Putin and Russia in Syria

No, it isn't true at all. Following the fall of the USSR the country had been run by oligarchs for almost a decade by the time Putin became the president. The economy was in shambles, the second Chechen war was still on, the level of trust in the government among the population was close to zero. The country was literally on its last legs economically, politically, socially. He ended the war, put oligarchs in their place, drastically reduced the crime rate and seriously improved social welfare, among many other things. There's a reason why most Russians support him, even though I'm not surprised westerners either genuinely don't get it or simply too brainwashed by their own version of liberal propaganda. Here's a fun fact: since Putin came to power, Russia’s gross national product per capita increased from 49,800 roubles in 2000 to 461,300 in 2013.

Here's a good explanation of why Putin enjoys such a strong support in Russia, a well written piece from someone who clearly knows the subject first hand.

-Now it's been run by oligarchs for 2.5 decades. Putin just keeps them on a leash since he can send them to the gulag like he's done previously if they step out of line. It doesn't really limit what they do as long as they don't screw him over. In 2013, 35% of Russia's wealth was in the hands of 110 people. Even in the US where wealth inequality is the worst it's been in decades if not ever, the wealthiest 1% (3.2m people) own about 35% of the wealth. The only difference is that there's now a mafia boss to control the mafia.
-It was just starting when Putin became PM and certainly benefited him when it came to election time the next March. Without it, it's unlikely that he would have been elected in the first place since he wasn't a known quantity in Russia prior to the war.
 
-Now it's been run by oligarchs for 2.5 decades. Putin just keeps them on a leash since he can send them to the gulag like he's done previously if they step out of line. It doesn't really limit what they do as long as they don't screw him over. In 2013, 35% of Russia's wealth was in the hands of 110 people. Even in the US where wealth inequality is the worst it's been in decades if not ever, the wealthiest 1% (3.2m people) own about 35% of the wealth. The only difference is that there's now a mafia boss to control the mafia.
-It was just starting when Putin became PM and certainly benefited him when it came to election time the next March. Without it, it's unlikely that he would have been elected in the first place since he wasn't a known quantity in Russia prior to the war.

Only difference between now and then is Putin has surrounded himself with a patronage network of wealthy individuals who support him, whereas anyone who over the years spoke up against his policies, swiftly found themselves on the wrong end of a trumped up investigation and prison time.
 
The point is, what the feck does M-R have to do with Syria. I'm going to state this unequivocally. Only a moron compares what is happening now with Russia to what happened in WW2 Stalin or Hitler. There are zero points of relevant comparison.

I wasn't saying the two situations have much in common. Just making the point that signing an agreement with a country like Russia is no guarantee of the future inviolability of your borders. They tend to be cynical about such things. In WW2 both parties acted in bad faith.
 
One wonders when the Russian people will finally get wind of what he's doing and get rid of him.

They sure need a second Russian Revolution in there regardless. If Putin goes the Ceaucescu route, I would probably open a bottle of champagne if the day ever comes.

That country has such a huge potential, but it's a huge shame they just can't "grow up" because people are still as asleep as they have been since the days of communism while the same elite assholes are plundering everything to no end.
 
They sure need a second Russian Revolution in there regardless. If Putin goes the Ceaucescu route, I would probably open a bottle of champagne if the day ever comes.

That country has such a huge potential, but it's a huge shame they just can't "grow up" because people are still as asleep as they have been since the days of communism while the same elite assholes are plundering everything to no end.

Agreed. They just need a good leader who can institute proper governance reforms and transition the economy from being solely based on oil towards other industries. Putin had that chance but he squandered it on corruption, authoritarianism, and neo-imperialism.
 
Agreed. They just need a good leader who can institute proper governance reforms and transition the economy from being solely based on oil towards other industries. Putin had that chance but he squandered it on corruption, authoritarianism, and neo-imperialism.

Exactly. Even if having a good leader helps, the most important thing they need to change is accountability from all elected politicians towards the people of the regions they each represent. The primary mission of any politician is to listen and serve the taxpayers who got him/her to the position of representative. Even the president should be held responsible when he is found violatinjg the oath he has sworn on the day he is inaugurated as leader of the country.

The neo-imperialism part is what I despise the most because it's not by re-using old ideas that a country can be rebuilt after it crashed down once. I can only look at both Japan and Germany as examples of how countries became big players in their respective parts of the world today without resorting to neo-imperialism after being destroyed once.
 
