War Against ISIS

Or from another perspective the Russians are making the same mistakes as the US and it's allies before.

Meddle in the Middle East on the cheap and expect the problems to basically resolve themselves if one just kills enough bad guys...

I for one am not seeing the Syria coming to rest anytime soon. And even if the Russians invest enough forces to help Assad reconquer it's former fiefdome, which they seem reluctant to do especialky when it comes to ground forces, it will result in a shattered Syrian state with a bleak future. Assad will go on a bloody witch hunt of epic proportions in order to keep the lid on the rebellion and the Russians won't even provide a fraction of the money needed to rebuild the country.

The roots for another bloody rebellion or coup or fracture will already be planted.

But hey, at least they have shown that they can be as dumb as the west when it comes to meddling in the middle east.

Waylander said:

Or from another perspective the Russians are making the same mistakes as the US and it's allies before.

Meddle in the Middle East on the cheap and expect the problems to basically resolve themselves if one just kills enough bad guys...

I for one am not seeing the Syria coming to rest anytime soon. And even if the Russians invest enough forces to help Assad reconquer it's former fiefdome, which they seem reluctant to do especialky when it comes to ground forces, it will result in a shattered Syrian state with a bleak future. Assad will go on a bloody witch hunt of epic proportions in order to keep the lid on the rebellion and the Russians won't even provide a fraction of the money needed to rebuild the country.

The roots for another bloody rebellion or coup or fracture will already be planted.

But hey, at least they have shown that they can be as dumb as the west when it comes to meddling in the middle east.

Click to expand...

Well there's a few questions. Does Russia seek to really defeat ISIS? Or to make sure Assad's regime is stable and on the right side of the anti-ISIS bandwagon? Russia's support of the anti-ISIS push on Tabka was limited. And their biggest commitments have been to anti-rebel efforts in Latakia and Idlib.

Russia is not interested in Daesh anymore as they get pounded a bit when they come too close to delivering a heavy punch to the regime like when the Assad forces pulled their better formations (Tiger Force, Desert Hawks) from the Palmyra area and the NDF, militias and lesser SAA formations hot their behinds handed to them by Daesh.

Russias main objective is preserving Assad and to that aim they bomb everybody who threatens his core lands and/or who poses a remotely credible fraction for international peace talks.

But IMHO Russia shys away from committing the necessary forces, especially land forces, which are necessary for bringing the country back under Assad's control.

And even if that is achieved, for example by a fresh influx of shia militias from Iraq, what is the follow on plan? Hope for Assad's iron fist to hold it all together? Team Sunni won't stand by idly and let the Iranians form their Shia crescent from the levante to the gulf. The cauldron will keep on boiling. And Russia does the same as the West has done before. Bomb some people and propping up some others without comitting the necessary, and massive, forces and treasures to bring real and lasting change to the region or even really securing their pet dictator.

The western powers meddling was about toppling regimes and having to rebuild countries. Russia just supports its ally so that in a future federal Syria they have influence.

The Western powers are the ones affected by mass immigration and increased terrorism. They are under more pressure to get rid of the jihadis than Russia.

I think Putin just didn't want Assad toppled and then the USA installing some puppet government of their lackeys and then deploying troops to help this government take control from jihadis. Because then he would totally lose influence in Syria, he would have no bases there, no weapon exports etc.

Putin has elevated Russia back to the status of a superpower. People are still wondering how Russia can pay for this deployment, as if it was still some soviet relic hahah! At this point I would be feeling pretty good if I was a Putin ally.

Russia has also been gifting equipment to Iraq (su-25 right?)

They are paying out of their pockets which got filled by high oil and gas prices and which are now getting depleted. They are not paying by having a competitive and well rounded economy. Speaking of being a superpower is a bit strange for a country which has a GDP (PPP) smaller than Germany. Spending more on defense and being more willing to use ones military doesn't make a superpower.

