Russian military intervention and aid to Syria #14

JohninMK wrote:The US helping Turkey by making the SAA spread its forces away from Idlib.

Spriter
@spriter99880
·
23h
The spox of the Russian forces in #Syria issued a statement saying that the activities of #ISIS terrorists have witnessed a remarkable increase since the release of a large number of them as part of the “pardon” decision taken by the Self-Administration.

https://english.iswnews.com/14945/operation-white-desert-in-deserts-of-syria/

Time to send some PGM's to those oil wells, to show those 'yellow bellies' (obviously marked in yellow) that they're at the VKS mercy, not the other way around.

Syria should declare that it will neutralize assets being stolen by the US and Turkey on its own territory. The UN will have nothing
to say. And nobody cares about the lame "pollution" argument. So the NATzO fake stream media can bleat until it drops.

kvs wrote:Syria should declare that it will neutralize assets being stolen by the US and Turkey on its own territory.   The UN will have nothing
to say.   And nobody cares about the lame "pollution" argument.    So the NATzO fake stream media can bleat until it drops.

They can destroy the pipelines without damaging the industry. No one can exploit the oil then.

Isos wrote:

kvs wrote:Syria should declare that it will neutralize assets being stolen by the US and Turkey on its own territory.   The UN will have nothing
to say.   And nobody cares about the lame "pollution" argument.    So the NATzO fake stream media can bleat until it drops.

They can destroy the pipelines without damaging the industry. No one can exploit the oil then.

As I understand it, the pipelines all head west into the Government area. Earlier oil was still being pumped to the Government with the SDF taking a cut but not sure now.

All the stolen oil has to be trucked out. One of the reasons for the US getting a new company in is to increase refinery capability so that they can truck higher value product not crude.

They can still bomb a node to stop the production instead of the pomps and all the production.

US would quickly stop supporting them.

If I remember rightly, the Rats in Iraq, together with backing from the US forces, tried to establish their presence in border region, between Iraq and Syria. Effectively blocking the Roads fron Iraq to Syria. Now it seems the Rats backed by Yanks, are trying to do the same in Syria. Gaining territory to block access by Syria to Iraq. Part of the same American / Zionist plan to cut off Asia from the Med coast. I think it was at this point, when there were some attacks against yank forces in Iraq. And subsequent assassination of Iranian and Iraqi Generals by yank. All interested countries, with   the aim of establishing secure and open borders for trade in the region, including China and Russia and Iran and Europeans and even India, should cooperate together to achieve this goal. And defeat the yank / Zionist plan of choking the world economy and destabilising through terror and war, peaceful relations between nations. They should push ( by any means) for complete withdrawal of yank forces, starting from border regions, and smash and destroy all the Rats.

A small relatively long range suicide drone that hunts fuel trucks would seem to be a good solution...

GarryB wrote:A small relatively long range suicide drone that hunts fuel trucks would seem to be a good solution...

A problem would be keeping the Arabs, who get money from the stolen oil, onside. But, done properly and all the blame went onto the US/Kurds, it could inflame the situation.

Does anyone know where the oil goes to?

Isos wrote:They can still bomb a node to stop the production instead of the pomps and all the production.

US would quickly stop supporting them.

The US would stop supporting the Kurds cause no oil?.

Lol that just silly logic.

Our objective in Syria goes far beyond "the oil" if you think that's all it would take your delusional.

nomadski wrote:If I remember rightly, the Rats in Iraq, together with backing from the US forces, tried to establish their presence in border region, between Iraq and Syria. Effectively blocking the Roads fron Iraq to Syria. Now it seems the Rats backed by Yanks, are trying to do the same in Syria. Gaining territory to block access by Syria to Iraq. Part of the same American / Zionist plan to cut off Asia from the Med coast. I think it was at this point, when there were some attacks against yank forces in Iraq. And subsequent assassination of Iranian and Iraqi Generals by yank. All interested countries, with   the aim of establishing secure and open borders for trade in the region, including China and Russia and Iran and Europeans and even India, should cooperate together to achieve this goal. And defeat the yank / Zionist plan of choking the world economy and destabilising through terror and war, peaceful relations between nations. They should push ( by any means) for complete withdrawal of yank forces, starting from border regions, and smash and destroy all the Rats.