I'm glad so many people who have never been to Russia know exactly what needs to be done to make things right there. If only Putin was frequenting the Redcafe, he could have picked up some great ideas from the resident experts. It's his loss, I'm sure.
 
I'm glad so many people who have never been to Russia know exactly what needs to be done to make things right there. If only Putin was frequenting the Redcafe, he could have picked up some great ideas from the resident experts. It's his loss, I'm sure.

Half the people here have never been to the US either, and still feel quite comfortable criticizing. Part in parcel with being on the internet i suppose.
 
I'm glad so many people who have never been to Russia know exactly what needs to be done to make things right there. If only Putin was frequenting the Redcafe, he could have picked up some great ideas from the resident experts. It's his loss, I'm sure.
Then why are you commenting on Syria? Have you ever been there? How would you know what would be right for it? Especially considering you've ignored our resident Syrian's take on it. Enlighten me.
 
Half the people here have never been to the US either, and still feel quite comfortable criticizing. Part in parcel with being on the internet i suppose.

I've lived in Brooklyn, NY for years, but my criticism of America mostly concerns its foreign policy, there are plenty of things otherwise that Russia and Russians could learn from the USA.
 
Then why are you commenting on Syria? Have you ever been there? How would you know what would be right for it? Especially considering you've ignored our resident Syrian's take on it. Enlighten me.

I've never said you cannot comment on topics if you haven't been to the country (but it certainly helps), so no need to put words in my mouth. Neither have I ever suggested that I knew more about the situation in Syria than you or any other Syrian poster. And I didn't ignore anything, I even asked your view on the FSA on another thread since I couldn't figure out what they were about.

As for the resident Syrian posters, I'm sure there are other Syrian citizens that may not share your particular view on the conflict, like for instance those who were on the receiving end of massacres of the Alawite villages at the hands of Al Nusra jihadists. We just don't have them here on the forum. If there were other Russians here with a different view on Russia and Putin, I'd be happy to debate them, too.
 
We are all too used to see the americans acting,paying and many times fixing the things or even being the moderators to calm down things. If they go to the war someone would talk about neo imperialism/make a bigger fire in the region being involved in a religion conflict among sunni-shia or even some sionism theory, however if they don't act we say that are soft with terrorism. They must keep everybody happy,Iran(nuclear deal),sunnis,Israel and Arabia, however whatever they do someone will burn an american flag in Middle East.
Despite all this I think that might have done more in the Iraq part of the conflict
 
I've lived in Brooklyn, NY for years, but my criticism of America mostly concerns its foreign policy, there are plenty of things otherwise that Russia and Russians could learn from the USA.

That's fair enough. I wasn't criticizing you, just making the case that one doesn't have to live in the country to criticize its policy.
 
Why? You're looking to give up your US citizenship and become a Russian state official? Those soulless Yanks, just when I was about to start believing in the American dream again.

:nono: I just wanted a $600k watch like his press officer has.
 
Russian strike 'kills 48 from single family' in Syria
Bomb shelter of family in Homs' countryside hit by apparent Russian rocket, killing 48 family members, activists say.

A suspected Russian air strike on a home in the countryside near the central city of Homs has killed 48 people from a single family, Syrian activists said.

The bomb shelter where the family was hiding was hit by a rocket in the western city of Homs, activists told Al Jazeera on Sunday.
 
Russian strike 'kills 48 from single family' in Syria
Bomb shelter of family in Homs' countryside hit by apparent Russian rocket, killing 48 family members, activists say.

A suspected Russian air strike on a home in the countryside near the central city of Homs has killed 48 people from a single family, Syrian activists said.

The bomb shelter where the family was hiding was hit by a rocket in the western city of Homs, activists told Al Jazeera on Sunday.
Source: Al Jazeera.
 
Airstrikes in Yemen Hit Wedding Party, Killing Dozens

SANA, Yemen — Warplanes with the Saudi Arabia-led military coalition bombed a wedding party on Yemen’s Red Sea coast on Monday, killing at least 70 civilians, according to two local officials and a relative of one of the victims.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/29/w...en-hit-wedding-party-killing-dozens.html?_r=0
That's also disgraceful. Not sure what your point is? Do you want me to call it disgraceful in every instance? The civilian deaths in Iraq and Afghan are also disgraceful.
 
