The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
Current Commenter says:

Leave a Reply -


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenters to FollowHide Excerpts
By Authors Filter?
Andrei Martyanov Andrew J. Bacevich Andrew Joyce Andrew Napolitano Boyd D. Cathey Brad Griffin C.J. Hopkins Chanda Chisala Eamonn Fingleton Eric Margolis Fred Reed Godfree Roberts Gustavo Arellano Ilana Mercer Israel Shamir James Kirkpatrick James Petras James Thompson Jared Taylor JayMan John Derbyshire John Pilger Jonathan Revusky Kevin MacDonald Linh Dinh Michael Hoffman Michael Hudson Mike Whitney Nathan Cofnas Norman Finkelstein Pat Buchanan Patrick Cockburn Paul Craig Roberts Paul Gottfried Paul Kersey Peter Frost Peter Lee Philip Giraldi Philip Weiss Robert Weissberg Ron Paul Ron Unz Stephen J. Sniegoski The Saker Tom Engelhardt A. Graham Adam Hochschild Aedon Cassiel Ahmet Öncü Alexander Cockburn Alexander Hart Alfred McCoy Alison Rose Levy Alison Weir Anand Gopal Andre Damon Andrew Cockburn Andrew Fraser Andy Kroll Ann Jones Anonymous Anthony DiMaggio Ariel Dorfman Arlie Russell Hochschild Arno Develay Arnold Isaacs Artem Zagorodnov Astra Taylor Austen Layard Aviva Chomsky Ayman Fadel Barbara Ehrenreich Barbara Garson Barbara Myers Barry Lando Belle Chesler Beverly Gologorsky Bill Black Bill Moyers Bob Dreyfuss Bonnie Faulkner Brenton Sanderson Brett Redmayne-Titley Brian Dew Carl Horowitz Catherine Crump Charles Bausman Charles Goodhart Charles Wood Charlotteville Survivor Chase Madar Chris Hedges Chris Roberts Christian Appy Christopher DeGroot Chuck Spinney Coleen Rowley Cooper Sterling Craig Murray Dahr Jamail Dan E. Phillips Dan Sanchez Daniel McAdams Danny Sjursen Dave Kranzler Dave Lindorff David Barsamian David Bromwich David Chibo David Gordon David North David Vine David Walsh David William Pear Dean Baker Dennis Saffran Diana Johnstone Dilip Hiro Dirk Bezemer Ed Warner Edmund Connelly Eduardo Galeano Ellen Cantarow Ellen Packer Ellison Lodge Eric Draitser Eric Zuesse Erik Edstrom Erika Eichelberger Erin L. Thompson Eugene Girin F. Roger Devlin Franklin Lamb Frida Berrigan Friedrich Zauner Gabriel Black Gary Corseri Gary North Gary Younge Gene Tuttle George Albert George Bogdanich George Szamuely Georgianne Nienaber Glenn Greenwald Greg Grandin Greg Johnson Gregoire Chamayou Gregory Foster Gregory Hood Gregory Wilpert Guest Admin Hannah Appel Hans-Hermann Hoppe Harri Honkanen Henry Cockburn Hina Shamsi Howard Zinn Hubert Collins Hugh McInnish Ira Chernus Jack Kerwick Jack Rasmus Jack Ravenwood Jack Sen James Bovard James Carroll James Fulford Jane Lazarre Jared S. Baumeister Jason C. Ditz Jason Kessler Jay Stanley Jeff J. Brown Jeffrey Blankfort Jeffrey St. Clair Jen Marlowe Jeremiah Goulka Jeremy Cooper Jesse Mossman Jim Daniel Jim Kavanagh JoAnn Wypijewski Joe Lauria Johannes Wahlstrom John W. Dower John Feffer John Fund John Harrison Sims John Reid John Stauber John Taylor John V. Walsh John Williams Jon Else Jonathan Alan King Jonathan Anomaly Jonathan Rooper Jonathan Schell Joseph Kishore Juan Cole Judith Coburn K.R. Bolton Karel Van Wolferen Karen Greenberg Kelley Vlahos Kersasp D. Shekhdar Kevin Barrett Kevin Zeese Kshama Sawant Lance Welton Laura Gottesdiener Laura Poitras Laurent Guyénot Lawrence G. Proulx Leo Hohmann Linda Preston Logical Meme Lorraine Barlett M.G. Miles Mac Deford Maidhc O Cathail Malcolm Unwell Marcus Alethia Marcus Cicero Margaret Flowers Mark Danner Mark Engler Mark Perry Matt Parrott Mattea Kramer Matthew Harwood Matthew Richer Matthew Stevenson Max Blumenthal Max Denken Max North Maya Schenwar Michael Gould-Wartofsky Michael Schwartz Michael T. Klare Murray Polner Nan Levinson Naomi Oreskes Nate Terani