What's new in Syria

Discussion in 'World Events' started by Schmelzer, Dec 13, 2015.

  1. Schmelzer Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,734
    Indeed. But so what?
    In your fantasy. In reality, it was paid out of the budget. And the oil price in normal, the ruble too. This is certainly not the reason.

    By the way, the main goal was the stabilization of Syria, and it is clearly more stable now. For some analysis, see
    http://thesaker.is/analysis-of-the-russian-military-pullout-from-syria/
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. CptBork Robbing the Shalebridge Cradle Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,388
    Mission accomplished! Like I said all along, now that the mainstream rebels have been sidelined (momentarily), and all that's left on the battlefield is ISIS and Al Nusra, Russian troops are free to return home to go starve with their pensionless, unemployed families. It was never about fighting terrorism, just a bunch of stupid drunks scrambling to protect their dying empire in its last days by murdering as many politically opposed civilians as they could.

    What's needed now is to continue arming the moderate opposition in Syria and entrenching their current ceasefire positions, and to help them secure any territory they capture from extremists so it doesn't fall into the hands of anyone allied with Iran or Russia. Then we wait a year or so for the bottom to fall out in Russia's economy, and once it does we pursue war crimes tribunals and exact our pound of flesh, while the Syrian people vote all Russians out of their country (hopefully Germany votes theirs out too).
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Schmelzer Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,734
    Fine, if you wait with new wars until the Russian economy collapses, the world is saved from more horrible wars.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,878
    What does that mean exactly? The Russian economy has already collapsed.
     
  8. Schmelzer Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,734
    In your dreams, maybe.
     
  9. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,878
    LOL...no, it is a matter of public record.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Russians aren't working without wages because the Russian economy is good. They are working without wages because the economy has collapsed.
     
  10. CptBork Robbing the Shalebridge Cradle Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,388
    I don't understand how you figure Russia to be saving the world from anything when they kill an order of magnitude more civilians than ISIS. Anyhow, you were saying all this time that Russia would be staying in Syria long-term, that's why there's all the fancy weaponry and new operating bases, and Russia would fight to the bitter end to defeat every last terrorist in Syria (especially the thousands from Chechnya). So you were completely wrong, yes?

    The funniest part is that if Putin had instead signed a deal with Assad to keep his forces in Syria for another 10 years, you would have been celebrating it just the same as a show of American weakness and Russian might. You have a wonderful outlook on life; if a pigeon poops on your head, it's a blessing because today you have something flavourful to include in your broth. It reminds me of how an ass-kissing RT reporter once passed off the lack of affordable cars and road infrastructure in Pyongyang, North Korea- hey, at least it's a great excuse to go out for a walk! Oh and he also had a sip of beer and nodded his head like it tasted good, so it must be a truly amazing country.
     
    joepistole likes this.
  11. CptBork Robbing the Shalebridge Cradle Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,388
    They've stolen the original plans to the Ford Pinto. They'll be up and running again in a jiffy, just you wait...
     
    joepistole likes this.
  12. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,878
    You were told when Putin began this military adventure it was a fools gambit that Putin could ill afford. It was, and that's why he is now withdrawing.
     
  13. Schmelzer Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,734
    Of course, I do not believe stupid propaganda lies.
    No, not completely. I was surprised (as everybody, I think), but the withdrawal is only a partial one. Looks like the increase of the airpower which has been made some time ago (don't remember the date) is now taken back. To announce such things loudly is, of course, thought to be helpful for various diplomatic reasons.

    There are, I think, several reasons why one needs less airpower now.

    After the Turkish attack against the Russian plane, it was necessary to demonstrate additional power in Latakia. To punish the Turkish terrorists (these were not only Turkish-paid Al Qaida, but a lot of Turkish Grey Wolves and so on). And for this purpose, some additional aircraft, in particular also aircraft for protection of the bombers, have been moved to Syria. The job in Latakia is almost finished now, so no more airforce for Latakia necessary. With Latakia and the jihadi highway closed, there is much less necessity for bombing near the Turkish border. Near, say, Deir Ezzor or Palmyra one does not need protection from Turkish airforce.