Don't forget that the US/Israel/Turkey have not lost sight of their objective of the 'Balkanisation' of Syria with Turkey keeping what they have and a mini Kurdistan in the east. The latter probably being the reason for the forthcoming US investment in the oilfields. This is the real strategic reason underneath the US is dragging its heels in getting out of Iraq.

The Deir Arabs can see this and don't like the idea that they have been permanently ethnically cleaned out of their area that the Kurds have taken over. Plus more potentially to lose.

JohninMK wrote:

Isos wrote:

kvs wrote:Syria should declare that it will neutralize assets being stolen by the US and Turkey on its own territory.   The UN will have nothing
to say.   And nobody cares about the lame "pollution" argument.    So the NATzO fake stream media can bleat until it drops.

They can destroy the pipelines without damaging the industry. No one can exploit the oil then.

As I understand it, the pipelines all head west into the Government area. Earlier oil was still being pumped to the Government with the SDF taking a cut but not sure now.

All the stolen oil has to be trucked out. One of the reasons for the US getting a new company in is to increase refinery capability so that they can truck higher value product not crude.

Mainly to Damacus, Some US companies buy some then sell it on the global market, think the EU buys some.

The kurds don't get that much oil so they aren't selling nearly as much as people think. This is mainly due to the fact they are pretty landlocked and do cannot export big amounts since Turkey won't let it through, Damascus wont. The Iraq's aren't very accepting of the Syrian kurds trying to move oil through their country due to the kurd problem they have.

A problem would be keeping the Arabs, who get money from the stolen oil, onside. But, done properly and all the blame went onto the US/Kurds, it could inflame the situation.

Does anyone know where the oil goes to?

Screw them... the first thing the Russians did when they entered the war properly was bomb the oil convoys... once the oil stops moving then quite a few actors there lose interest.

The US is not just there for the Oil, they are there to be as well, but cutting off the oil trade and then where does the money have to come from?

US pockets? It wont fall from the sky.

Wars don't happen by accident, and they need money to continue... if there is no oil then someone has to stump up the cash to keep things going.

To get the US out of there you need to make it hard for them... cutting off the money is the first step. A few drone kills would also be useful too... they just revealed a huge range of small munitions optimised for use from drones... I am sure field testing would be useful against the terrorists in Idlib and the terrorists the US are supporting elsewhere.

Good place to test some long range artillery too I suspect...

I would hit the oil and gas fields that are not cooperating with Damascus... if Syria doesn't benefit then nobody else should... easy to hit... likely a few experts that cannot be replaced after the first few attacks and they wont be able to pump anything anyway...

1. We aren't getting rich off Syria, frankly put if you think we are in Syria for money you are clueless. We are losing money by being there. Just like the Russians.

2. Attacking those areas would mean attacking US forces stationed in them, what you have proposed could literally start WW3 if Russian forces attack us because we will respond in kind and brutally. Garry, I did not think you where that short-sighted or insane to propose such insanity or maybe you are just clueless about the reality on the ground.

Iran attacked you. No response. And you left the bases last month.

Isos wrote:Iran attacked you. No response. And you left the bases last month.

They did not kill anybody and only hit empty land near the base, there was no reason to attack back.

Learn the facts before you speak Iso.

Internet "experts" think they know all.

Also what base are you speaking of.

SeigSoloyvov wrote:

Isos wrote:Iran attacked you. No response. And you left the bases last month.

They did not kill anybody and only hit empty land near the base, there was no reason to attack back.

Learn the facts before you speak Iso.

Internet "experts" think they know all.

Also what base are you speaking of.

"Near the base" yeah... we saw that. Casualities are hidden by US. Next week they had few deads in "Afghanistan"...

US gave 4 or 5 bases recently to Iraq. Don't know which one but I pretty sure the one bombed by Iran was gave also.

Isos wrote:

SeigSoloyvov wrote:

Isos wrote:Iran attacked you. No response. And you left the bases last month.

They did not kill anybody and only hit empty land near the base, there was no reason to attack back.

Learn the facts before you speak Iso.

Internet "experts" think they know all.

Also what base are you speaking of.