That's also disgraceful. Not sure what your point is? Do you want me to call it disgraceful in every instance? The civilian deaths in Iraq and Afghan are also disgraceful.
You want the Muslims everywhere to unite behind Saudi Arabia.
 
@Danny1982 - what do you think of Russian bombs killing Syrian civilians?
I think civilians dying anywhere in the world is an awful thing. In fact any people dying (whether civilian or military) is a bad thing. It's not like the soldiers are robots who don't have kids and families.

However, I don't use the blood of the innocent (selectively) as a way to win a political argument, and I don't shed the crocodile tears. In every single conflict in the world civilians will die. I can argue that Saudi Arabia is actually targeting the civilians while Russia isn't (/collateral damage TM), something the US people are used to doing to defend their share of crimes against civilians, but it's a moot point and will only lead to endless (and a bit pointless) arguments.

The difference between you and me is I don't post selective pictures of dead children or news about dead civilians to support my political aims. Instead I only remind some people here (sometimes) about the whole picture, when they (imo) shamelessly try to exploit the suffering of some people to reach their own (political/ideological) goals.

My stance in this forum has always been very clear. I'm against the extremist ideology of Al-Qaeda (regardless of the name tag it uses) and Saudi Arabia which is the root of that ideology. I think it's the most dangerous thing right now not only for the middle east, but for the whole world. I'll be with anybody fighting that ideology, and against anybody supporting it, and I'm not going to hide behind selective pictures of dead civilians, like some are trying to do here.
 
Michael Fallon: Logic for British air strikes in Syria is 'inescapable'

The "logic" for British jets carrying out air strikes against terrorists in Syria is now "inescapable", the Defence Secretary has said as he raised the prospect of an "accidental confrontation" with Russia if the UK goes to war in the region.

Michael Fallon said that the British military should be deployed in Syria to tackle Isil jihadists if the Government is able to get Parliamentary approval.

However, he admitted that he is worried that it could lead to an "accidental confrontation" with Russian forces, which are now carrying out operations in the region.

Mr Fallon said that Russian aggression in the region should not "divert us for a moment from our focus against Isil".

Speaking to the Andrew Marr programme on BBC 1, Mr Fallon was asked if he "hopes" to be able to send British planes to carry out targeted strikes against Isil jihadists in Syria.

"The logic is inescapable," he said. "Isil is a huge threat to this country, to the stability of Iraq, to the stability of the whole region and has carried out barbarous acts."

He said that Vladimir Putin's decision to lauch attacks in Syria is "prolonging the conflict" and helping to "prop up" the regime of Bashar al-Assad.

Mr Fallon said: "What [Russia] is doing is propping up the Assad regime, making the resolution of all this more difficult. They are prolonging the conflict and civilians are being killed.

"The RAF strikes are done to very strict rules of engagement. They've been striking in Iraq for a year where so far there have been no civilian casualties. The Russians have been at in Syria for a couple of weeks and independent reports estimate that they've killed several hundred people already."

He added: "I don't think we should let Russia divert us for a moment from our focus against Isil. Don't let's forget that Isil beheaded British hostages. They were behind the slaughter of 30 British holidaymakers on a beach in Tunisia. They've been killing Christians, gays, they've been carrying out unspeakable acts of brutality. They are a very direct threat to the peace in the Middle East and they are a direct threat to us in the United Kingdom."

Asked if he is "worried" about the potential for an "accidental confrontation" with Russian forces if Britain goes to war in the region, Mr Fallon said: "Well I am worried, yes. When you have this activity - you've seen on the Turkish border, which is a Nato border, you've seen incursions into Turkish airspace. Obviously there is the danger of accidents, of incidents taking place that inflame the tension."

He added: "We have to deal with Isil. That is our focus."


Why do we need to get involved. And what are we achieving.
 
Michael Fallon: Logic for British air strikes in Syria is 'inescapable'

The "logic" for British jets carrying out air strikes against terrorists in Syria is now "inescapable", the Defence Secretary has said as he raised the prospect of an "accidental confrontation" with Russia if the UK goes to war in the region.

Michael Fallon said that the British military should be deployed in Syria to tackle Isil jihadists if the Government is able to get Parliamentary approval.

However, he admitted that he is worried that it could lead to an "accidental confrontation" with Russian forces, which are now carrying out operations in the region.

Mr Fallon said that Russian aggression in the region should not "divert us for a moment from our focus against Isil".

