Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #12

miketheterrible wrote:Why post this drivel? Foreign policy is far from being honest or objective.

I noticed you been posting a lot of stupid bullshit from stupid bullshit websites? Care to explain yourself?

As a note: kadyrov cannot act internationally beyond what federal laws allow. In other words, he isn't acting beyond what Kremlin agrees to. The rest is media sensation bs.

I post stuff that I think some on here might find interesting, especially background stuff that I find in my travels on the web, in this case you are clearly not one of them. I do not categorise sites so "stupid bullshit websites" is a meaningless phrase to me.

Just put me on ignore.

kvs wrote:https://twitter.com/GrishinMax/status/949050062239358979

After being contradicted by Russia's MOD, the Berezovsky 5th column rag tries to scam its way out the lie it was
spreading by providing

1) photographs that could be from basically anywhere in Russia (the damage from a mortar blast "destroying 7 planes" would shred
the aircraft and not have such ridiculously localized damage)

2) from a source who is not even in Syria.

Actually, the source they said they used, has been dead (for a while) from what I read by Lieth.

But lets not ignore the fact that Kommersant has been taken to court multitude of times for falsifying information, spreading false information entirely, and slander.

JohninMK wrote:

miketheterrible wrote:Why post this drivel? Foreign policy is far from being honest or objective.

I noticed you been posting a lot of stupid bullshit from stupid bullshit websites? Care to explain yourself?

As a note: kadyrov cannot act internationally beyond what federal laws allow. In other words, he isn't acting beyond what Kremlin agrees to. The rest is media sensation bs.

I post stuff that I think some on here might find interesting, especially background stuff that I find in my travels on the web, in this case you are clearly not one of them. I do not categorise sites so "stupid bullshit websites" is a meaningless phrase to me.

Just put me on ignore.

Post whatever you like. Not meaning I wont call it out for what it is. Even Kadyrov's own words are "I will not go beyond what isn't approved from Putin". Mind you, he does exactly as Putin says, and maybe not the party itself.

kvs wrote:

JohninMK wrote:

miketheterrible wrote:Why post this drivel? Foreign policy is far from being honest or objective.

I noticed you been posting a lot of stupid bullshit from stupid bullshit websites? Care to explain yourself?

As a note: kadyrov cannot act internationally beyond what federal laws allow. In other words, he isn't acting beyond what Kremlin agrees to. The rest is media sensation bs.

I post stuff that I think some on here might find interesting, especially background stuff that I find in my travels on the web, in this case you are clearly not one of them. I do not categorise sites so "stupid bullshit websites" is a meaningless phrase to me.

Just put me on ignore.

Actually, if you contribute to the Gish Gallop of anti-Russian propaganda, then you ain't so squeaky clean.

The proper procedure is for all NATO propagandists to be banned from this site.   NATO maggots have plenty of other boards and the whole
western MSM to spread their hate drivel.

If that was aimed at me perhaps you could be a bit more specific about my anti Russian propaganda?

miketheterrible wrote:

Post whatever you like.  Not meaning I wont call it out for what it is.  Even Kadyrov's own words are "I will not go beyond what isn't approved from Putin".  Mind you, he does exactly as Putin says, and maybe not the party itself.

Kadyrov is getting some very useful experience in Syria and is going to be very useful to Putin over the next few years heading off CIA operations through the 'stans.

Why the fuck are crashes due to technical failure so common with the Russian aircraft? Every few months we hear of a new crash. First the Yak-130s, now this Mi-24. If it didn't come under fire, but crashed anyway, then the fault is poor maintance in some way. What the FUCK? I Khmeimim had the best of the RuAF personell. The Russian ministry must be so embarrassed that they didnt report the cause of the technical failure.

How the hell do goatfuckers haul mortars plus ammo undetected 40-50km into enemy territory without getting detected? They surely can't walk through the latakia mountains carrying everything on their backs, therefore it was most likely through vehicles. But how do these vehicles get past the SAA checkpoints?