Ned Stark Nelson Rosit Nicholas Stix Nick Kollerstrom Nick Turse Noam Chomsky Nomi Prins Patrick Cleburne Patrick Cloutier Paul Cochrane Paul Engler Paul Nachman Paul Nehlen Pepe Escobar Peter Brimelow Peter Gemma Peter Van Buren Pierre M. Sprey Pratap Chatterjee Publius Decius Mus Rajan Menon Ralph Nader Ramin Mazaheri Ramziya Zaripova Randy Shields Ray McGovern Razib Khan Rebecca Gordon Rebecca Solnit Richard Krushnic Richard Silverstein Rick Shenkman Rita Rozhkova Robert Baxter Robert Bonomo Robert Fisk Robert Lipsyte Robert Parry Robert Roth Robert S. Griffin Robert Scheer Robert Trivers Robin Eastman Abaya Roger Dooghy Ronald N. Neff Rory Fanning Sam Francis Sam Husseini Sayed Hasan Sharmini Peries Sheldon Richman Spencer Davenport Spencer Quinn Stefan Karganovic Steffen A. Woll Stephanie Savell Stephen J. Rossi Steve Fraser Steven Yates Sydney Schanberg Tanya Golash-Boza Ted Rall Theodore A. Postol Thierry Meyssan Thomas Frank Thomas O. Meehan Tim Shorrock Tim Weiner Tobias Langdon Todd E. Pierce Todd Gitlin Todd Miller Tom Piatak Tom Suarez Tom Sunic Tracy Rosenberg Virginia Dare Vladimir Brovkin Vox Day W. Patrick Lang Walter Block William Binney William DeBuys William Hartung William J. Astore Winslow T. Wheeler Ximena Ortiz Yan Shen
Nothing found
By Topics/Categories Filter?
2016 Election 9/11 Academia AIPAC Alt Right American Media American Military American Pravda Anti-Semitism Benjamin Netanyahu Blacks Britain China Conservative Movement Conspiracy Theories Deep State Donald Trump Economics Foreign Policy Hillary Clinton History Ideology Immigration IQ Iran ISIS Islam Israel Israel Lobby Israel/Palestine Jews Middle East Neocons Political Correctness Race/IQ Race/Ethnicity Republicans Russia Science Syria Terrorism Turkey Ukraine Vladimir Putin World War II 1971 War 2008 Election 2012 Election 2014 Election 23andMe 70th Anniversary Parade 75-0-25 Or Something A Farewell To Alms A. J. West A Troublesome Inheritance Aarab Barghouti Abc News Abdelhamid Abaaoud Abe Abe Foxman Abigail Marsh Abortion Abraham Lincoln Abu Ghraib Abu Zubaydah Academy Awards Acheivement Gap Acid Attacks Adam Schiff Addiction Adoptees Adoption Adoption Twins ADRA2b AEI Affective Empathy Affirmative Action Affordable Family Formation Afghanistan Africa African Americans African Genetics Africans Afrikaner Afrocentricism Agriculture Aha AIDS Ain't Nobody Got Time For That. Ainu Aircraft Carriers AirSea Battle Al Jazeera Al-Qaeda Alan Dershowitz Alan Macfarlane Albania Alberto Del Rosario Albion's Seed Alcohol Alcoholism Alexander Hamilton Alexandre Skirda Alexis De Tocqueville Algeria All Human Behavioral Traits Are Heritable All Traits Are Heritable Alpha Centauri Alpha Males Alt Left Altruism Amazon.com America The Beautiful American Atheists American Debt American Exceptionalism American Flag American Jews American Left American Legion American Nations American Nations American Prisons American Renaissance Americana Amerindians Amish Amish Quotient Amnesty Amnesty International Amoral Familialism Amy Chua Amygdala An Hbd Liberal Anaconda Anatoly Karlin Ancestry Ancient DNA Ancient Genetics Ancient Jews Ancient Near East Anders Breivik Andrei Nekrasov Andrew Jackson Androids Angela Stent Angelina Jolie Anglo-Saxons Ann Coulter Anne Buchanan Anne Heche Annual Country Reports On Terrorism Anthropology Antibiotics Antifa Antiquity Antiracism Antisocial Behavior Antiwar Movement Antonin Scalia Antonio Trillanes IV Anywhere But Here Apartheid Appalachia Appalachians Arab Christianity Arab Spring Arabs Archaic DNA Archaic Humans Arctic Humans Arctic Resources Argentina Argentina Default Armenians Army-McCarthy Hearings Arnon Milchan Art Arthur Jensen Artificial Intelligence