Speaking to the Andrew Marr programme on BBC 1, Mr Fallon was asked if he "hopes" to be able to send British planes to carry out targeted strikes against Isil jihadists in Syria.

"The logic is inescapable," he said. "Isil is a huge threat to this country, to the stability of Iraq, to the stability of the whole region and has carried out barbarous acts."

He said that Vladimir Putin's decision to lauch attacks in Syria is "prolonging the conflict" and helping to "prop up" the regime of Bashar al-Assad.

Mr Fallon said: "What [Russia] is doing is propping up the Assad regime, making the resolution of all this more difficult. They are prolonging the conflict and civilians are being killed.

"The RAF strikes are done to very strict rules of engagement. They've been striking in Iraq for a year where so far there have been no civilian casualties. The Russians have been at in Syria for a couple of weeks and independent reports estimate that they've killed several hundred people already."

He added: "I don't think we should let Russia divert us for a moment from our focus against Isil. Don't let's forget that Isil beheaded British hostages. They were behind the slaughter of 30 British holidaymakers on a beach in Tunisia. They've been killing Christians, gays, they've been carrying out unspeakable acts of brutality. They are a very direct threat to the peace in the Middle East and they are a direct threat to us in the United Kingdom."

Asked if he is "worried" about the potential for an "accidental confrontation" with Russian forces if Britain goes to war in the region, Mr Fallon said: "Well I am worried, yes. When you have this activity - you've seen on the Turkish border, which is a Nato border, you've seen incursions into Turkish airspace. Obviously there is the danger of accidents, of incidents taking place that inflame the tension."

He added: "We have to deal with Isil. That is our focus."


Why do we need to get involved. And what are we achieving.

Feeding the perception you are "doing something about ISIS".
 
Russia's Defense Ministry has denied that any of its soldiers have died recently in Syria, after a report that three Russians were killed in fighting there.

http://www.rferl.org/content/russian-embassy-no-information-about-syria-deaths/27316929.html

In comments quoted by TASS, the Defense Ministry said: "In relation to reports appearing in foreign media about the alleged deaths in Syria of Russian soldiers, we assert: there have been no casualties among soldiers from Russia's armed forces in Syria."
 
Russia's Defense Ministry has denied that any of its soldiers have died recently in Syria, after a report that three Russians were killed in fighting there.

http://www.rferl.org/content/russian-embassy-no-information-about-syria-deaths/27316929.html

In comments quoted by TASS, the Defense Ministry said: "In relation to reports appearing in foreign media about the alleged deaths in Syria of Russian soldiers, we assert: there have been no casualties among soldiers from Russia's armed forces in Syria."

They said that about Russian troops in Ukraine though so we know that they lie about it if it suits their needs.
 
The Russian army asserts its superiority in conventional warfare
by Thierry Meyssan


Moscow’s military intervention in Syria has not simply overturned the fortunes of war and spread panic throughout the ranks of the jihadist groups. It has also shown the rest of the world the current capacities of the Russian army in situations of real warfare. To everyone’s astonishment, it has proved to possess a system of signal jamming capable of rendering the Atlantic Alliance deaf and blind. Despite a far superior budget, the United States have just lost their military domination.

1_-_1-129-3a4d9-2236a.jpg

The Russian military intervention in Syria, which was at first considered a risky bet by Moscow against the jihadists, has transformed itself into a demonstration of power which upsets the strategic balance of the world [1]. Originally conceived to isolate and then destroy the armed groups equipped by states who support the jihadists in violation of the pertinent resolutions of the Security Council, the operation has now blinded all the Western actors and their allies.

The Pentagon is now divided between those who tend to minimise the facts while attempting to find a weakness in the Russian system, and those who, on the contrary, consider that the United States have lost their superiority in terms of conventional wafare, and that it will take long years before they are able to recover it [2].

We remember that in 2008, during the war in South Ossetia, although the Russian forces had managed to repel the Georgian attack, they had above all shown the world the deplorable state of their equipment. And only ten days ago, ex-Secretary of Defence Robert Gates and ex-National Security advisor Condoleezza Rice were describing the Russian army as a « second-rate » force. [3].

So how has the Russian Federation managed to rebuild its defence industry, and to design and produce very high-technology weapons without the Pentagon measuring the importance of the phenomenon, and allowing itself to be over-taken ? Have the Russians used all their new weapons in Syria, or do they have other surprises in reserve ? [4]

The confusion in Washington is so great that the White House has cancelled the official visit by Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev and a delegation of the Russian Chief of Staff. This decision was taken after an identical visit to Turkey by a Russian military delegation. There is little point in discussing the operations in Syria, because the Pentagon does not know what is happening there. Furious, the « liberal hawks » and the neo-conservatives are demanding a relaunch of the military budget, and have succeeded in stopping the withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan.

