Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #9

Project Canada wrote:

Wtf is this?? Is Russia saying okay we will stop bombing Terrorists and let them take over SAA controlled areas in Aleppo to please America?

Relax man you are panicking for no reason. This is foreign ministry, their job is to sound relaxing.

JohninMK wrote:
The longer it goes on the more terrorists will die trying to save their buddies inside as desperate messages come over the airways. Good time of year for a seige, lots of water needed!

Good plan.

This...

Russia is playing an attrition war on NATO in syria. The more the war last , the worse for
their image. Russia understand that the war will not end even if Syria takes 100% of its
territory back , because NATO can continue sending more fresh waves of dozens of thousands jihadist for a whole decade. and when no more terrorist left , SYria will still need to deal with
Turkey army , Jornanian Army and Israel Army and many NATO private mercenaries and with a very weakened and reduced force.


I think Russia is counting on time to work in their favor , and until now it have been more or less true but not at the expense on civilian casualties. which will happen any way if NATO invades. By having aleppo under siege and doing humanitarian corridors , they can still fight
in self defense of civilians trying to flee and slowly bleed the terrorist and slowly force them to surrender with full amnesty. Until in the end there is no more civilians left.

What is also very clear is that Russia will make sure ,that none of the zones Terrorist control
can be prosperous or have a normal life .Civilians will need electricity ,water and food and something to do.. and this will be a major pressure to the terrorist , living in a city doomed
to fail. This also will encourage other terrorist worldwide to not go there ,and experience
and very long war , with them starving. at the same time NATO and their middle east coalition will go broke , with the war ,by their training of jihadist ,supplying them with food and weapons and munitions.  Here the major question in Syria is Turkey.. this is the nation that is more dangerous for Syria and the one Russia needs to keep as much distanced from Syria as possible
So that if even Turkey continues to fight Syria , that it will be not directly but by proxy.

BEcause in a direct war of Turkey with Syria , will force Russia to fight Turkey back ,and this will
drag things to another level that Russia will like to prefer to avoid for economic and political reasons , if Russia will go to war , it cannot be with Turkey or Poland or baltics or any nation in Europe. If RUssia have to go to a limited war , im sure they will prefer it to be United States.
Because that way , that is to take the fight to the source . and provoke a major civil war in America after the a few US planes shut down by Russia or a warship sink in self defense.

If Russia ends winning in Syria , with this slow war , it will teach NATO a lesson ,that it cannot
win a proxy war with Russia ,because Russia will freeze the conflict and will stay firm in their defense of their interest. Russia is playing a defensive war. that can allow Russia to have the
moral high ground and political too.  In the Korean War for example , it took Americans 2 years
of more fighting ,to give a last try. This is because Americans also have an internal dateline of until when they can continue fighting.So the Russia-US cease of fire began in 2016 , so around 2018 if the conflict if freeze and Russia handles well the defense without too much economic burden.. then they will give up.  

people need to remember ,that the ultimate goal of the neocons with Syrian war ,is Russia itself and not Syria. Is Economic warfare on Russia to collapse Russia economy ,to destroy Russia army and airforce image and break the unity of Russian citizens with Russian government and provoke civil unrest. and after Russia economy crash ,more easier provoke
a soviet union style collapse again in Russia.   IRAN in the other hand , conflict with Russia is that they want to create a corridor to Israel to more easily fight them. and Russia will do everything possible to not allow IRAN to use Syria ,for its personal war with Israel. To not drag
Russia into a fight with them either.

So RUssia and even more importantly Syria , needs to fight a mostly defensive long war
and avoid as much as possible casualties. The real winning of the Syrian war ,is not about capturing territory in general terms speaking , but more about to exhaust economically ,physically and morally the enemy in a long attrition war. So that if NATO or terrorist occupy any territory in Syria ,to make sure it will be useless for them ,by encircling it and blocking . The vietnam war is a perfect example of an atrition war.. that in the worse case ,
vietcong lost most of the battles but in the end won the war ,because Americans could not
continue funding the war.
any supplies vital for they to continue fighting.

Project Canada wrote:

Russian Foreign Ministry Rules Out Offensive on Syria's Aleppo

Russia's deputy foreign minister ruled out any plans Moscow's offensive on the Syrian city of Aleppo and underscored that Russia's goal in the region was confined to conducting a humanitarian operation only.

MOSCOW (Sputnik) — Russia has no intentions of launching an offensive on Syria's Aleppo and is carrying out a purely humanitarian operation, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov said Wednesday.

"There are no plans of an offensive in Aleppo neither by Syrian forces, nor through airstrikes by the Russian Aerospace Forces," Ryabkov told reporters. "Absolutely false and harmful interpretations of our actions are voiced by certain circles in Washington."

Wtf is this?? Is Russia saying okay we will stop bombing Terrorists and let them take over SAA controlled areas in Aleppo to please America?