As for just supporting their ally. What difference does it make? They are keeping a bloody dictator alive (not that most of the rebels are any better) without adressing the fundamental problems of Syria or the region. And I bet without having a longlasting effect.

But RUSSIA STRONK! The irony is that they are doing the same sh** they weren't shy of criticising the West for since ages.

Waylander said:

Russia is not interested in Daesh anymore as they get pounded a bit when they come too close to delivering a heavy punch to the regime like when the Assad forces pulled their better formations (Tiger Force, Desert Hawks) from the Palmyra area and the NDF, militias and lesser SAA formations hot their behinds handed to them by Daesh.

Russias main objective is preserving Assad and to that aim they bomb everybody who threatens his core lands and/or who poses a remotely credible fraction for international peace talks.

But IMHO Russia shys away from committing the necessary forces, especially land forces, which are necessary for bringing the country back under Assad's control.

And even if that is achieved, for example by a fresh influx of shia militias from Iraq, what is the follow on plan? Hope for Assad's iron fist to hold it all together? Team Sunni won't stand by idly and let the Iranians form their Shia crescent from the levante to the gulf. The cauldron will keep on boiling. And Russia does the same as the West has done before. Bomb some people and propping up some others without comitting the necessary, and massive, forces and treasures to bring real and lasting change to the region or even really securing their pet dictator.

Click to expand...

I don't think they have a follow-on plan. I think the intent is to keep Assad sitting in some sort of power while the situation resolves itself. Even if Assad is left with little more them Alawistan, Russia still keeps their bases.

Waylander said:

They are paying out of their pockets which got filled by high oil and gas prices and which are now getting depleted. They are not paying by having a competitive and well rounded economy. Speaking of being a superpower is a bit strange for a country which has a GDP (PPP) smaller than Germany. Spending more on defense and being more willing to use ones military doesn't make a superpower.

Click to expand...

It depends on who does the math, especially since russia has a huge shadow sector (estimated from 200-500 mil USD nominal). But even if we say it's smaller, this puts Russia in a very small club, with China in #1, then USA, Japan, India, Germany, and followed by Russia. I wouldn't call Russia a super power, but their economy isn't just resource exports either. The view that Russia is a bigger colder Saudi Arabia with nukes, just doesn't hold true, and the last couple of years have shown that.

As for just supporting their ally. What difference does it make? They are keeping a bloody dictator alive (not that most of the rebels are any better) without adressing the fundamental problems of Syria or the region. And I bet without having a longlasting effect.

Click to expand...

I think the difference here is the basing agreement. They were ready to ditch Assad but after running around the entire Eastern Mediterranean, they best they could do was a victualing agreement with Cyprus. A Russian Mediterranean base means you can't shut the Russian Navy in the Black sea, and don't have to wait for the Northern Fleet or the Baltic Fleet to get there. And with the Suez right there, it also gives easy access to the Middle East.

But RUSSIA STRONK! The irony is that they are doing the same sh** they weren't shy of criticising the West for since ages.

Click to expand...

It's a way to test new weapons and tactics, practice projecting force, and put Russia back at the negotiating table after the ostracism they faced over the Ukraine issue. You have to look at goals beyond just the Syrian situation.

Update.

The fighting around Aleppo has basically stabilized, with no significant changes. Meat-grinder urban combat continues but now that Iraq militias and Hezbollah are on the scene, the SAA is holding their ground and even regaining some. While technically the ring around Aleppo is broken, no clear supply route into the rebel-held portion of the city exists.

Битва за Ðлеппо. 18.08.2016 - Colonel Cassad

The US is pulling their nukes out of Turkey, into Romania, for now.

Про вывоз Ñдерного Ð¾Ñ€ÑƒÐ¶Ð¸Ñ Ð¸Ð· Турции - Colonel Cassad

Meanwhile minor clashes between the SAA and the Kurds have escalated, in northern Syria, leading to SAA airstrikes against the Kurds. Given the making-nice between the Turks and the Russo-Iranian coalition, this conflict could put Assad and the Kurds on different sides, though previously they were working together.