As-Safir Ash Carter Ashkenazi Intelligence Ashkenazi Jews Ashraf Ghani Asia Asian Americans Asian Quotas Asians ASPM Assassinations Assimilation Assortative Mating Atheism Atlantic Council Attractiveness Attractiveness Australia Australian Aboriginals Austria Austro-Hungarian Empire Austronesians Autism Automation Avi Tuschman Avigdor Lieberman Ayodhhya Babri Masjid Baby Boom Baby Gap Baby Girl Jay Backlash Bacterial Vaginosis Bad Science Bahrain Balanced Polymorphism Balkans Baltimore Riots Bangladesh Banking Banking Industry Banking System Banks Barack H. Obama Barack Obama Barbara Comstock Bariatric Surgery Baseball Bashar Al-Assad Baumeister BDA BDS Movement Beauty Beauty Standards Behavior Genetics Behavioral Genetics Behaviorism Beijing Belgrade Embassy Bombing Believeing In Observational Studies Is Nuts Ben Cardin Ben Carson Benghazi Benjamin Cardin Berlin Wall Bernard Henri-Levy Bernard Lewis Bernie Madoff Bernie Sanders Bernies Sanders Beta Males BICOM Big Five Bilingual Education Bill 59 Bill Clinton Bill Kristol Bill Maher Billionaires Billy Graham Birds Of A Feather Birth Order Birth Rate Bisexuality Bisexuals BJP Black Americans Black Crime Black History Black Lives Matter Black Metal Black Muslims Black Panthers Black Women Attractiveness Blackface Blade Runner Blogging Blond Hair Blue Eyes Bmi Boasian Anthropology Boderlanders Boeing Boers Boiling Off Boko Haram Bolshevik Revolution Books Border Reivers Borderlander Borderlanders Boris Johnson Bosnia Boston Bomb Boston Marathon Bombing Bowe Bergdahl Boycott Divest And Sanction Boycott Divestment And Sanctions Brain Brain Scans Brain Size Brain Structure Brazil Breaking Down The Bullshit Breeder's Equation Bret Stephens Brexit Brian Boutwell Brian Resnick BRICs Brighter Brains Brighton Broken Hill Brown Eyes Bruce Jenner Bruce Lahn brussels Bryan Caplan BS Bundy Family Burakumin Burma Bush Administration C-section Cagots Caitlyn Jenner California Cambodia Cameron Russell Campaign Finance Campaign For Liberty Campus Rape Canada Canada Day Canadian Flag Canadians Cancer Candida Albicans Cannabis Capital Punishment Capitalism Captain Chicken Cardiovascular Disease Care Package Carl Sagan Carly Fiorina Caroline Glick Carroll Quigley Carry Me Back To Ole Virginny Carter Page Castes Catalonia Catholic Church Catholicism Catholics Causation Cavaliers CCTV Censorship Central Asia Chanda Chisala Charles Darwin Charles Krauthammer Charles Murray Charles Schumer Charleston Shooting Charlie Hebdo Charlie Rose Charlottesville Chechens Chechnya Cherlie Hebdo Child Abuse Child Labor Children Chimerism China/America China Stock Market Meltdown China Vietnam Chinese Chinese Communist Party Chinese Evolution Chinese Exclusion Act Chlamydia Chris Gown Chris Rock Chris Stringer Christian Fundamentalism Christianity Christmas Christopher Steele Chuck Chuck Hagel Chuck Schumer CIA Cinema Civil Liberties Civil Rights Civil War Civilian Deaths CJIA Clannishness Clans Clark-unz Selection Classical Economics Classical History Claude-Lévi-Strauss Climate Climate Change Clinton Global Initiative Cliodynamics Cloudburst Flight Clovis Cochran And Harpending Coefficient Of Relationship Cognitive Empathy Cognitive Psychology Cohorts Cold War Colin Kaepernick Colin Woodard Colombia Colonialism Colonists Coming Apart Comments Communism Confederacy Confederate Flag Conflict Of Interest Congress Consanguinity Conscientiousness Consequences Conservatism Conservatives Constitution Constitutional Theory Consumer Debt Cornel West Corporal Punishment Correlation Is Still Not Causation Corruption Corruption Perception Index Costa Concordia Cousin Marriage Cover Story CPEC Craniometry CRIF Crime Crimea Criminality Crowded