Hello. I am looking for a timeline that explains the Syrian conflict 2011-2022 thoroughly from a trustworthy source (i.e. free from Western propaganda). I do not even trust Wikipedia as a source, because they may mix reality with Western narratives.
Hard to say, most sources are biased sadly, but I would think pro Assad or Russian sources would be less inclined to embellish the truth than western sources, because the Russian forces and Syrian forces essentially generally played by international law whereas the western forces did all sorts of things they would have seriously condemned Syria or Russia for doing.
Does not look like a hostile meeting, I would say the opposite ...
There are a few hard core soldier types that give in to hate and really hate all prospective foes, but there are just as many who consider it a profession and recognise the other guys are just the same as them really, just on different teams.
Your average soldier probably has more in common with his enemy than with his command, because it is about power and money and status and most of the top political and military figures wouldn't... well they couldn't mix with the squaddies... except for PR photo shoots.
Are those completely moved back to Russia? If yes then why? I thought they were Syrian only under Russian supervision. What was the point of giving it to them then?
The purpose was a smack on the nose for Israel, and I think they got the point. John mentions the increased availability of Iranian and perhaps even Chinese systems with less restrictions sounds like a reasonable explanation... the S-300 was technically under Syrian control but the fact that it never seemed to fire at anything suggests it was actually under Russian management to prevent an incident, which would explain why it is no longer needed... I mean if you can't use it...
The Russian S-400 is still there so it is not like they are open and exposed if they actually want to shoot things down.
Defence is expensive and not always reliable . Expensive for the defender and cheap for the attacker .
That is true, but if I went to war you can bet anything you like that wearing a helmet and body armour would be a priority... no matter how heavy they were.
HATO is enormously vulnerable right now because they are aircraft and attack based... the war in the Ukraine shows how vulnerable aircraft are in a modern conflict... a HATO fanboy might say Russia has inferior aircraft, but a Russian fanboy could reply their losses are not crippling and that Russian weapons have been very effective so far... both in attack and defence. The orcs have had a couple of successes, but over the time period they equate to pinprick attacks that could be largely ignored in the overall scheme of things, and while the Russians showed serious restraint their attacking missiles and aircraft appear to be getting to and destroying their targets.
It is all bad news for HATO because they use aircraft for both attack and defence, so every operation on the attack or in defence is going to cost them aircraft... weakening their effectiveness with every contact.
Russian lives were not being lost in Israeli attacks as much as Syrian lives . Russia also wanted cosy relations with Israel , for domestic reasons and also Israel is a nuke power .
Not cosy, Israel can negotiate and be reasoned with, unlike the US or EU and so talking with the various groups in the region that are open to talks makes sense... certain aspects need to be sorted at the negotiating table rather than in battle.
Being reasonable with Israel and also Turkey and even Iran, means a lasting solution is more likely to be found eventually.
Expanding relationships later on could result eventually better relations and a real peace that everyone can accept and observe.
If these SAM are being permanently removed , it is not because Israel has stopped attacks . But more because they are needed elsewhere . This leaves Syrians more vulnerable , yet more free also to respond offensively against Israel .
Russia has a lot of S-300 systems and is currently producing S-350 systems with better performance and more ready to fire longer ranged higher performing missiles, as well as S-400s which were also part of the replacements.
The Russian IADS in Syria is still operational, but removing the S-300s from the Syrian control does not remove their IADS which is linked to the Russian IADS.
An IADS is a command and control network with sensors and weapons attached to it. Remove some weapons and replace them with different ones and the system overall is still effective... much more effective than sensors and weapons placed geographically but all working on their own, perhaps with radio or phone warning systems in place.
Offence is cheaper than defence .
But both are important... there is no value in stabbing an opponent to death if you do not bother to block their blows and by the time you have ensured your enemies wounds are fatal he has managed to inflict enough damage to you for that to be fatal too.
Remember Israel has nukes and the US and west blindly supporting them so they can use them if they want with likely little international sanction or action against them... it will be self defence the US president will say.
All this before Ukraine war , and Russia ability to take out their SAM . The probability was less than 30% . I would say now in retrospect ( of Ukraine war ) that , in reality it is much less . So taking this into account , Syria and Iran best move away from air defence model . Into model of using drones and missiles against AD . Iran and Syria can not afford a defensive war , nor are they limited by domestic policy against attacking Israel .
Drones and missiles would be serious degraded in performance against an enemy with air defence... most Ukrainian aircraft and weapons fired at Russian forces were defeated by SAMs and aircraft etc etc... if you just try to absorb the damage they inflict then you need to be sure they are using their fingernails to scratch your skin and don't have a knife or larger bladed weapon to cut you into small chunks.
Iran has the SAM capacity to have an excellent defence, and having them integrated in an IADS means you can operate some radar and keep others off meaning the enemy wont know where you SAMs are until you start launching missiles, which makes flying around very very dangerous... which is what Iran wants.
Weapons like TOR and Pantsir can reach 15km plus which makes them very mobile and very effective... both can now even fire on the move and shoot down threats fired at them to try to eliminate them.
You can't defend everything and any enemy will find gaps, but most of the time that will be civilian targets that are embarrassing but not critical to the conflict...
Think of it like a sky scraper building with thousands of windows... in a working building many windows will be open at different times of the day, and for other times they will be shut... from a burglars point of view you can watch for days and weeks and months and watch for patterns and make a plan to get into the building without going through the front door. From a security perspective you have to monitor every single window and make sure is it not being compromised right now.
Obviously the easiest solution is to make the windows so they can't be opened and just have air conditioning and heating managed by the infrastructure, but a lot of people would object to that...
Home
Latest images
Register
Log in
JohninMK