Apparently so. 18 tons of humanitarian aid sent to Aleppo in the middle of the biggest battle on the planet. Russia is risking the lives of its service members like they are worth nothing.

https://www.rt.com/in-motion/354379-russian-humanitarian-convoy-syria/

Since February 27 with the fake ceasefire deal, the Russian base in Latakia is nothing but a reconciliation center, publishing daily fake report of hundreds of settlements reconciled.

https://twitter.com/mod_russia

A few months from now, a huge tunnel bomb will explode under the Russian base in Latakia killing hundreds of Russian service members.

Like I said. Putin is too soft and he needs to be voted out in 2018 to save the lives of Russian service members.

Werewolf wrote:Retard the only definition of mercanary is they work for money that does not make them impartial to politics or ideologies. They are paid huge amount of money, that is the definition of mercanairy. They constantly switch the terrorist groups from Al-CIAda, FSA, ISIS and all the other founded, paid and organized terror groups who belong to Israel, USA, Turkey, Qatar and Saudis. They are the financers.

I have to side with Walther this time. The jihadi's warlords are White House's c**ksuckers, but their soldiers may be pure fanatics who are brainwashed by these warlords.

A few months from now, a huge tunnel bomb will explode under the Russian base / reconciliation center. They are digging. Don't think they won't do it. It will be a tragedy, costing the lives of hundreds of Russian servicemen.

I'm telling you now, and you will say I am a hater of Putin blah blah blah. You will see when the time comes, I am right, you are wrong, Putin is too soft.

higurashihougi wrote:

Werewolf wrote:Retard the only definition of mercanary is they work for money that does not make them impartial to politics or ideologies. They are paid huge amount of money, that is the definition of mercanairy. They constantly switch the terrorist groups from Al-CIAda, FSA, ISIS and all the other founded, paid and organized terror groups who belong to Israel, USA, Turkey, Qatar and Saudis. They are the financers.

I have to side with Walther this time. The jihadi's warlords are White House's c**ksuckers, but their soldiers may be pure fanatics who are brainwashed by these warlords.

Then you both are not the brightest. It does not matter what ideology someone has if he is paid for mercenary work it is a mercenary. As soon as the money stops flowing people will stop fighting, because there is nothing for them to gain fighting a freaking army. That is the only definition of mercenary.

It seems odd Russia MOD does not report any of its military actions in Syria like it used to before February 27. Every day there's a stupid fake reconciliation report.

KoTeMoRe wrote:

eehnie wrote:

sepheronx wrote:The Russians knew the risks. They are fighting a conflict that is difficult all around, with very incompetent ally and enemies with lots of weapons.  Yet, in the entirety of this conflict, they lost few (21 now?) and as much as it is sad, they knew that casualties will happen and always do. Happened for US, France, Canada, etc everywhere.  Sad but realities of a war.  If it was just planes, doubt any would face issue besides the Su-24 incident.  But when helicopters and guys on the ground appear, then it is bound to happen.

Yes, unfortunately, you are right. Most of the human loses are from helicopters in military campaigns like this.

And this is still a war, where the islamic side has very low level of antiaircraft weapons (because their allies fear to give them the guns to avoid loses in their own aircrafts).

But still helicopters are fragile. This is why I talk about a review of the entire concept of helicopter.

There is a way to avoid these casualties in helicopters in the future, and it is to make the helicopters unmanned, avoiding also, of course, the transport of people in contested areas, except maybe for wounded soldiers. Russia (and surely the rest of the countries) will go for it, for their next generation of helicopters. Today makes not sense to begin a new project of helicopter that tries not to be unmanned. The first unmanned helicopters should come around 2030.

Out of this, Russia has been following a very good strategy with the use of aircrafts. They are using the right tactics and the best type of aircrafts to avoid casualties today in these circumstances.

Overexposure in such a campaign is alas unavoidable. They just can't get the right manpower.

I tend to think that Russia is working in Syria like they want. I do not think they want big manpower on the ground. They are going to a minimum risk but effective aid to the Syrian government.

But still the helicopters are emerging (and it also happened to other countries) as a type of warfare where it is more difficult to keep the risks under control all the time. It makes as example the transition to unmanned technologies more urgent on helicopters than for other manned aircrafts.

eehnie wrote:

KoTeMoRe wrote:

eehnie wrote:

sepheronx wrote:The Russians knew the risks. They are fighting a conflict that is difficult all around, with very incompetent ally and enemies with lots of weapons.  Yet, in the entirety of this conflict, they lost few (21 now?) and as much as it is sad, they knew that casualties will happen and always do. Happened for US, France, Canada, etc everywhere.  Sad but realities of a war.  If it was just planes, doubt any would face issue besides the Su-24 incident.  But when helicopters and guys on the ground appear, then it is bound to happen.

