War Against ISIS

[Feanor]

Update.

Iranian troops are being redeployed to Syria (not advisers, but troops) to help with an upcoming major offensive.

Слухи о готовÑщемÑÑ Ð½Ð°Ñтуплении правительÑтвенных Ñил в Сирии.. - Юрий ЛÑмин

Russian airstrikes continue using guided and unguided munitions, including KAB-500S satellite guided bombs. UAVs are being used for BDA, as well as recon, and the Su-34s are participating in the strikes. ISIS command posts and storage bunkers are the main targets, but a car bomb factory was also hit.

As of right now they're not bombing populated areas, and most of the munitions are still unguided.

СирийÑкое. Итоги Ð´Ð½Ñ - Ð”ÐµÐ½Ð¸Ñ ÐœÐ¾ÐºÑ€ÑƒÑˆÐ¸Ð½
Вторые Ñутки роÑÑийÑкой военной операции в Сирии - bmpd
Ðичего Ñтранного в Ñтом видео не находите? - Добро пожаловать в журнал РоÑтовÑкого Орла
Ðемного про инÑтрументы - Берлога Бронемедведа
БÐО на ÐБ "ЛатакиÑ" - Берлога Бронемедведа
Первое видео Су-34 на авиабазе в Латакии - Юрий ЛÑмин
Первый Ñтап бомбардировок иÑламиÑтов в Сирии ВВС РФ - Военный Блог
Минобороны выложило видео ударов по позициÑм боевиков в Сирии - Ð”ÐµÐ½Ð¸Ñ ÐœÐ¾ÐºÑ€ÑƒÑˆÐ¸Ð½
Взрывы под землёй - Военный Блог

Russian base security will be provided by marines (810th Bde most likely) troops from the 7th VDV, and SpetzNaz. Tankers from the Baltic, Northern, and Black Sea Fleets will be used to get fuel to the aircraft. A btln tactical group of marines is confirmed.

И морпехам работа нашлаÑÑŒ - Берлога Бронемедведа
СирийÑÐºÐ°Ñ Ð»Ð¾Ð³Ð¸Ñтика - Ð”ÐµÐ½Ð¸Ñ ÐœÐ¾ÐºÑ€ÑƒÑˆÐ¸Ð½
КоличеÑтвенный ÑоÑтав группировки ВС РФ в Сирии - Ð”ÐµÐ½Ð¸Ñ ÐœÐ¾ÐºÑ€ÑƒÑˆÐ¸Ð½

Russian officials confirm willingness to strike targets in Iraq, should the Iraqi government request it.

Íîâîñòè NEWSru.com :: Âëàñòè Ðîññèîçìîæíîñòü áîìáåæêè Èðàêà
Ðу а что? Мы и в Ираке можем помочь... - Берлога Бронемедведа

US and Russia continue talks on how to avoid incidents over Syria. Lavrov claims Russia only bombed ISIS positions.

Íîâîñòè NEWSru.com :: Ðîññèÿ è ÑØÀ îáñóäèëè, êàê íå ìåøàòü äðóã äðóãó ïðè áîìáàðäèðîâêàõ ÈÃ â Ñèðèè
Íîâîñòè NEWSru.com :: Ëàâðîâ íà ïåðåãîâîðàõ ñ Êåððè çàÿâèë, ÷òî ÐÔ â Ñèðèè áîìáèëà òîëüêî ïîçèöèè ÈÃ

Meanwhile Saudi Arabia accuses Russia of intentionally bombing holy sites, and mosques.

СаудовÑÐºÐ°Ñ ÐÑ€Ð°Ð²Ð¸Ñ Ð¾Ð±Ð²Ð¸Ð½Ñет: РоÑÑÐ¸Ñ ÑƒÐ½Ð¸Ñ‡Ñ‚Ð¾Ð¶Ð°ÐµÑ‚ в Сирии иÑламÑкие ÑвÑтыни - Военный Блог

An interesting map of alleged Russian air strikes and positions. Not sure how accurate the locations actually are.

http://understandingwar.org/sites/default/files/Russian Airstrikes 30 SEPT 2015-1_6.png

 

[gazzzwp]

The words "accurate assessment" followed by a link to Fox News.