ОбоÑтрение в Ñеверной Сирии - Colonel Cassad

Tu-22M3s and Su-34 have carried out airstrikes around Deyr-ez-Zor. This comes after the rebasing of at least two Su-34s two Iran.

https://aftershock.news/?q=node/427135
Бомбардировки в провинции Дейр-Ñз-Зор - Colonel Cassad
Пополнение - Берлога Бронемедведа

An interesting photo-set of Russian sappers in Palmyra.

Саперы в Пальмире - Ð”ÐµÐ½Ð¸Ñ ÐœÐ¾ÐºÑ€ÑƒÑˆÐ¸Ð½

The Russian AC may head to Syria earlier the originally planned (original date was Oct 20th). It will be accompanied by a 1155 destroyer, a fleet tug, and a tanker.

Ðу что, поехали? - Берлога Бронемедведа

Sure Russia is no small country but my point was that calling it a superpower is way beyoind reality.

I am also sceptical of the basing rights. It's not as if Tartus was a sprawling hive of activity before this mess started. And NATOs superiority in the Med is so overhelming that some ships and planes in Syria will get annhilated quickly anyway in case of a big conflict with the rest of the black sea forces bottled up either way.

And the lack of a longtime plan and the unwillingness to commit serious resources will lead to the situation staying volatile for a long long time.

The training effect is defenitely there. I somewhere read that by now Russia has circled lots of it's active pilots through Syria and with Syria and Ukraine the artillery corps should have gained lots of real life experience by now. The same goes for a small part of their elite formations (and all these "volunteers" in Donbass).

It is also true that it brings another bargain chip to the table.

What riles me up are the people pretending this is something else than a heavy handed imperial powerplay of which Russia accused the West oh so often.

Waylander said:

Sure Russia is no small country but my point was that calling it a superpower is way beyoind reality.

Click to expand...

Agreed.

I am also sceptical of the basing rights. It's not as if Tartus was a sprawling hive of activity before this mess started. And NATOs superiority in the Med is so overhelming that some ships and planes in Syria will get annhilated quickly anyway in case of a big conflict with the rest of the black sea forces bottled up either way.

Click to expand...

It's a timing issue. Russia started looking for a Mediterranean base just as Syria descended into their civil war. And it will be some time before Tartus is a sprawling hive of activity yet. Especially with the cancellation of the Mistrals and the second 11356 trio.

And the lack of a longtime plan and the unwillingness to commit serious resources will lead to the situation staying volatile for a long long time.

Click to expand...

I mean, if the greens are defeated in Idlib, it will be mostly a case of holding the wall against ISIS, and mopping up pockets in the south.

The training effect is defenitely there. I somewhere read that by now Russia has circled lots of it's active pilots through Syria and with Syria and Ukraine the artillery corps should have gained lots of real life experience by now. The same goes for a small part of their elite formations (and all these "volunteers" in Donbass).

It is also true that it brings another bargain chip to the table.

Click to expand...

They just did another Su-30SM rotation. Illustrating your point nicely.

What riles me up are the people pretending this is something else than a heavy handed imperial powerplay of which Russia accused the West oh so often.

Click to expand...

Well the Russian elites spent over a decade protesting western imperialism with no success, as the Libyan clusterf*ck demonstrated. So now they decided to have a hand at it themselves, having built up their military.

Some signs here of a possible escalation. US stepping in to show support for the Kurds after they were apparently bombed by the Syrian air force.

https://www.rt.com/usa/356527-us-syria-jets-pentagon/

Obviously showing that they are prepared to defend their special forces on the ground who are working with the Kurds.

More here:

http://www.voanews.com/a/civilians-...ve-bombarded-by-syrian-warplanes/3472133.html

Waylander said:

I am also sceptical of the basing rights. It's not as if Tartus was a sprawling hive of activity before this mess started. And NATOs superiority in the Med is so overhelming that some ships and planes in Syria will get annhilated quickly anyway in case of a big conflict with the rest of the black sea forces bottled up either way.