Yes, unfortunately, you are right. Most of the human loses are from helicopters in military campaigns like this.

And this is still a war, where the islamic side has very low level of antiaircraft weapons (because their allies fear to give them the guns to avoid loses in their own aircrafts).

But still helicopters are fragile. This is why I talk about a review of the entire concept of helicopter.

There is a way to avoid these casualties in helicopters in the future, and it is to make the helicopters unmanned, avoiding also, of course, the transport of people in contested areas, except maybe for wounded soldiers. Russia (and surely the rest of the countries) will go for it, for their next generation of helicopters. Today makes not sense to begin a new project of helicopter that tries not to be unmanned. The first unmanned helicopters should come around 2030.

Out of this, Russia has been following a very good strategy with the use of aircrafts. They are using the right tactics and the best type of aircrafts to avoid casualties today in these circumstances.

Overexposure in such a campaign is alas unavoidable. They just can't get the right manpower.

I tend to think that Russia is working in Syria like they want. I do not think they want big manpower on the ground. They are going to a minimum risk but effective aid to the Syrian government.

But still the helicopters are emerging (and it also happened to other countries) as a type of warfare where it is more difficult to keep the risks under control all the time. It makes as example the transition to unmanned technologies more urgent on helicopters than for other manned aircrafts.

By manpower I was aiming at Syrian troops. They aren't ready to be a supporting force for many reasons. Risk adverse militaries I know, but the Russian one isn't. The problem is that Russia is trying to overcome the manpower issue with a combination on fast CAS and helicopters. This tragedy here isn't due to CAS, but to something else. So let the inquiry find out why this CSAR Mil found its way on Idlib airspace and how it was shot.

KoTeMoRe wrote:

eehnie wrote:

KoTeMoRe wrote:

eehnie wrote:

sepheronx wrote:The Russians knew the risks. They are fighting a conflict that is difficult all around, with very incompetent ally and enemies with lots of weapons.  Yet, in the entirety of this conflict, they lost few (21 now?) and as much as it is sad, they knew that casualties will happen and always do. Happened for US, France, Canada, etc everywhere.  Sad but realities of a war.  If it was just planes, doubt any would face issue besides the Su-24 incident.  But when helicopters and guys on the ground appear, then it is bound to happen.

Yes, unfortunately, you are right. Most of the human loses are from helicopters in military campaigns like this.

And this is still a war, where the islamic side has very low level of antiaircraft weapons (because their allies fear to give them the guns to avoid loses in their own aircrafts).

But still helicopters are fragile. This is why I talk about a review of the entire concept of helicopter.

There is a way to avoid these casualties in helicopters in the future, and it is to make the helicopters unmanned, avoiding also, of course, the transport of people in contested areas, except maybe for wounded soldiers. Russia (and surely the rest of the countries) will go for it, for their next generation of helicopters. Today makes not sense to begin a new project of helicopter that tries not to be unmanned. The first unmanned helicopters should come around 2030.

Out of this, Russia has been following a very good strategy with the use of aircrafts. They are using the right tactics and the best type of aircrafts to avoid casualties today in these circumstances.

Overexposure in such a campaign is alas unavoidable. They just can't get the right manpower.

I tend to think that Russia is working in Syria like they want. I do not think they want big manpower on the ground. They are going to a minimum risk but effective aid to the Syrian government.

But still the helicopters are emerging (and it also happened to other countries) as a type of warfare where it is more difficult to keep the risks under control all the time. It makes as example the transition to unmanned technologies more urgent on helicopters than for other manned aircrafts.

By manpower I was aiming at Syrian troops. They aren't ready to be a supporting force for many reasons. Risk adverse militaries I know, but the Russian one isn't. The problem is that Russia is trying to overcome the manpower issue with a combination on fast CAS and helicopters. This tragedy here isn't due to CAS, but to something else. So let the inquiry find out why this CSAR Mil found its way on Idlib airspace and how it was shot.

I see. Yes, maybe right. In some way it is understandable if the Syrian soldiers are risk averse. There is not other way to survive to a 5 years war of this intensity, only being very risk averse and being lucky enough. Surely only risk averse soldiers survived until now.

Russia is not serious about defeating terrorists in Syria. Russian air strikes in the Aleppo city area are sporadic at best, less than 10% the intensity prior to the February 27 peace deal. All Russia cares about is sending humanitarian aid to Aleppo city according to the February 27 peace deal, with no regards to the safety of Russian service members. Thousands of jihadists are grouping in plain sight without being attacked by planes. Russia let Syrian people down man, BIG time. Go big, or go home.

If Russians don't want to fight, fine, go back to Russia and give the MiG-29M2 and Yak-130 planes Syria bought before 2011 and let Syrians fight.