KomissarBojanchev wrote:Why the fuck are crashes due to technical failure so common with the Russian aircraft? Every few months we hear of a new crash. First the Yak-130s, now this Mi-24. If it didn't come under fire, but crashed anyway, then the fault is poor maintance in some way. What the FUCK? I Khmeimim had the best of the RuAF personell.  The Russian ministry must be so embarrassed  that they didnt report the cause of the technical failure.

And other airforces don't have technical failures?

KomissarBojanchev wrote:How the hell do goatfuckers haul mortars plus ammo  undetected 40-50km into enemy territory without getting detected? They surely can't walk through the latakia mountains carrying everything on their backs, therefore it was most likely through vehicles.  But how do these vehicles get past the SAA checkpoints?

The same way that similar sabotage squads have made their way through enemy territory for thousands of years.

What others are saying


RussianDefence.com
‏ @Russian_Defence
3h3 hours ago
Replying to @Russian_Defence

New(unconfirmed) details re; 31.12.17 attack on Khmeimim:
- images of damaged Su-24 29 White via Vasya @ lostarmour
- An-72 RF-72949 & Аn-30 83 Red were apparently "damaged" via galandecZP
- anonymous MoD source:2 heli crew killed,1x heli & 1xSu-24 damaged https://www.rbc.ru/politics/04/01/2018/5a4def379a7947a9e3f00a5b …

Those photos don't show aircraft damage due mortars, artillery or rockets. No sign of fragmentation damage.

Photo of Su-24 tail section looks to be consistent with damage taken from ground fire, ie HMG or cannon shells damaging the tail section which then is torn up due to aerodynamic stresses.  If it was a HE/frag round I'd expect to see frag damage on the remaining tail panels, holes & perorations and some discolouration, as well as on the rudder and adjacent fuselage.  As it, there is nothing.

This photo is almost certainly unrelated to the Jihadi shelling.

As usual, the goat fuckers are exaggerating the damage, and the 5th columnist presstitute at Kommersant is trying to earn his daily quota of shekels/riyals by supporting Jihadi agitprop.

KomissarBojanchev wrote:Why the fuck are crashes due to technical failure so common with the Russian aircraft? Every few months we hear of a new crash. First the Yak-130s, now this Mi-24. If it didn't come under fire, but crashed anyway, then the fault is poor maintance in some way. What the FUCK? I Khmeimim had the best of the RuAF personell.  The Russian ministry must be so embarrassed  that they didnt report the cause of the technical failure.

High sortie rates and rapid turn-around puts unavoidable stresses on equipment (and the crews). Failures are inevitable, and the best hope is to minimise losses, not totally prevent them.

KomissarBojanchev wrote:How the hell do goatfuckers haul mortars plus ammo  undetected 40-50km into enemy territory without getting detected? They surely can't walk through the latakia mountains carrying everything on their backs, therefore it was most likely through vehicles.  But how do these vehicles get past the SAA checkpoints?

Are you for real? You take a small infiltration team, give them a number of man-portable rockets, and they move covertly through friendly territory and rest in safe-houses maintained by sympathisers. They set up their rockets, fire a salvo, make their way back to their own lines.

Not really complicated is it? I've no doubt the Wahhabis have tried this on many occasions, but this time they got through (around) checkpoints and weren't detected. It happens.

Big_Gazza wrote:

KomissarBojanchev wrote:How the hell do goatfuckers haul mortars plus ammo  undetected 40-50km into enemy territory without getting detected? They surely can't walk through the latakia mountains carrying everything on their backs, therefore it was most likely through vehicles.  But how do these vehicles get past the SAA checkpoints?

Are you for real?  You take a small infiltration team, give them a number of man-portable rockets, and they move covertly through friendly territory and rest in safe-houses maintained by sympathisers.  They set up their rockets, fire a salvo, make their way back to their own lines.

Not really complicated is it?  I've no doubt the Wahhabis have tried this on many occasions, but this time they got through (around) checkpoints and weren't detected.  It happens.

Except those were mortars, not rockets. An 82mm mortar is still around 20-30kg and the ammo also weighs that much.



The thing is that latakia is almost entirely alawite, even if there were traitors, local alawites would've seen something.