    During the offensive against the jihadi highway, they have attacked some very seriously entrenched and protected defense lines. Because this was a very serious, if not the most serious, connection for Al Qaida, and because an attack had to be expected in this particular place, because the Syrian aim to break the siege of Nubl and Zahra was obvious. What I have read, the attacks against this particular front line have been very intense. And I think that the aim of this very intense attacks was also a demonstration for the future, for the various fighters of various rebel groups. Those who have survived this explain what this means. (Note: this was close to Aleppo but outside Aleppo. There was no point at all bombing Aleppo itself. This was left to Americans, who have bombed Aleppo itself.) But, once done, this extension of airforce power is no longer necessary. Some reduction makes sense.

    In other words, with the liberation of Latakia, the cut of the jihadi highway in Aleppo, and the ceasefire where was simply much less need in airpower. And aircraft standing around without any need at the moment.

    The third point is a diplomatic signal to all those rebels who participate in the ceasefire. It is a sign that Russia is really interested in its continuation.
     
  14. pjdude1219 screw watergate i want to know about zaragate Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    15,693
    russia has a third world economy.
     
  15. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,878
    Oh, to the contrary, that is all you believe as evidenced by your many posts.

    It's a sign Mother Putin got his ass kicked. He lost a warplane. He lost the lives of many Russian soldiers. He lost a civilian airliner packed with Russians. And he has lost a fortune supplying troops in an area in which he is ill equipped to do so and at at time when he is severely financially stretched. Aside for killing innocent civilians in Syria, the geopolitical situation remains unchanged with once exception. Putin has placed Russia squarely in the sites of terrorists and Syrian nationals and he has further degraded Mother Russia's international reputation, as if that were possible. But Putin has managed to do it. Russia is now known for its violation of international law and its attacks on innocent civilians.

    Russia has had a presence in Syria for some time. So just because they intend to maintain that presence, it doesn't mean Mother Russia isn't turning tail and running, because it is.
     
  16. Schmelzer Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,734
    Who cares about one SU 24 warplane? 4 or 5 Russian soldiers, as far as I have heard, are also nothing for such an action. Russia's air force operation in Syria costs approx. $480 million "allotted in the ministry's 2015 budget for exercises and combat training. We simply reassigned those funds to support the group in Syria," said Putin." https://rbth.com/politics_and_socie...s-costs-of-military-operation-in-syria_576549

    By the way, the withdrawal is only a partial one. And, if necessary, the planes will be back in a few hours.

    Russia has been a target for the terrorists from the start, all those thousands of Russian-speaking terrorists would come back to Russia some time later anyway. Putin prefers to kill them in Syria. And has already done so. And nobody cares about your fantasies about the Russian reputation.
     
  17. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,878
    Well, assuming your numbers are correct, and that's a big if, that's still a lot of money especially for Mother Russia. As previously discussed, Mother Russia cannot even afford to pay its employees. And a jetliner full of people is certainly more than 4 or 5 Russian soldiers. Russia keeps the number of dead a state secret. But there are credible reports of large numbers of dead, mostly due to disease.

    Well, I wouldn't take much comfort in that, as I previously wrote, Russia has a naval repair facility which it wants to retain. That's its only legitimate base on foreign soil. Lord knows Russia's navy needs repair facilities. As for being able to reintroducing its aircraft, it's more than just a few hours. It's a journey of several thousands of miles and then there is the matter of getting approval from the countries who own that airspace. So it isn't as simple or as painless as you seem to think it is. Mother Russia doesn't have a deep sea navy and is therefore unable to project force much beyond its borders. Sending aircraft to Syria is about as much as Mother Russia can do.

    Except by all credible accounts it hasn't. From the start and until the finish, Mother Russia has been primarily attacking Syrian dissidents and Syrian civilians. If Putin prefers to kill terrorists in Syria, why has he not seriously attacked them and why is he now leaving. Those terrorists are still in Syria. They haven't gone away. And you mean, you don't care about what I think of Mother Russia. That's fine, but the fact remains Russia's status as a nation has fallen under Putin's rule. Putin's Syrian escapades has revealed his depravity to the world. Putin and his Russia aren't winning friends and influencing people. . Maybe I should send Putin to a Dale Carnegie course. Then again, maybe his mother dropped him on his head one too many times.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  18. Schmelzer Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,734
    So you propose not to fight Daesh because this can increase to probability that Daesh directs their attacks against American civilians?