In the most bizarre fashion, the Atlantist commentators who are witnessing the out-distancing of US military power are now denouncing the dangers of Russian imperialism [5]. And yet Russia is only acting to save the Syrian People, and proposing that other states work in collaboration with them, while the United States, when they enjoyed military pre-eminence, imposed their economic system and destroyed a number of states.

We are obliged to note that the hesitant declarations by Washington, published during the Russian deployment before the offensive, should not be interpreted as a slow political adaptation of official rhetoric, but should be understood for what they actually reveal – the fact that the Pentagon did not know the terrain. It had become deaf and blind.

A system of generalised jamming
We know, since the incident of the USS Donald Cook in the Black Sea on the 12th April 2014, that the Russian Air Force has at its disposition a weapon which enables it to jam all radars, all control circuits, all systems for the transmission of information, etc. [6]. Since the beginning of its military deployment, Russia had installed a jamming centre at Hmeymim, to the North of Latakia. Then, suddenly, the USS Donald Cook incident occurred, but this time within a perimeter of 300 kilometres – which includes the NATO base at Incirlik (Turkey). And this is still going on. Because the event happened during a sand-storm of historical proportions, the Pentagon first thought its measuring equipment had malfunctioned, but then discovered that it had been jammed. Completely.

Modern conventional warfare is based on what is known as « C4i » - an acronym which corresponds to the English terms « Command », « Control », « Communications », « Computer » and « intelligence ». The satellites, planes and drones, ships and submarines, tanks and now even the combatants themselves, are all connected to one another by a system of permanent communication, which enables the Chiefs of Staff to oversee and command the fighting more efficiently. It is this entire system - NATO’s nervous system – which is presently jammed in Syria and part of Turkey.

According to the Romanian expert Valentin Vasilescu, Russia has installed several Krasukha-4, equipped its planes with SAP-518/ SPS-171 jamming equipment (like the plane that overflew the USS Donald Cook), and its helicopters with the Richag-AV system. Besides this, it is using the spy-ship Priazovye (Project 864 Vishnya class, to use NATO terminology), in the Mediterranean [7].

It seems that Russia has agreed not to interfere with Israëli communications – a US preserve – which means that it will not deploy its jamming system in South Syria.

Russian planes have enjoyed the privilege of violating Turkish air space many times. Their purpose was not to measure the reaction time of the Turkish Air Force, but to verify the efficiency of their jamming capabililies in the area concerned, and also to keep an eye the installations which are at the disposition of the jihadists in Turkey.

High-performance Cruise missiles
Russia has used several new weapons, like the 26 stealth (or LO technology) cruise missiles (3M-14T Kaliber-NK), equivalent to the American RGM/UGM-109E Tomahawk [8]. Fired by its fleet in the Caspian Sea – with no military necessity – they reached and destroyed 11 targets situated at 1,500 kilometres distance, in the non-jammed area – so that NATO could appreciate their performance. These missiles crossed Iranian and Iraqi air space at an altitude varying between 50 and 100 metres, depending on the terrain, and flying just four kilometres away from a US drone. None of them were lost, compared to US missiles, which have a margin of error beteen 5 % and 10 %, depending on the models [9]. At the same time, this salvo demonstrated the waste of the incredible sums of money spent on the useless « anti-missile shield » built by the Pentagon around Russia –even though it was officially intended for protection against Iranian launch sites.

Taking into account that these missiles can be fired from submarines situated anywhere in the oceans, and that they can transport nuclear warheads, the Russians have clearly made up for their delay as far as launchers are concerned.

Finally, in the case of a nuclear confrontation, the Russian Federation would be destroyed by the United States – and vice versa – but would win in the case of a conventional war.

Only the Russians and the Syrians are capable of evaluating the situation on the ground. All the other military information from other sources, including the jihadists, are without foundation, since only Russia and Syria have an overall picture of the terrain. Moscow and Damascus intend to profit as far as possible from their advantage, and are therefore keeping their operations secret.