Big_Gazza wrote:

KomissarBojanchev wrote:Why the fuck are crashes due to technical failure so common with the Russian aircraft? Every few months we hear of a new crash. First the Yak-130s, now this Mi-24. If it didn't come under fire, but crashed anyway, then the fault is poor maintance in some way. What the FUCK? I Khmeimim had the best of the RuAF personell.  The Russian ministry must be so embarrassed  that they didnt report the cause of the technical failure.

High sortie rates and rapid turn-around puts unavoidable stresses on equipment (and the crews).  Failures are inevitable, and the best hope is to minimise losses, not totally prevent them.

Ok then its understandable.

arkhangelski wrote:

This photo would indicate that wet floor is from fuel, not rain.

Also you can we ordinance loaded on that plane, had this caught fire it would have been massive shitstorm.



What I am most curious about is why isn't anyone taking the credit for this? It's a pretty big PR scalp but everyone is silent.

My guess is that they are not in the hurry to get on VKS's extermination list.

The wetness isn't fuel, at least not predominantly.  The 2nd and 3rd pics are of different aircraft, and in both cases the tarmac is wet, and to a greater extent than a punctured fuel tank can account for.  

I'd say both pics are unrelated instances of combat damage, and IMHO don't provide any evidence to support the Jihadi goat fuckers contention of their attack damaging any aircraft.

JohninMK wrote:

kvs wrote:

JohninMK wrote:

miketheterrible wrote:Why post this drivel? Foreign policy is far from being honest or objective.

I noticed you been posting a lot of stupid bullshit from stupid bullshit websites? Care to explain yourself?

As a note: kadyrov cannot act internationally beyond what federal laws allow. In other words, he isn't acting beyond what Kremlin agrees to. The rest is media sensation bs.

I post stuff that I think some on here might find interesting, especially background stuff that I find in my travels on the web, in this case you are clearly not one of them. I do not categorise sites so "stupid bullshit websites" is a meaningless phrase to me.

Just put me on ignore.

Actually, if you contribute to the Gish Gallop of anti-Russian propaganda, then you ain't so squeaky clean.

The proper procedure is for all NATO propagandists to be banned from this site.   NATO maggots have plenty of other boards and the whole
western MSM to spread their hate drivel.

If that was aimed at me perhaps you could be a bit more specific about my anti Russian propaganda?

It is so clear your role here since a lot of time. Last example is you finding all the shit on this, but posting nothing about the defeat of the rebels in the Bayt Jinn area.

eehnie wrote:

JohninMK wrote:

kvs wrote:

JohninMK wrote:

miketheterrible wrote:Why post this drivel? Foreign policy is far from being honest or objective.

I noticed you been posting a lot of stupid bullshit from stupid bullshit websites? Care to explain yourself?

As a note: kadyrov cannot act internationally beyond what federal laws allow. In other words, he isn't acting beyond what Kremlin agrees to. The rest is media sensation bs.

I post stuff that I think some on here might find interesting, especially background stuff that I find in my travels on the web, in this case you are clearly not one of them. I do not categorise sites so "stupid bullshit websites" is a meaningless phrase to me.

Just put me on ignore.

Actually, if you contribute to the Gish Gallop of anti-Russian propaganda, then you ain't so squeaky clean.

The proper procedure is for all NATO propagandists to be banned from this site.   NATO maggots have plenty of other boards and the whole
western MSM to spread their hate drivel.

If that was aimed at me perhaps you could be a bit more specific about my anti Russian propaganda?

It is so clear your role here since a lot of time. Last example is you finding all the shit on this, but posting nothing about the defeat of the rebels in the Bayt Jinn area.

No it's fucking not. John has been reliable poster from way back MP.net days, much longer before you even knew where Syria or the Ukraine are and before anyone heard about your stupid fanboy ass. 

So show some fucking respect you ignorant little pisshead.

Thanks for the words of support Papa. Whilst he sometimes posts good stuff he can be an ignorant fool blinded by his own prejudices at times like this and especially in the Syria threads.

Eehnie, perhaps you could explain what my role is, since no-one else has given me or told me about a role?

Maybe time to build some aircraft shelters, eh?