    Ok, this explains a lot why the American fight against Daesh has not given any results.
    which are Iran and Iraq. They have already all the necessary permissions, the question would be only to send information to the air dispatchers.
    Yes, Russia is not interested in the ability to bomb Honduras or so. So, for the deep sea it has what is necessary for defense against the US. Some submarines with nuclear weapons for the second strike ability is the most important thing.
    And they are still attacked. This is only a partial withdrawal.
    In your fantasy. For some sheeple of Western propaganda too. Not for the rest of the world.
     
  19. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,878
    LOL... So where exactly did I propose or even suggest "not to fight Daesh"? I didn't, you are once again being dishonest comrade. Additionally, if you don't think the American fight, the allied fight, against Daesh hasn't given results, then you are seriously ignorant about of what has and is occurring in Syria and the Iraq. Since American intervention Daesh has suffered numerous losses on the battlefield. It has lost much, if not most, of the ground if formerly controlled. Only on American soldier died in the effort. He died while rescuing innocent civilians from Daesh.

    The US has captured a number of high ranking Daesh leaders. It has trained and supplied regional forces and aligned regional forces against Daesh. It has bombed and destroyed its major financial center and its oil producing assets. So are you really that ignorant? All mother Russia has done is drop a few bombs on Daesh targets, and in the process lost hundreds if not thousands of Russian lives and treasure. That's only a success in Putin's Mother Russia. As you well know, most of Russia's efforts in Syria has been to bomb innocent Syrian civilians and Assad's dissidents.

    LOL...well, no they don't. Permission to traverse airspace can be revoked at any time for any reason.

    What does Honduras have to do with Syria? The fact remains, Syria is about as far as Russia could possibly project military force, and that as evidence by its withdrawal, is stretching it. And while you may not know it, Mother Russia's nuclear subs, like Russia's nuclear bombers do not present a strategic threat to the US or any allied nation. And whither you want to admit it, mighty Russia's nuclear armed subs would be terminated in less time than I can hold my breath should Mother Russia decide to use them and Putin knows it. That's why he is desperately trying to develop new weapons, dirty weapons. You know, the kind of weapons terrorists are trying to develop. Putin is desperately trying to build a Russian military that could threaten the US. The Soviets before him tried to do the same thing. Look how well it worked out for the Soviet Union. It didn't.

    Putin is hell bent on repeating the mistakes of the Soviet Union. It's unfortunate, especially for Russians, but it is what it is.

    Who is "still attacked"? You are grasping at straws. Putin could withdraw all of his recently introduced forces and call it a partial withdrawal.

    Well for the world too, the unfortunate fact for you comrade is Putin has made Mother Russia an international pariah. That's why Mother Russia and Putin's fellow oligarchs are under international sanctions. Putin is a widely recognized clown. That's not propaganda, that's a fact.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
    Last edited: Mar 18, 2016
  20. Schmelzer Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,734
    Downing the Russian civil plane was the reaction of Daesh to the Russians fighting them. Else, they would have downed in the same way the plane of some other, probably European, nation. Not?
    I think it has given some results. Bombing has happened only when they have attacked the Kurds. So, it has given them time to raise own military power, and then directed Daesh against Assad.
    You have started to mention deep sea navy, which would be necessary to attack Honduras, but is irrelevant for Syria.
    LOL. http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/the-us-navys-worst-nightmare-super-advanced-russian-14203 http://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2013-06/russian-submarine-fleet-reborn The purpose is to be a second strike weapon.
    Daesh today around Palmyra is still attacked. Putin can do what he likes. It is the Russian decision how much remains now there.
     
  21. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,878
    Huh, no. It was a reaction to Putin's announcement he would fight Daesh. The bombing occurred within 30 days of Russia's announcement. Daesh could have chosen another plane to bomb. But other countries have better security. It was much easier to bomb a Russian aircraft. The fact is Daesh chose to bomb a Russian aircraft and Russia never really did much to fight Daesh. Those are the facts.

    The fact is you were wrong. The US and allied efforts to fight Daesh have been very successful. The Kurds are a part of that alliance, but they are only a part. The Kurds were fighting long before the US and allied nations became involved in the fighting of Daesh.