Seriously, media like Fox is useless as a source of information. Even the CNN and BBC are barely reliable when it comes to basic facts. Analysis is another story entirely.

It was not a news clip. It was an assessment of the situation from a military adviser. I wonder if you looked at it? 3

 

[gf0012-aust]

It was not a news clip. It was an assessment of the situation from a military adviser. I wonder if you looked at it? 3

I thought that the ex Col bought in to comment was relatively on the money.

 

[gazzzwp]

I thought that the ex Col bought in to comment was relatively on the money.

I thought he was spot on.

Looks like a decision is imminent regarding whether the US will defend the rebels or not:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...ebels-against-russian-airstrikes-it-wont-say/

Personally I don't think they have a choice. If they don't the world will slide into anarchy anyway with an over assertive Russia.

So how far away are the F22's? Are any F35's combat ready? How good will the F15's and F16's be in this theatre against a capable enemy?

We may soon find out.

 

[gazzzwp]

Is it true that China are going to join the Russian coalition?

Chinese troops to join Russian marines in Syria soon, says report

Now what?

 

[A.V. Berg]

If they don't the world will slide into anarchy anyway with an over assertive Russia

I don't see any causal links between an assertive Russia and world anarchy. Middle East became a train-wreck largely due to Western interference. Soviet/Russian allies in the region have all been secular regimes which, whilst brutal and corrupt, allowed much greater freedom from conservative forms of Islam than the regimes which replaced them. Iran would be an exception but then again, its relationship with Russia is better defined as marriage of convenience rather than alliance.

US on the other hand, backs a Saudi Regime which this year, beheaded twice more people than ISIS for similar types of crimes: adultery and sorcery. Newsweek last year reported that public beheadings are the only forms public entertainment in the Kingdom apart from soccer. Similarly, US supports Bahrain which, according to The Guardian, gave 15 year jail terms to doctors who treated demostrators shot by soldiers in a pro-democracy rally.

There is absolutely no reliable evidence that rebels fighting Assad are either democratic or have broad grass-roots support. The case of of Libya was very telling in this regard: Qaddaffi's enemies ended up caring only about their tribal affiliations and/or committed to militant politics. Fox News may have told us that the rebels were freedom-loving but the shambles which is now Libya suggest otherwise.

 

[gf0012-aust]

Fox News may have told us that the rebels were freedom-loving but the shambles which is now Libya suggest otherwise.

part of the analytical process is to look at the merits of the argument in isolation of the entity that bought them in for 5 minutes of analysis - in the Foxnews case I didn't abide by the line and tone of questioning as it lacked credibility - however the Col bought in as a talking head did have valid points

there are similar issues with the press over here - the media outlet can take a very distinct view which can often be nowhere near what the talking head is stating

I do think that there is a parallel between Putin stepping into a vacuum and filling the space - and the irony of Daesh forming up to step into the various vacuums caused by a rapid american withdrawal from the MEAO once Obama got in.

This is despite the fact that the military was telling obama and state that if you do a withdrawal with indecent haste then you will create a power vacuum where local players will step in and cause havoc. This was the advice that Kilkullen was giving on the changing of the POTUS guard - but he and other analysts and uniforms were immediately sidelined as they were not fitting into the Govts narrative of getting forces out ASAP

IMO, we're seeing the consequences of political ideology coming home to roost.

As Colin Powell said, once you do this you own it - and he wasn't just talking about winning a military victory - he was talking about the fact that if you take military action then be prepared inherit the political and regional consequences

Its funny how the civilian executive can think that this the area of their expertise, ignore military advice because its doesn't dovetail into the executives narrative - and then see that exactly what the military predicted has happened.