"Near the base" yeah... we saw that. Casualities are hidden by US. Next week they had few deads in "Afghanistan"...

US gave 4 or 5 bases recently to Iraq. Don't know which one but I pretty sure the one bombed by Iran was gave also.

there were no casualties lol, but hey make shit up if that pleases you.

It was an unoccupied area near the base SATE images even showed that, so lying and denying facts now are we, joy.

That was at the request of the government not because of Iran.

Once more you have displayed you don't have an ounce of an idea of what you are talking about.

Yeah the CNN shared sat images show it happened in the desert but real one show it happen in the middle of the base and even hit where soldier used to sleep.

Isos wrote:Yeah the CNN shared sat images show it happened in the desert but real one show it happen in the middle of the base and even hit where soldier used to sleep.

Again wrong.

I am not talking about images from CNN, I have called government-controlled media shit goes for Russia's also.

It happened near the base yes OH btw did you forget the part where Iran themselves gave us a warning of the attack a few hours before it happened  

I guess you are leaving that fact out because it puts a hole in the BS you are trying to spread.

No one died or was injured, we knew about the attack, we were warned by Iran. That is why we did not strike back and there was no reason to do so. Simply because it was better to just let the Iranians hit nothing to let things cool down then attack back over nothing.

I hope this helps you gain understanding.

Multiple injuries were reported even by your propaganda media. You had no call from the iranian. Your soldiers barely had time to go away in shelters. You only knew they would attack as soon as they put the dead general in the ground and that's what happened. They clearly targeted your soldiers.

US are affraid of a war with Iran.

Trump, since elected, blames Iran for everything but when they bomb the shit out his soldiers and gave him a reason to attack them, he run away.

Another proof US are pussies attacking only guys dying of malnutrition. So please stop talking about attacking Russia or China, they would wipe out all your bases in the ME and Europe and Pacific.

SeigSoloyvov wrote:

Isos wrote:Yeah the CNN shared sat images show it happened in the desert but real one show it happen in the middle of the base and even hit where soldier used to sleep.

Again wrong.

I am not talking about images from CNN, I have called government-controlled media shit goes for Russia's also.

It happened near the base yes OH btw did you forget the part where Iran themselves gave us a warning of the attack a few hours before it happened  

I guess you are leaving that fact out because it puts a hole in the BS you are trying to spread.

No one died or was injured, we knew about the attack, we were warned by Iran. That is why we did not strike back and there was no reason to do so. Simply because it was better to just let the Iranians hit nothing to let things cool down then attack back over nothing.

I hope this helps you gain understanding.

As far as I remember it was two bases, Al Assad and Erbil. I think there may have been a 30 minute warning given before the BM landed. Lots of damage at both sites with TV crews filming some of it at Al Assad whilst Erbil was kept very quiet. Having initially said no injuries (even though it was reported that some were airlifted to Germany) CENTCOM admitted 2/3 weeks later that there were 60 or so concussion injuries.

Plenty of it was reported here at the time.

EDIT

You are talking crap. Its your memory that's failing, not ours. Just been back and checked it out

Next you'll say something stupid about this, but it don't look like a field being hit to me. They were bang on target, the MQ-9 drone areas.

JohninMK wrote:

SeigSoloyvov wrote:

Isos wrote:Yeah the CNN shared sat images show it happened in the desert but real one show it happen in the middle of the base and even hit where soldier used to sleep.

Again wrong.

I am not talking about images from CNN, I have called government-controlled media shit goes for Russia's also.

It happened near the base yes OH btw did you forget the part where Iran themselves gave us a warning of the attack a few hours before it happened  

I guess you are leaving that fact out because it puts a hole in the BS you are trying to spread.

No one died or was injured, we knew about the attack, we were warned by Iran. That is why we did not strike back and there was no reason to do so. Simply because it was better to just let the Iranians hit nothing to let things cool down then attack back over nothing.

I hope this helps you gain understanding.

As far as I remember it was two bases, Al Assad and Erbil. I think there may have been a 30 minute warning given before the BM landed. Lots of damage at both sites with TV crews filming some of it at Al Assad whilst Erbil was kept very quiet. Having initially said no injuries (even though it was reported that some were airlifted to Germany) CENTCOM admitted 2/3 weeks later that there were 60 or so concussion injuries.