    It's deep water navy, not a deep sea navy and Russia has never had one. The point was, because Mother Russia doesn't have a deep water navy it cannot project a military presence much beyond Syria and even Syria was a big stretch. That's why Mother Russia is withdrawing from Syria.

    You should read your references.

    "The Yasen-class boats are fast, heavily armed and deep diving—and ideally the United States would have more Seawolf-class vessels to handle them. But while the Virginia-class subs don’t have the deep diving, high-speed open ocean performance of the Seawolf-class, it should be more than adequate to handle the handful of Project 885s that Russia builds." - National Interest

    Russia's new submarines are still noisy and still easy targets for US submarines. And as noted in your reference, Russian submarines are years behind schedule. Mother Russia is great at making great plans for Russian glory. But it's horrible when it comes to executing those plans, as evidenced by its submarine program.
     
  22. Schmelzer Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,734
    The weak place was the Egypt airport. They could have done the same with a European plane, which was the initial plan. And, different from joepistole's "facts", Daesh had been hit really hard already during the first month by the Russian airforce.
    You mean SDF? LOL, that are 90% or so Kurds, and a few arabs to make the US happy, because it minimizes a little bit the US-Turkish conflict.

    In some sense, it even made the Turks happy. Once the Kurds have ... on the Turkish red line, and the Turks had to accept this, they were able to say "oh, the Arab forces of the SDF have made this, no problem". The Kurds in the net have had a lot of fun after this.

    Nonsense. But, again, Russia does not need a navy able to bomb Honduras, whatever its name (deep water or deep sea). Anyway, the American navy is not a danger for Russia. It is good for attacking helpless small nations around the world.
    LOL. That some US submarines are yet less noisy does not mean that the Russian ones are easy targets, except in your dreams. You also seem to ignore the "ideally" in your quote. "Really" it may be different. By the way, I have just quoted a typical NATO source, National Interest, to show you that even your own propaganda sources have a much better idea about the Russian submarines, using titles like "The U.S. Navy's Worst Nightmare: Super Advanced Russian Submarines" and writes things like "another dangerous and unpredictable potential threat stirs in the East. From the ashes of the Soviet Union’s mighty fleet of nuclear submarines, Russia has embarked on an aggressive effort to resurrect its undersea-warfare capabilities."
     
  23. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,878
    Well, here is the thing, while Egyptian security might be weak, it doesn't mean that airlines cannot provide their own security. US and European and other airliners have their own security protocols. So they couldn't have done the same to others. If you have credible evidence Mother Russia hit "Daesh hard" now is the time to show it. Because as we both known Mother Russia has never hit Daesh hard before or after the incident.

    No, I mean what I wrote. The fact is the Kurds were fighting ISIS before the US became involved and the Kurds are an important part of the coalition of forces led by the US to fight Daesh (i.e. ISIS).

    I don't see how your machinations are relevant here.

    Well, good. I'm sure that reassures Hondurans. Hondurans everywhere can now rest assured.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    As for small helpless nations, just because you are the biggest baddest kid on the block, it doesn't make everyone else helpless. Additionally, the US Navy does more than just conduct military operations. It provides humanitarian relief around the world to every country in need. Most recently, it sent a hospital ship to Africa to contain the Ebola outbreak. Unlike Mother Russia, US military forces also provide humanitarian aid. They don't use humanitarian efforts as a cover for invasion.

    While you may think the US Navy isn't a threat to Mother Russia, Mother Putin and his generals know better.

    Russian subs are noisy, they have always been noisy and are easy targets for the US Navy. And as previously pointed out to you, you should read your references. Because if you had, you would know they concluded Russia's new submarines do not pose a threat the US. And some of the articles you have referenced spoke of Russian ambitions, not what Mother Russia actually has. Mother Russia has always had ambitions which have far exceeded its abilities. That's a big part of Russia's current woes.
    Your references also pointed out that Mother Russia's naval development programs have consistently been far behind schedule and delivered less than expected. Mother Russia is also working on a drone submarine to deliver a dirty nuclear weapon. True to form that program is also behind schedule and fraught with problems. It has some very obvious weak links up to and including the annihilation of Mother Russia should she ever manage to develop and successfully deploy it against a NATO nation.
     

Share This Page