Daesh stepped into a vacuum assisted by an executive bent on sticking to the electorral mantra of bringing people home

Russia has stepped into a MEAO vacuum that was fundamentally assisted by a US President who wanted to get out of ongoing wars, but ignored the advice that whether he liked it or not this was going to be a war that had the potential to run for generations - I have seen references which were considered thoughts by sensible people who argue that this is the next 100 year war.

Russia has its own real politik at play as well, and without wanting to be flippant, he must have the current POTUS on the xmas card list for handing him opportunity.

that doesn't mean that the russians have pulled the rabbit out of the hat - I think they've also made a rod for their back

one of the reasons why I have doubts about the chinese coming into the ME is because I think they've taken the long view and can see that going in opens a can of worms with the Urghyrs etc...

quite frankly, the whole thing is a cluster. Unfort I think this is going to be a generational war

 

[Ranger25]

I agree, the Chineses will stand and watch, I can see them sending military observers to take away lessons learned. I cannot find any credible articles defining any chinese movements.

Cannot agree more about the hasty US withdrawal has created this entire situation.


Has anyone heard what ADA systems the Russians have fielded for airbase protection? Pantsir S-1 for close in I understand but anything longer range?

 

[John Fedup]

Cannot agree more about the hasty US withdrawal has created this entire situation.

That is true. It is also true that the US hasty regime change of Saddam created this entire situation.

 

[Ranger25]

That is true. It is also true that the US hasty regime change of Saddam created this entire situation.

We could spend the rest of our lives debating the pros and cons of that one for sure


The Vacuum exists worldwide IMO, ME, Asia, EU and everyone is lining up to step into it creating a very challenging worldwide security situation

 

[gazzzwp]

If they don't the world will slide into anarchy anyway with an over assertive Russia]

I don't see any causal links between an assertive Russia and world anarchy. Middle East became a train-wreck largely due to Western interference.

1) The fact that they bulldozed their way into the E Ukraine wrecking the lives of thousands, in a country that largely wanted to be free from the old poverty stricken and corrupt Soviet masters? Without even encouraging a democratic process first?

2) The fact that they claim that they are in Syria to deal with ISIL when in fact no raids on ISIL have yet been confirmed? Moving in on a false pretense?

3) Flying old nuclear bombers close to US and NATO territory with transponders turned off risking mid air collisions with passenger flights?

Erm let me see if what you are claiming is true.:dance2

 

[John Fedup]

We could spend the rest of our lives debating the pros and cons of that one for sure


The Vacuum exists worldwide IMO, ME, Asia, EU and everyone is lining up to step into it creating a very challenging worldwide security situation

It is indeed a challenging security situation. The US and the coalition of the willing stepped into Afghanistan and Iraq in 2003. Russia stepped into Afghanistan in 1979. Today everyone seems to be falling in as opposed to stepping in the case of the ME. Libya was somewhere in between. The one difference about Syria is the Russians have a client they can work with and more or less trust. The only decent client the West has (the Kurds) is being attacked by one of its own (Turkey).

 

[barney41]

This article posits the possible motives behind the recent dramatic developments in the region. It does seem apparent that Russia and Iran are engaged in an ambitious gambit to assert themselves as the key actors in the ongoing drama and not mere supporting cast. The bjg question is how the US and NATO will respond and if Israel gets dragged into the conflict.


http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-...rgets-iran-readies-ground-invasions-while-sau

Mid-East Coup: As Russia Pounds Militant Targets, Iran Readies Ground Invasions While Saudis Panic

hat should be obvious here is that this is a coordinated plan.

The Kremlin has effectively agreed to bring the might of the Russian air force to bear on Assad’s opponents in Syria and on Sunni militants in Iraq in support of Iranian ground troops and because the US and its allies have failed so miserably in terms of fielding anti-Assad rebels who don't turn out to be extremists, Putin gets to pitch the whole thing as a "war on terror." It would be difficult to design a more elegant power play...