And the lack of a longtime plan and the unwillingness to commit serious resources will lead to the situation staying volatile for a long long time.

The training effect is defenitely there. I somewhere read that by now Russia has circled lots of it's active pilots through Syria and with Syria and Ukraine the artillery corps should have gained lots of real life experience by now. The same goes for a small part of their elite formations (and all these "volunteers" in Donbass).

It is also true that it brings another bargain chip to the table.

What riles me up are the people pretending this is something else than a heavy handed imperial powerplay of which Russia accused the West oh so often.

Click to expand...

Interesting view Waylander and your post really bites to the truth, in expressing your argument.

You really beleive this is an Imperial play by the RF? Any permanent gains in Syria doesn't gain much, apart from propping an ally..

Interesting that you draw the 'training effect' both from the current Syrian conflict and to that of the frozen conflict in Crimea and E. Ukraine. In my view, they both draw on many parallels from a similar RF policy.

If this 'training effect' is important, what does that eventually lead to? For what purpose? merely testing new weapons & tactics in real-life war-based scenarios, across different environs? Raising the readiness standards across the forces?

The continual changing Turkish dynamic, will prove most interesting from these events.. Deep down, who can really trust Erdoğan?

Clashes between Kurds and the SAA Hasake continue. Syrian jets have been seen over the town despite earlier reports of them being forced away, and the YPG reportedly rejected a ceasefire with the SAA.

Ð¡Ð¸Ñ‚ÑƒÐ°Ñ†Ð¸Ñ Ð² ХаÑаке к 19.08.2016 - Colonel Cassad

Impressive shots of the retreating ISIS column from Manbij. Note they left under an agreement with the Kurds.

ОтÑтупление из Манбиджа - Colonel Cassad

Russia carried out additional cruise missile strikes, and has rebased Su-34s to Iran along with the Tu-22M3s.

Применение "Калибров" - Colonel Cassad

An ISIS cell has been found and liquidated in Iran.

Ð›Ð¸ÐºÐ²Ð¸Ð´Ð°Ñ†Ð¸Ñ Ð³Ñ€ÑƒÐ¿Ð¿Ñ‹ террориÑтов ИГ в иранÑком Керманшахе - Юрий ЛÑмин

A high-level Chinese general visited Syria to discuss aid and training programs.

Análisis Militares: China da un paso hacia el apoyo directo de Assad

Turkey will continue to play an important role in the conflict but in a changed manner and with a new friend : Russia. Turkey is also improving its relations with Iran. On another matter, I never knew that Jabhat al-Nusrah has more Syrians serving within its ranks compared to IS.

The Shias are winning in the Middle East – and it's all thanks to Russia | Voices | The Independent

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices...xistential-battle-victory-death-a7199441.html

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices...ng-is-changing-rebels-hope-that-a7187251.html

STURM said:

Turkey will continue to play an important role in the conflict but in a changed manner and with a new friend : Russia. Turkey is also improving its relations with Iran. On another matter, I never knew that Jabhat al-Nusrah has more Syrians serving within its ranks compared to IS.

The Shias are winning in the Middle East – and it's all thanks to Russia | Voices | The Independent

Every Syrian fighter is waging an existential battle that can only end in victory or death | Voices | The Independent

There are so many foreign backers in the Syrian war that nothing is changing – rebels hope that Hillary Clinton could change that | Voices | The Independent

Click to expand...

This all means very little. These nations are forming alliances out of desperation rather than strong principles. Turkey is a 'dizzy' nation just recovering from a major coup attempt and at this time is desperate for allies as is Russia who are attracting poor PR and criticism from every direction (sport, politics, war crimes etc).

In doing this Turkey are just aligning themselves with the rogue elements of the region and as we all know, alliances formed in haste are only likely to be temporary. Remember that Turkey has a Sunni majority. At least the western nations are holding fast to principles; the US for example backing off from supporting rebel groups if their alliances are towards terror groups.