Crowding Cruise Missiles Cuba Cuban Missile Crisis Cuckold Envy Cuckservative Cultural Evolution Cultural Marxism Cut The Sh*t Guys DACA Dads Vs Cads Daily Mail Dalai Lama Dallas Shooting Dalliard Dalton Trumbo Damascus Bombing Dan Freedman Dana Milbank Daniel Callahan Danish Daren Acemoglu Dark Ages Dark Tetrad Dark Triad Darwinism Data Posts David Brooks David Friedman David Frum David Goldenberg David Hackett Fischer David Ignatius David Katz David Kramer David Lane David Petraeus Davide Piffer Davos Death Death Penalty Debbie Wasserman-Schultz Debt Declaration Of Universal Human Rights Deep Sleep Deep South Democracy Democratic Party Democrats Demographic Transition Demographics Demography Denisovans Denmark Dennis Ross Depression Deprivation Deregulation Derek Harvey Desired Family Size Detroit Development Developmental Noise Developmental Stability Diabetes Diagnostic And Statistical Manual Of Mental Disorders Dialects Dick Cheney Die Nibelungen Dienekes Diet Different Peoples Is Different Dinesh D'Souza Dirty Bomb Discrimination Discrimination Paradigm Disney Dissent Diversity Dixie Django Unchained Do You Really Want To Know? Doing My Part Doll Tests Dollar Domestic Terrorism Dominique Strauss-Kahn Dopamine Douglas MacArthur Dr James Thompson Drd4 Dreams From My Father Dresden Drew Barrymore Dreyfus Affair Drinking Drone War Drones Drug Cartels Drugs Dry Counties DSM Dunning-kruger Effect Dusk In Autumn Dustin Hoffman Duterte Dylan Roof Dylann Roof Dysgenic E.O. 9066 E. O. Wilson Eagleman East Asia East Asians Eastern Europe Eastern Europeans Ebola Economic Development Economic Sanctions Economy Ed Miller Education Edward Price Edward Snowden EEA Egypt Eisenhower El Salvador Elections Electric Cars Elie Wiesel Eliot Cohen Eliot Engel Elites Ellen Walker Elliot Abrams Elliot Rodger Elliott Abrams Elon Musk Emigration Emil Kirkegaard Emmanuel Macron Emmanuel Todd Empathy England English Civil War Enhanced Interrogations Enoch Powell Entrepreneurship Environment Environmental Estrogens Environmentalism Erdogan Eric Cantor Espionage Estrogen Ethiopia Ethnic Genetic Interests Ethnic Nepotism Ethnicity EU Eugenic Eugenics Eurasia Europe European Right European Union Europeans Eurozone Everything Evil Evolution Evolutionary Biology Evolutionary Psychology Exercise Extraversion Extreterrestrials Eye Color Eyes Ezra Cohen-Watnick Face Recognition Face Shape Faces Facts Fake News fallout Family Studies Far West Farmers Farming Fascism Fat Head Fat Shaming Father Absence FBI Federal Reserve Female Deference Female Homosexuality Female Sexual Response Feminism Feminists Ferguson Shooting Fertility Fertility Fertility Rates Fethullah Gulen Fetish Feuds Fields Medals FIFA Fifty Shades Of Grey Film Finance Financial Bailout Financial Bubbles Financial Debt Financial Sector Financial Times Finland First Amendment First Law First World War FISA Fitness Flags Flight From White Fluctuating Asymmetry Flynn Effect Food Football For Profit Schools Foreign Service Fourth Of July Fracking Fragrances France Francesco Schettino Frank Salter Frankfurt School Frantz Fanon Franz Boas Fred Hiatt Fred Reed Freddie Gray Frederic Hof Free Speech Free Trade Free Will Freedom Of Navigation Freedom Of Speech French Canadians French National Front French Paradox Friendly & Conventional Front National Frost-harpending Selection Fulford Funny G G Spot Gaddafi Gallipoli Game Gardnerella Vaginalis Gary Taubes Gay Germ Gay Marriage Gays/Lesbians Gaza Gaza Flotilla Gcta Gender Gender Gender And Sexuality Gender Confusion Gender Equality Gender Identity Disorder Gender Reassignment Gene-Culture Coevolution Gene-environment Correlation General Intelligence General Social Survey General Theory