From the official communiqués and the confidences of certain officers, we may conclude that at least 5,000 jihadists have been killed, including several leaders of Ahrar el-Sham, al-Qaïda and the Islamic Emirate. At least 10,000 mercenaries have fled to Turkey, Iraq and Jordan. The Syrian Arab Army and Hezbollah have re-captured the area without waiting for the promised Iranian reinforcements.

The bombing campaign should end by the Orthodox Christmas. The question which will then have to be answered is whether or not Russia will be authorised to finish its job by pursuing the jihadists who have found refuge in Turkey, Iraq and Jordan. Failing this, Syria will have been saved, but the problem will still not have been resolved. The Muslim Brotherhood will not fail to seek revenge, and the United States will not fail to use them again against other targets.
 
The Russian army asserts its superiority in conventional warfare
by Thierry Meyssan


Moscow’s military intervention in Syria has not simply overturned the fortunes of war and spread panic throughout the ranks of the jihadist groups. It has also shown the rest of the world the current capacities of the Russian army in situations of real warfare. To everyone’s astonishment, it has proved to possess a system of signal jamming capable of rendering the Atlantic Alliance deaf and blind. Despite a far superior budget, the United States have just lost their military domination.

1_-_1-129-3a4d9-2236a.jpg

The Russian military intervention in Syria, which was at first considered a risky bet by Moscow against the jihadists, has transformed itself into a demonstration of power which upsets the strategic balance of the world [1]. Originally conceived to isolate and then destroy the armed groups equipped by states who support the jihadists in violation of the pertinent resolutions of the Security Council, the operation has now blinded all the Western actors and their allies.

The Pentagon is now divided between those who tend to minimise the facts while attempting to find a weakness in the Russian system, and those who, on the contrary, consider that the United States have lost their superiority in terms of conventional wafare, and that it will take long years before they are able to recover it [2].

We remember that in 2008, during the war in South Ossetia, although the Russian forces had managed to repel the Georgian attack, they had above all shown the world the deplorable state of their equipment. And only ten days ago, ex-Secretary of Defence Robert Gates and ex-National Security advisor Condoleezza Rice were describing the Russian army as a « second-rate » force. [3].

So how has the Russian Federation managed to rebuild its defence industry, and to design and produce very high-technology weapons without the Pentagon measuring the importance of the phenomenon, and allowing itself to be over-taken ? Have the Russians used all their new weapons in Syria, or do they have other surprises in reserve ? [4]

The confusion in Washington is so great that the White House has cancelled the official visit by Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev and a delegation of the Russian Chief of Staff. This decision was taken after an identical visit to Turkey by a Russian military delegation. There is little point in discussing the operations in Syria, because the Pentagon does not know what is happening there. Furious, the « liberal hawks » and the neo-conservatives are demanding a relaunch of the military budget, and have succeeded in stopping the withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan.

In the most bizarre fashion, the Atlantist commentators who are witnessing the out-distancing of US military power are now denouncing the dangers of Russian imperialism [5]. And yet Russia is only acting to save the Syrian People, and proposing that other states work in collaboration with them, while the United States, when they enjoyed military pre-eminence, imposed their economic system and destroyed a number of states.

We are obliged to note that the hesitant declarations by Washington, published during the Russian deployment before the offensive, should not be interpreted as a slow political adaptation of official rhetoric, but should be understood for what they actually reveal – the fact that the Pentagon did not know the terrain. It had become deaf and blind.

A system of generalised jamming
We know, since the incident of the USS Donald Cook in the Black Sea on the 12th April 2014, that the Russian Air Force has at its disposition a weapon which enables it to jam all radars, all control circuits, all systems for the transmission of information, etc. [6]. Since the beginning of its military deployment, Russia had installed a jamming centre at Hmeymim, to the North of Latakia. Then, suddenly, the USS Donald Cook incident occurred, but this time within a perimeter of 300 kilometres – which includes the NATO base at Incirlik (Turkey). And this is still going on. Because the event happened during a sand-storm of historical proportions, the Pentagon first thought its measuring equipment had malfunctioned, but then discovered that it had been jammed. Completely.

Modern conventional warfare is based on what is known as « C4i » - an acronym which corresponds to the English terms « Command », « Control », « Communications », « Computer » and « intelligence ». The satellites, planes and drones, ships and submarines, tanks and now even the combatants themselves, are all connected to one another by a system of permanent communication, which enables the Chiefs of Staff to oversee and command the fighting more efficiently. It is this entire system - NATO’s nervous system – which is presently jammed in Syria and part of Turkey.