It would be difficult to overstate the significance of what appears to be going on here. This is nothing short of a Middle Eastern coup, as Iran looks to displace Saudi Arabia as the regional power broker and as Russia looks to supplant the US as the superpower puppet master.

Do not expect Saudi Arabia and Israel to remain on the sidelines here.

If Russia ends up bolstering Iran's position in Syria (by expanding Hezbollah's influence and capabilities) and if the Russian air force effectively takes control of Iraq thus allowing Iran to exert a greater influence over the government in Baghdad, the fragile balance of power that has existed in the region will be turned on its head and in the event this plays out, one should not expect Washington, Riyadh, Jerusalem, and London to simply go gentle into that good night.

 

[John Fedup]

This article posits the possible motives behind the recent dramatic developments in the region. It does seem apparent that Russia and Iran are engaged in an ambitious gambit to assert themselves as the key actors in the ongoing drama and not mere supporting cast. The bjg question is how the US and NATO will respond and if Israel gets dragged into the conflict.


http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-...rgets-iran-readies-ground-invasions-while-sau

Mid-East Coup: As Russia Pounds Militant Targets, Iran Readies Ground Invasions While Saudis Panic

hat should be obvious here is that this is a coordinated plan.

The Kremlin has effectively agreed to bring the might of the Russian air force to bear on Assad’s opponents in Syria and on Sunni militants in Iraq in support of Iranian ground troops and because the US and its allies have failed so miserably in terms of fielding anti-Assad rebels who don't turn out to be extremists, Putin gets to pitch the whole thing as a "war on terror." It would be difficult to design a more elegant power play...


It would be difficult to overstate the significance of what appears to be going on here. This is nothing short of a Middle Eastern coup, as Iran looks to displace Saudi Arabia as the regional power broker and as Russia looks to supplant the US as the superpower puppet master.

Do not expect Saudi Arabia and Israel to remain on the sidelines here.

If Russia ends up bolstering Iran's position in Syria (by expanding Hezbollah's influence and capabilities) and if the Russian air force effectively takes control of Iraq thus allowing Iran to exert a greater influence over the government in Baghdad, the fragile balance of power that has existed in the region will be turned on its head and in the event this plays out, one should not expect Washington, Riyadh, Jerusalem, and London to simply go gentle into that good night.

Until the US gets somebody into the Whitehouse that knows the score, Russia and its clients will continue to make gains. None of the Western aligned players can do much without US leadership IMO except for Israel. If Israel sees itself in danger it will respond and world opinion( especially Obama) be damned.

 

[gazzzwp]

Until the US gets somebody into the Whitehouse that knows the score, Russia and its clients will continue to make gains. None of the Western aligned players can do much without US leadership IMO except for Israel. If Israel sees itself in danger it will respond and world opinion( especially Obama) be damned.

There is a notion that those who make a military commitment like this are the most vulnerable.

Even though it looks as if the US has been well and truly trumped by Russia, we must remember that it is Putin who has his credit card out and is taking the risks. The US if they want to can sit back and watch the show. There are two ends to every bar.

As long as Israel is left alone and is not at risk then one much well ask what have the west got to lose?

One thing is now for certain and that is we know that Russia is highly opportunistic, and will do absolutely anything to score points off the US.

The next few days promises to be highly interesting.:dbanana

 

[Blackshoe]

Looks like a decision is imminent regarding whether the US will defend the rebels or not:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...ebels-against-russian-airstrikes-it-wont-say/

Personally I don't think they have a choice.

You presume current US leadership cares. I don't think that's the case.

They're busy telling friendly media that this will lead to a quagmire for Russia and thus we'll win in the long run, which is appallingly obvious mirroring on the behalf of the administration.

 

[A.V. Berg]

1) The fact that they bulldozed their way into the E Ukraine wrecking the lives of thousands, in a country that largely wanted to be free from the old poverty stricken and corrupt Soviet masters? Without even encouraging a democratic process first?