Of The West Genes Genes: They Matter Bitches Genetic Diversity Genetic Divides Genetic Engineering Genetic Load Genetic Pacification Genetics Genetics Of Height Genocide Genomics Geography Geopolitics George Bush George Clooney George Patton George Romero George Soros George Tenet George W. Bush George Wallace Germ Theory German Catholics Germans Germany Get It Right Get Real Ghouta Gilgit Baltistan Gina Haspel Glenn Beck Glenn Greenwald Global Terrorism Index Global Warming Globalism Globalization God Delusion Goetsu Going Too Far Gold Gold Warriors Goldman Sachs Good Advice Google Gordon Gallup Goths Government Debt Government Incompetence Government Spending Government Surveillance Great Depression Great Leap Forward Great Recession Greater Appalachia Greece Greeks Greg Clark Greg Cochran Gregory B Christainsen Gregory Clark Gregory Cochran Gregory House GRF Grooming Group Intelligence Group Selection Grumpy Cat GSS Guangzhou Guantanamo Guardian Guilt Culture Gun Control Guns Gynephilia Gypsies H-1B H Bomb H.R. McMaster H1-B Visas Haim Saban Hair Color Hair Lengthening Haiti Hajnal Line Hamas Hamilton: An American Musical Hamilton's Rule Happiness Happy Turkey Day ... Unless You're The Turkey Harriet Tubman Harry Jaffa Harvard Harvey Weinstein Hasbara Hassidim Hate Crimes Hate Speech Hatemi Havelock Ellis Haymarket Affair Hbd Hbd Chick HBD Denial Hbd Fallout Hbd Readers Head Size Health And Medicine Health Care Healthcare Heart Disease Heart Health Heart Of Asia Conference Heartiste Heather Norton Height Helmuth Nyborg Hemoglobin Henri De Man Henry Harpending Henry Kissinger Herbert John Fleure Heredity Heritability Hexaco Hezbollah High Iq Fertility Hip Hop Hiroshima Hispanic Crime Hispanic Paradox Hispanics Historical Genetics Hitler HKND Hollywood Holocaust Homicide Homicide Rate Homo Altaiensis Homophobia Homosexuality Honesty-humility House Intelligence Committee House M.d. House Md House Of Cards Housing Huey Long Huey Newton Hugo Chavez Human Biodiversity Human Evolution Human Genetics Human Genomics Human Nature Human Rights Human Varieties Humor Hungary Hunter-Gatherers Hunting Hurricane Hurricane Harvey I.F. Stone I Kissed A Girl And I Liked It I Love Italians I.Q. Genomics Ian Deary Ibd Ibo Ice T Iceland I'd Like To Think It's Obvious I Know What I'm Talking About Ideology And Worldview Idiocracy Igbo Ignorance Ilana Mercer Illegal Immigration IMF immigrants Immigration Imperial Presidency Imperialism Imran Awan In The Electric Mist Inbreeding Income Independence Day India Indians Individualism Inequality Infection Theory Infidelity Intelligence Internet Internet Research Agency Interracial Marriage Inuit Ioannidis Ioannis Metaxas Iosif Lazaridis Iq Iq And Wealth Iran Nuclear Agreement Iran Nuclear Program Iran Sanctions Iranian Nuclear Program Iraq Iraq War Ireland Irish ISIS. Terrorism Islamic Jihad Islamophobia Isolationism Israel Defense Force Israeli Occupation Israeli Settlements Israeli Spying Italianthro Italy It's Determinism - Genetics Is Just A Part It's Not Nature And Nurture Ivanka Ivy League Iwo Eleru J. Edgar Hoover Jack Keane Jake Tapper JAM-GC Jamaica James Clapper James Comey James Fanell James Mattis James Wooley Jamie Foxx Jane Harman Jane Mayer Janet Yellen Japan Japanese Jared Diamond Jared Kushner Jared Taylor Jason Malloy JASTA Jayman Jr. Jayman's Wife Jeff Bezos Jennifer Rubin Jensen Jeremy Corbyn Jerrold Nadler Jerry Seinfeld Jesse Bering Jesuits Jewish History JFK Assassination Jill Stein Jim Crow Joe Cirincione Joe Lieberman John Allen John B. Watson John Boehner John Bolton John Brennan John Derbyshire John Durant John F. Kennedy John Hawks John Hoffecker John Kasich John Kerry John Ladue John McCain John