Quite frankly I can't see any side coming out of this smelling of roses. As for Russia, almost completed a 12 month campaign now and no end in sight. Let us see where we are in another 3 years! You can bet that the Sunni factions will be reinforced in the near future.

Turkey *is* a rogue nation
And a NATO member of course. The other bedfellows of the USA are the definitive rogue nations of Saudi Arabia and co. And of course for the state of the Middle East one can directly blame the wars and actions of the USA and its allies. So I grinned when you wrote that Turkey joined the rogue alliance!

And why are you rubbing your hands together that the russian participation has no end in sight? Maybe your country isn't affected by the refugee wave or you don't care about terrorism or about the death toll? I have noticed many people expressing bitter schadenfreude over the russians' economic expenditure in Syria and I find it bizarre.

Russia is an enemy of the West, anything that inhibits it is a positive development in the same way the Soviets viewed Vietnam and the West viewed the Soviet/Afghan conflict.

-----

It will be interesting to see what the Syrian Kurds long term plan is. They are secure so long as US air-support is in place but that can't last forever. Their best bet would seem to be formally siding with Assad once IS is closer to defeat.

gazzzwp said:

This all means very little. These nations are forming alliances rather than strong principles.

Click to expand...

These new alliances are significant; irrespective of whether they're ''out of desperation'' and not based on ''strong principles''. BTW, what existing alliances - with regards to Syria - are of ''strong principles''?

gazzzwp said:

At least the western nations are holding fast to principles; the US for example backing off from supporting rebel groups if their alliances are towards terror groups.

Click to expand...

If Western policy towards the Middle East was based on principles [as you claim]; rather than self-interest, then maybe the Middle East wouldn't be such in a mess now.

gazzzwp said:

As for Russia, almost completed a 12 month campaign now and no end in sight. Let us see where we are in another 3 years!

Click to expand...

What about Afghanistan? It's 2016; there's still a very weak central government in Kabul; not only are the Talibs still there [despite all the efforts to defeat them] but also IS. Russia off course didn't get involved in Syria because it had the interests of the Syrian people at heart but neither did the West. if Russia hadn't entered the picture and it was only the West that was involved; would we be closer in achieving the objective of defeating IS?

Goknub said:

Russia is an enemy of the West, anything that inhibits it is a positive development in the same way the Soviets viewed Vietnam and the West viewed the Soviet/Afghan conflict.

Click to expand...

If Russia hadn't entered the picture when it did; IS would have gained more ground in Syria; how would that have benefited the West? At least Russia has realistic goals, that of defeating IS before talking about who replaces Assad. The West in contrast insisted that Assad must go before even having someone who could replace him and also insisted he must go whether or not IS has been defeated. Assad leaving prematurely would leave a void that only IS can fill and it would have been the Syrian people who will pay the price; not western policy makers. The reality is that at present, the only anti-Assad group strong enough to replace Assad is IS; not any of the ''moderates'' we heard so much about. Some of whom by the way weren't as ''moderate'' or as numerous as we were told.

Oh, I would actually agree that Russia's intervention in Syria was a good thing. Assad seemed to be one of the more moderate leaders in the Middle East, at least by the standards of the region. Unfortunately he's a Russian/Iranian ally which means it's a "good thing" if he emerges from this conflict weakened. That the West isn't bombing the Syrian army is a good sign that Assad remaining in power isn't that big of an issue.

The fact that the U.S. has had talks with Russia on how both can cooperate shows that not only is Russia a significant player in the region but also has a positive role to play. Assad being an Iranian ally is precisely why the Gulf Sunni states are so eager to get rid of him; it's all part of the Cold War being fought between Shia Iran and various Sunni countries led by Saudi. Syria off course was the only Arab ally Iran had during its war against Saddam. The question really is what kind of Syria will emerge after Assad has left and IS is defeated.