According to the Romanian expert Valentin Vasilescu, Russia has installed several Krasukha-4, equipped its planes with SAP-518/ SPS-171 jamming equipment (like the plane that overflew the USS Donald Cook), and its helicopters with the Richag-AV system. Besides this, it is using the spy-ship Priazovye (Project 864 Vishnya class, to use NATO terminology), in the Mediterranean [7].

It seems that Russia has agreed not to interfere with Israëli communications – a US preserve – which means that it will not deploy its jamming system in South Syria.

Russian planes have enjoyed the privilege of violating Turkish air space many times. Their purpose was not to measure the reaction time of the Turkish Air Force, but to verify the efficiency of their jamming capabililies in the area concerned, and also to keep an eye the installations which are at the disposition of the jihadists in Turkey.

High-performance Cruise missiles
Russia has used several new weapons, like the 26 stealth (or LO technology) cruise missiles (3M-14T Kaliber-NK), equivalent to the American RGM/UGM-109E Tomahawk [8]. Fired by its fleet in the Caspian Sea – with no military necessity – they reached and destroyed 11 targets situated at 1,500 kilometres distance, in the non-jammed area – so that NATO could appreciate their performance. These missiles crossed Iranian and Iraqi air space at an altitude varying between 50 and 100 metres, depending on the terrain, and flying just four kilometres away from a US drone. None of them were lost, compared to US missiles, which have a margin of error beteen 5 % and 10 %, depending on the models [9]. At the same time, this salvo demonstrated the waste of the incredible sums of money spent on the useless « anti-missile shield » built by the Pentagon around Russia –even though it was officially intended for protection against Iranian launch sites.

Taking into account that these missiles can be fired from submarines situated anywhere in the oceans, and that they can transport nuclear warheads, the Russians have clearly made up for their delay as far as launchers are concerned.

Finally, in the case of a nuclear confrontation, the Russian Federation would be destroyed by the United States – and vice versa – but would win in the case of a conventional war.

Only the Russians and the Syrians are capable of evaluating the situation on the ground. All the other military information from other sources, including the jihadists, are without foundation, since only Russia and Syria have an overall picture of the terrain. Moscow and Damascus intend to profit as far as possible from their advantage, and are therefore keeping their operations secret.

From the official communiqués and the confidences of certain officers, we may conclude that at least 5,000 jihadists have been killed, including several leaders of Ahrar el-Sham, al-Qaïda and the Islamic Emirate. At least 10,000 mercenaries have fled to Turkey, Iraq and Jordan. The Syrian Arab Army and Hezbollah have re-captured the area without waiting for the promised Iranian reinforcements.

The bombing campaign should end by the Orthodox Christmas. The question which will then have to be answered is whether or not Russia will be authorised to finish its job by pursuing the jihadists who have found refuge in Turkey, Iraq and Jordan. Failing this, Syria will have been saved, but the problem will still not have been resolved. The Muslim Brotherhood will not fail to seek revenge, and the United States will not fail to use them again against other targets.

:lol: Alex Jones didn't have an article to post on the topic?
 
About the article, 5000 jihadists killed sound like a good amount but it´s worrying that 10000 are now in other countries, probably prepared to join again another militia.
About who would win a war, I read a couple of months ago a book written for an (american) expert in geopolitics(George Friedman) explaining the next 100 years.Among other things I was struck by what he said about American naval power, perhaps I exaggerate but I think that he wrote that was almost as strong as all the great powers together, giving them a unique advantage.
 
About the article, 5000 jihadists killed sound like a good amount but it´s worrying that 10000 are now in other countries, probably prepared to join again another militia.
About who would win a war, I read a couple of months ago a book written for an (american) expert in geopolitics(George Friedman) explaining the next 100 years.Among other things I was struck by what he said about American naval power, perhaps I exaggerate but I think that he wrote that was almost as strong as all the great powers together, giving them a unique advantage.

Technically true, but the Chinese for one have been developing carrier-busting ballistic missiles which would render them obsolete overnight. In much the same way as British battleships were rendered obsolete by aircraft carriers. I wouldn't underestimate Russia's abilities on this either. In the future carriers are likely to be a target rather than an asset.
 
Carrier groups are usually equipped with enough firepower to repel any threats, including the likes of patriot missiles, subs, and air power. It would be hard to overcome that if they have water and air superiority, as well as anti-missile technology.