The Syrian military leadership must know something I don't. They have militias fighting to take parts of Handarat Camp in north Aleppo and others trying to retake Kinsabba in Latakia, meanwhile their supply lines in south Aleppo are a few hundred meters from being severed, which would besiege a million residents in West Aleppo.

zorobabel wrote:The Syrian military leadership must know something I don't. They have militias fighting to take parts of Handarat Camp in north Aleppo and others trying to retake Kinsabba in Latakia, meanwhile their supply lines in south Aleppo are a few hundred meters from being severed, which would besiege a million residents in West Aleppo.

Both Syrians and Russians are incompetent. Russia lost Ukraine from under its grasp all because of Olympics in 2014. Intervened too late and snatched Crimea. Had Russians intervened in Syria in 2012, none of this has to happen today. Also, Russians are wasting their men away in Syria doing humanitarian aid instead of hitting jihadists.

This thread needs moderation. There's a cancer in here.

WHERE ARE THE RUSSIAN HELICOPTERS ???
WHERE ARE THE RUSSIAN JET-FIGHTERS ???

WHERE ARE THE RUSSIAN AIR FORCES ???

KoTeMoRe wrote:This thread needs moderation. There's a cancer in here.

Lost cause, my friend!

Solncepek wrote:

WHERE ARE THE RUSSIAN HELICOPTERS ???
WHERE ARE THE RUSSIAN JET-FIGHTERS ???

WHERE ARE THE RUSSIAN AIR FORCES ???

Russia airforce is seriously limited by the small force deployed in Latakkia .
My Bet is NATO RADARs in Turkey and in Cyprus with their satellite observation, warns
before hand ,the terrorist ,any time the Russian airforce is moving in their direction
so they seek cover or camouflage their trucks whenever Russia airforce close. Aside the Syrian
Army is not properly armed to deal with very fast moving targets , in kamikazi suicide attacks full of explosives.

Российский Ми-8 в Сирии сбили из новейшего «Стингера»: будем ждать «обратку»

4.08.2016 · В мире
Ми-8

Сбитый 1 августа около посёлка Телль-Тукан у границы сирийских провинций Идлиб и Алеппо Ми-8АМТШ (бортовой номер RF-95585) выполнял спецзадание в интересах военной разведки. Навести на него могли только американские спецслужбы.

Сама машина была приписана к 562-й авиационной базе армейской авиации (г. Новосибирск, аэродром Толмачёво), а погибшие российские лётчики служили на военном аэродроме «Клин-5» в 92-й инструкторско-исследовательской вертолётной эскадрилье (ИИВЭ). Структурно она входит в состав 344-го Центра боевой подготовки и переучивания лётного состава армейской авиации.

В Минобороны назвали имена погибших лётчиков. Командиром экипажа был 33-летний капитан Роман Павлов, лётчиком-штурманом – 29-летний Олег Шеламов, 41-летний капитан Алексей Шорохов – бортовым техником. Вместе с экипажем погибли и два офицера, как говорится в официальных сообщениях, из «центра примирения сторон». Также, по официальной версии, борт RF-95585 возвращался на авиабазу Хмеймим после доставки гуманитарного груза в Алеппо.

Эксперты сразу обратили внимание, что «восьмёрка» шла по достаточно безопасному воздушному коридору на высоте 3500 метров, но без сопровождения боевыми вертолетами Ми-24 или Ми-28. Как пояснил военный источник, «ребята из «Клина» часто выполняют вылеты в интересах Главного управления Генштаба (так теперь называется ГРУ ГШ). И в целях недопущения утечки информации такие вылеты, особенно по заброске или эвакуации разведчиков «из поля», проводятся без привлечения боевого охранения».

Зато за этими машинами внимательно следят «большие космические уши» из Агентства национальной безопасности (АНБ). Ответственность за гибель российских военных взяли на себя террористы из проамериканского «Фронта Фатх аш-Шам». Сбить вертолёт на такой высоте могут только новейшие модели FIM-92 «Стингер». В результате складывается трагический пазл – России передали кровавый привет из Вашингтона.

Будем ждать «обратку». В афганском небе с безопасной высоты вполне может рухнуть подбитый Boeing CH-47 Chinook с подразделением морской пехоты на борту.

http://k-politika.ru/rossijskij-mi-8-v-sirii-sbili-iz-novejshego-stingera-budem-zhdat-obratku/

I tend to think that in the case of use of antiaircraft manpads, if some of the countries that support the islamic forces would want its use against the Russian aircrafts in Syria, would not need to give them to the islamic forces and put in risk the aircrafts of their own coalition. Of course talking about the countries that can provide them in the area.

Instead of taking these risks, these countries can easily to send irregularly groups of their own forces, to operate in Syria with these weapons.

Solncepek wrote:РОССИЯ, ЧТО С ТОБОЙ ???

Re this and your previous post.

WTF

Is this a private discussion you have started or can all us English speakers on here join in without each of us using Yandex?