in the making...Like non-stop coverage of alleged humanitarian violations, to aid a certain candidates presidential chances?

zorobabel wrote:There's a huge propaganda push happening right now in the Western media regarding Russia's role in Syria. Continuous reports of Russia's 'brutal' bombing (despite the fact more civilians were killed by the US in the first 3 weeks of the war in Iraq than have been killed by Russia over the past year in Syria). Usually that means the US is laying the groundwork for some kind of escalation.

Yeah, it's kind of every news break on the radio.

magnumcromagnon wrote:

zorobabel wrote:There's a huge propaganda push happening right now in the Western media regarding Russia's role in Syria. Continuous reports of Russia's 'brutal' bombing (despite the fact more civilians were killed by the US in the first 3 weeks of the war in Iraq than have been killed by Russia over the past year in Syria). Usually that means the US is laying the groundwork for some kind of escalation.

Could this be an October surprise in the making...Like non-stop coverage of alleged humanitarian violations, to aid a certain candidates presidential chances?

From a political standpoint, Hillary is a much better choice as president than Trump. Hillary is basically Obama 2. Hillary cares about public opinion in the US and that is very anti war. Trump is a thuggish and arrogant. Trump is basically Reagan 2. Trump is Putin's worst possible nightmare. If you think about what Reagan did to the USSR, what Trump can do to Russia is out of this world.

I do expect Western Nations or a "coalition " of countries to intervene by striking Syrian Government troops. This is the only way they can bring Syria and its allies to negotiate a ceasefire. There is the trade off between deep strikes and tactical strikes and the various degrees of escalation associated with each. So far, we have witnessed tactical strikes by both sides in tit for tat face off, latest example being the coalition strikes on Syrian troops in Deir Ezzor.

What would the repercussions of a deep strike be? If I were to plan such a mission it would involve the employment of standoff weapons and remote systems such cruise missiles and drones rather than using piloted aircraft. Airplanes can be interdicted by Russian and Syrian Air force without being shot down or even worse direct conflict with Russian Forces but cruise missiles will have to be shot down.

The target list will be dependent on the mission objectives, whether would be limited to bring Syria to the table or to destroy the Syrian Army. In the case of bringing Syria to the table, limited HPTs targets in Damascus and Southern Syria, and eastern Aleppo will be struck avoiding Latakia and other areas where Russian Forces are located.

The Syrian response to a limited operation such as this will be limited to enforcing its air space and EEZ or can escalate it at the UN.

However deep strikes with the intent of destroying the SAA and the Government will have a severe response regionally as the Russian Foreign Ministry stated, due to Iranian-Shia reactions.

I don't see Russian Forces directly retaliating on remote assets such as subs, surface vessels and bases. However the Syrians would have reasons to retaliate on coalition Assets using their Air force and rocket forces

Military intelligence would need to look for indications and warnings. We are beginning to see non violent indicators such as increase in the veracity of propaganda , and the testing of the Syrian response in the mentioned strike. Turkey just recently sent and additional 1000 SF to "secure the 900km buffer".

Syrian and Russian forces should now consider disrupting reconnaissance efforts by drones and aircraft in government controlled areas.

From Peto. Looking good. Like they say in Harper's Island: ''one by one''

SOHR interview today...

Following my comments at the end of last week, it is really starting to look like there is some kind of plan to physically divide Syria underway. The Coalition has now brought four bridges down in Deir Ezzur. It is hard to see any immediate military reason for doing so.

There are reports that al-Shihan Bridge near al-Salhin neighborhood in al-Bokamal countryside and Tarif Bridge were bombed on Friday. This follows the bombing of al-Asharah Bridge and al-Mayadin Bridge on Wednesday.

http://www.fort-russ.com/2016/10/syr...sis-again.html

Syrian army captures Kindi hospital in north Aleppo countryside
Published on Oct 2, 2016

Al Kindi hospital.


before

JohninMK wrote:Following my comments at the end of last week, it is really starting to look like there is some kind of plan to physically divide Syria underway. The Coalition has now brought four bridges down in Deir Ezzur. It is hard to see any immediate military reason for doing so.

There are reports that al-Shihan Bridge near al-Salhin neighborhood in al-Bokamal countryside and Tarif Bridge were bombed on Friday. This follows the bombing of al-Asharah Bridge and al-Mayadin Bridge on Wednesday.

http://www.fort-russ.com/2016/10/syr...sis-again.html

well, yeah. There'll be no real compromise on this, because the goals of Russia/Syria and US/"Coalition" are fundamentally, diametrically opposed. For Russia, entertaining negotiations and ceasefires are just a hopeful way to offer (yet again) a semi face-saving way for the US and its vassals to abandon this regime change attempt. In bad faith, the US demands the same in order to buy some time in which to reconstitute its terrorist proxies after each particularly severe battering. And although regime change really looks like a failure now, the massive ego of the sore loser is too heavily invested, and it will never take the offer.

So, a cutting up/balkinization attempt is inevitable. Or, they will simply seek to turn all of Syria into an irretrievable basket case, to stand as an glaring example to everyone elsewhere who might contemplate defying the exceptionals. It's just a question of how far they'll be willing to go in attempting to achieve plan B in the face of Russian opposition. It's also still an open question as to how far Russia will go in their opposition. Tense times.

JohninMK wrote:Following my comments at the end of last week, it is really starting to look like there is some kind of plan to physically divide Syria underway. The Coalition has now brought four bridges down in Deir Ezzur. It is hard to see any immediate military reason for doing so.

There are reports that al-Shihan Bridge near al-Salhin neighborhood in al-Bokamal countryside and Tarif Bridge were bombed on Friday. This follows the bombing of al-Asharah Bridge and al-Mayadin Bridge on Wednesday.

http://www.fort-russ.com/2016/10/syr...sis-again.html

The US and allies still could build that pipeline if successful in dividing Syria at the Euphrates. Obviously Plan B.

SAA and allies are making quick advances in Aleppo, looks like these guys are improving overall in Urban warfare. Aleppo OP is looking good and clean let's pray to God a magical counter-offensive doesn't roll back these gains.

franco wrote:

JohninMK wrote:Following my comments at the end of last week, it is really starting to look like there is some kind of plan to physically divide Syria underway. The Coalition has now brought four bridges down in Deir Ezzur. It is hard to see any immediate military reason for doing so.

There are reports that al-Shihan Bridge near al-Salhin neighborhood in al-Bokamal countryside and Tarif Bridge were bombed on Friday. This follows the bombing of al-Asharah Bridge and al-Mayadin Bridge on Wednesday.

http://www.fort-russ.com/2016/10/syr...sis-again.html

The US and allies still could build that pipeline if successful in dividing Syria at the Euphrates. Obviously Plan B.

What are they going to do, line the thing with Patriot missile batteries?
Syria will just attack it.

A look at the white helmets and the Aleppo situation from an investigative journalist.

Syrian "women" aganst Russia