2) The fact that they claim that they are in Syria to deal with ISIL when in fact no raids on ISIL have yet been confirmed? Moving in on a false pretense?

3) Flying old nuclear bombers close to US and NATO territory with transponders turned off risking mid air collisions with passenger flights?

Erm let me see if what you are claiming is true.:dance2

Well, firstly, remember that Ukrainian crisis was sparked off by an overthrow of an elected president by a Western-backed mob of far-rightists. Yanukovich was a horrible president and Russia's stance is often opportunistic. However, there is no mystery as to why Russians in Crimea and Russian-speaking Ukrainians in Donbass felt that Russia could protect them from Kiev. As the Ukraine thread on this forum will indicate, Ukraine is more corrupt than it ever was, especially compared to Soviet times when it was a major economy.

Secondly, Russian Tu 95 bombers are younger than their B 52 counterparts. US forces conduct more numerous sea and air nuclear deterrence patrols than Russia several times over. If you compare Ohio versus Delta III/ IV patrols per year, Russian navy will come out looking rather bleak. Similarly, state of readiness of American bomber fleet is incomparably higher. There is simply no way for Russians to fly far from NATO given that it is on its doorstep.

And thirdly, I would agree that there are no confirmations as to who gets bombed by the Russians. But that brings us back to the question as to who the rebels are. Frankly, given that Assad's army is the only large ground force fighting ISIS, anything which frees up his troops is probably worthwhile.

 

[A.V. Berg]

part of the analytical process is to look at the merits of the argument in isolation of the entity that bought them in for 5 minutes of analysis - in the Foxnews case I didn't abide by the line and tone of questioning as it lacked credibility - however the Col bought in as a talking head did have valid points

there are similar issues with the press over here - the media outlet can take a very distinct view which can often be nowhere near what the talking head is stating

I do think that there is a parallel between Putin stepping into a vacuum and filling the space - and the irony of Daesh forming up to step into the various vacuums caused by a rapid american withdrawal from the MEAO once Obama got in.

This is despite the fact that the military was telling obama and state that if you do a withdrawal with indecent haste then you will create a power vacuum where local players will step in cause havoc. This was the advice that Kilkullen was giving on the changing of the POTUS guard - but he and other analysts and uniforms were immediately sidelined as they were not fitting into the Govts narrative of getting forces out ASAP

IMO, we're seeing the consequences of political ideology coming home to roost.

As Colin Powell said, once you do this you own it - and he wasn't just talking about winning a military victory - he was talking about the fact that if you tale military action then be prepared inherit the political and regional consequences

Its funny how the civilian executive can think that this the area of their expertise, ignore military advice because its doesn't dovetail into the executives narrative - and then see that exactly what the military predicted has happened.

Daesh stepped into a vacuum assisted by an executive bent on sticking to the electorral mantra of bringing people home

Russia has stepped into a MEAO vacuum that was fundamentally assisted by a US President who wanted to get out of ongoing wars, but ignored the advice that whether he like it or not this was going to be a war that had the potential to run for generations - I have seen references which were considered thoughts by sensible people who argue that this is the next 100 year war.

Russia has its own real politik at play as well, and without wanting to be flippant, he must have the current POTUS on the xmas card list for handing him opportunity.

that doesn't mean that the russians have pulled the rabbit out of the hat - I think they've also made a rod for their back

one of the reasons why I have doubts about the chinese coming into the ME is because I think they've taken the long view and can see that going in opens a can of worms with the Urghyrs etc...

quite frankly, the whole thing is a cluster. Unfort I think this is going to be a generational war

I would completely agree. Sorry when I mentioned Fox News, that was not a criticism of the specific link posted here earlier but a criticism of a general tendency at delusional over-simplification which peppers the media. Even RT sometimes has interesting interviews once in a while.