Plenty of it was reported here at the time.

Only one missile hit near Ebril and it did nothing just made a crater, 10 hit Al-Assad.

It was 11 and they weren't full concussions just some very minor symptoms, the guys where fine a few weeks later.

SeigSoloyvov wrote:
Only one missile hit near Ebril and it did nothing just made a crater, 10 hit Al-Assad.

It was 11 and they weren't full concussions just some very minor symptoms, the guys where fine a few weeks later.

"It happened near the base yes OH btw did you forget the part where Iran themselves gave us a warning of the attack a few hours before it happened"

See the photo I added to my post. That's not 'near' the base its smack in the middle.

EDIT

Pentagon has revealed 34 U.S. troops suffered traumatic brain injuries in Iran IRGC ballistic missiles strike in Iraq bases
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/jan/24/us-soldiers-iran-traumatic-brain-injury-pentagon

January 29, 2020 at 8:09 am

The Pentagon said on Tuesday 50 US service members were now diagnosed with traumatic brain injury after missile strikes by Iran on a base in Iraq earlier this month, 16 more than the military had previously announced. President Donald Trump and other top officials initially said Iran’s Jan. 8 attack had not killed or injured any US service members.

“As of today, 50 US service members have been diagnosed” with traumatic brain injury, Pentagon spokesman Lieutenant Colonel Thomas Campbell said in a statement about injuries in the attack on the Ain al-Asad airbase in western Iraq.

Symptoms of concussive injuries include headaches, dizziness, sensitivity to light and nausea. Thirty-one of the 50 were treated in Iraq and returned to duty, including 15 of those diagnosed most recently, Campbell said. Eighteen of the total have been sent to Germany for further evaluation and treatment, and one was sent to Kuwait and has since returned to duty, he said.

“This is a snapshot in time and numbers can change,” Campbell said.

Number now 64

https://www.garda.com/crisis24/news-alerts/310401/iraq-rocket-attack-near-military-base-in-mosul-nineveh-province-january-31

So I was confusing Ebril with Al-Assad. My mistake there.

Ah you are talking about that, Campbell was talking about anyone who had any symptoms. It's standard practice for everyone to under-report the real numbers, as I have said before.

The actual number is around 109 it's standard practice for everyone to under-report the real numbers, as I have said before. but only 40 needed to be safe went to Germany to get checked out they returned to duty a few weeks later A-okay.

11 had some very minor TBI, and didn't return to duty but they are fine.

Most of the guys never even left Iraq because it was so minor and didn't do anything and within a few days they returned to duty.

I really don't consider something that only lasts for a few days or weeks "injuries" while they technically are injuries yes. So I only counted the 11. Difference of opinion here.

But hey, be my guest Bomb US forces and see the shit go that will turn into.

Isos wrote:Multiple injuries were reported even by your propaganda media. You had no call from the iranian. Your soldiers barely had time to go away in shelters. You only knew they would attack as soon as they put the dead general in the ground and that's what happened. They clearly targeted your soldiers.

US are affraid of a war with Iran.

Trump, since elected, blames Iran for everything but when they bomb the shit out his soldiers and gave him a reason to attack them, he run away.

Another proof US are pussies attacking only guys dying of malnutrition. So please stop talking about attacking Russia or China, they would wipe out all your bases in the ME and Europe and Pacific.

An actual war against Iran would be easy, the problem would be an occupation that would turn into a nightmare really fast but the conventional fight wouldn't be hard. Which is one of the reasons I am in opposition to war against Iran.

"Iraqi Prime Minister Adil Abdul Mahdi said in a statement Wednesday that Iran notified Iraq the attack “had begun or would begin shortly,” on unspecified U.S. military locations. The U.S. military reported the attack at the same time, he said"

Iraq warned us, but the Iranians told them ahead of time. My mistake in that I forgot Iran told Iraq who then told us, I forgot the middle man.

Well if you think that I hope you are prepared to see hundreds dead on your side, sure you can kill us but we will kill you back to and much harder.

Btw if you think we are scared of the Russians, then you should check their body bags. We may not kill them directly buuuut hey and yes they do the same to us.

At the same time getting into a direct fight with them could see millions dead so yeah.