I would also agree that realising that troops should not have been sent in is not a reason for their rapid pull-out. I almost think now that leaving Iraq, was a greater crime than occupying it in the first place.

 

[GermanHerman]

I'm not quite sure what to make out of this situation.

I find it uncomfortably easy to just follow the "Putin outwitted them all" narrative as the US appears to be the more dominant Force dictating pace and theatre in the conflict with russia.

In e.g. if there was a sure way to provoce a (military) reaction from russia it was to continue the efforts to integrate former USSR states like Ukraine and Georgia into NATO structures.

The failure to see this coming would be of 9/11 Dimensions and hard to swollow for any sane person. As the Ukraine conflict actually started years back with the orange revolution which was highly influenced and financed by western players the question arises about the legitimacy of the most recent coup in ukraine and how far the western involvement actually goes.

At first this might sound a bit far fatched, but looking at Lybia and the long established history of US Intelligence to mingle in the internal affairs of countrys around the world from assasinations of democratic elected presidents to out right orchestrating coup d'etats from south america to iran this is a question worth asking and even considering the US involvement in the events where minimal there can be no denial that there in fact was an active involvement of some form.

Same goes for the continued effort of the west to bring ukraine closer when Russia showed its willingness to defend its sphere of influence with military power and considering the strategic value of Crimea to the russian navy there was no way russia would just let it slide away.

Was this an provoced and calculated reaction by russia? How is this favorable to the US? In the long run russia will establish some sort of control over former ukrainien territory and keep its naval base but it has lost a buffer state and ukraine will most likely side with the west so that one can see how this is not the desired outcome for moscow but some sort of minimizing losses and consolidating.

This leads to the question how the situation in the ME arose and what the pontential outcomes are.

Daesh is the direct consequence of the decision to disband the iraqi army, who is responsible for this and how can it be unclear till today? This was such a huge factor in the whole outcome of the 2003 Campaign and no one ever actualy gave this orders?

Looking at the Arab Spring one has to notice how the revolution was over very fast in countrys close to the west like the UAE or Saudi Arabia while it seemed to be purpusfully fueled in other states like Lybia and very much so in Syria.

In Syria we have the Saudis as players and it would be overly simple to stage them as a US puppet as they are very well capable of their own plots and schemes, but once again the question rises what did the forces that side against bashar al assad actualy expect russia to do?

This is a vital russian navy base and a longtime ally to russia that the US openly try to remove from power while supporting groups with funding and weapons which would be considered terrorists if they would be in Saudi Arabia or Israel.

Some people argue that this is supposed to be Afghanistan 2.0 for russia and that might very well be so when one takes a look at the outcome of the american intervention in Iraq.

If russia is commited to a longterm mission and fails to achieve its objectives in a relativly short manner things could turn out ugly for them, binding forces and ressources in a theatre relativly far away from home and minimizing the threat to EU / NATO.


I know, this might all be far fetched but I dislike the over simplification of this whole situation and wanted to discuss maybe a different angle than the "opportunistic russia outsmarts short sighted obama". As said, the US seems to be the more active player in this dance and russia is reacting to the opportunitys the US offers or forces them into.

And that should be enough tinfoil-hat thoughts for me.

 

[Feanor]

It was not a news clip. It was an assessment of the situation from a military adviser. I wonder if you looked at it? 3

The adviser in question thinks that problem isn't that the Syrian opposition takes their US-supplied weapons and joins ISIS, but that Russia is bombing them. And this from Fox News. I'm not even surprised. This is exactly what I would expect from them. There's minimal analysis, and very few facts, a few conclusions, and buckets of opinion. I mean, this guy doesn't even bother to acknowledge that the US-trained opposition joins ISIS and other radicals voluntarily. The only example he cites involves al-Nusra attacking them. According to this guy Obama's policy is bad, so the US should do more of it. Train more rebels, get more involved with support for the same regimes, and of course at the same time oppose Russia more decisively. Traditional Republican non-sense.