McLaughlin John McWhorter John Mearsheimer John Tooby Joke Posts Jonathan Freedland Jonathan Pollard Joseph Lieberman Joseph McCarthy Judaism Judicial System Judith Harris Julian Assange Jute K.d. Lang Kagans Kanazawa Kashmir Katibat Al-Battar Al-Libi Katy Perry Kay Hymowitz Keith Ellison Ken Livingstone Kenneth Marcus Kennewick Man Kevin MacDonald Kevin McCarthy Kevin Mitchell Kevin Williamson KGL-9268 Khazars Kim Jong Un Kimberly Noble Kin Altruism Kin Selection Kink Kinship Kissing Kiwis Kkk Knesset Know-nothings Korea Korean War Kosovo Ku Klux Klan Kurds Kurt Campbell Labor Day Lactose Lady Gaga Language Larkana Conspiracy Larry Summers Larung Gar Las Vegas Massacre Latin America Latinos Latitude Latvia Law Law Of War Manual Laws Of Behavioral Genetics Lead Poisoning Lebanon Leda Cosmides Lee Kuan Yew Left Coast Left/Right Lenin Leo Strauss Lesbians LGBT Liberal Creationism Liberalism Liberals Libertarianism Libertarians Libya life-expectancy Life In Space Life Liberty And The Pursuit Of Happyness Lifestyle Light Skin Preference Lindsay Graham Lindsey Graham Literacy Litvinenko Lloyd Blankfein Locus Of Control Logan's Run Lombok Strait Long Ass Posts Longevity Look AHEAD Looting Lorde Love Love Dolls Lover Boys Low-carb Low-fat Low Wages LRSO Lutherans Lyndon Johnson M Factor M.g. MacArthur Awards Machiavellianism Madeleine Albright Mahmoud Abbas Maine Malacca Strait Malaysian Airlines MH17 Male Homosexuality Mamasapano Mangan Manor Manorialism Manosphere Manufacturing Mao-a Mao Zedong Maoism Maori Map Posts maps Marc Faber Marco Rubio Marijuana Marine Le Pen Mark Carney Mark Steyn Mark Warner Market Economy Marriage Martin Luther King Marwan Marwan Barghouti Marxism Mary White Ovington Masha Gessen Mass Shootings Massacre In Nice Mate Choice Mate Value Math Mathematics Maulana Bhashani Max Blumenthal Max Boot Max Brooks Mayans McCain/POW Mearsheimer-Walt Measurement Error Mega-Aggressions Mega-anlysis Megan Fox Megyn Kelly Melanin Memorial Day Mental Health Mental Illness Mental Traits Meritocracy Merkel Mesolithic Meta-analysis Meth Mexican-American War Mexico Michael Anton Michael Bloomberg Michael Flynn Michael Hudson Michael Jackson Michael Lewis Michael Morell Michael Pompeo Michael Weiss Michael Woodley Michele Bachmann Michelle Bachmann Michelle Obama Microaggressions Microcephalin Microsoft Middle Ages Mideastwire Migration Mike Huckabee Mike Pence Mike Pompeo Mike Signer Mikhail Khodorkovsky Militarized Police Military Military Pay Military Spending Milner Group Mindanao Minimum Wage Minnesota Transracial Adoption Study Minorities Minstrels Mirror Neurons Miscellaneous Misdreavus Missile Defense Mitt Romney Mixed-Race Modern Humans Mohammed Bin Salman Moldova Monogamy Moral Absolutism Moral Universalism Morality Mormons Moro Mortality Mossad Mountains Movies Moxie Mrs. Jayman MTDNA Muammar Gaddafi Multiculturalism Multiregional Model Music Muslim Muslim Ban Muslims Mutual Assured Destruction My Lai My Old Kentucky Home Myanmar Mysticism Nagasaki Nancy Segal Narendra Modi Nascar National Debt National Differences National Review National Security State National Security Strategy National Wealth Nationalism Native Americans NATO Natural Selection Nature Vs. Nurture Navy Yard Shooting Naz Shah Nazi Nazis Nazism Nbc News Nbc Nightly News Neanderthals NED Neo-Nazis Neoconservatism Neoconservatives Neoliberalism Neolithic Netherlands Neuropolitics Neuroticism Never Forget The Genetic Confound New Addition New Atheists New Cold War New England Patriots New France New French New Netherland New Qing History New Rules New Silk Road New World Order New York City New York Times Newfoundland Newt Gingrich NFL Nicaragua Canal Nicholas Sarkozy Nicholas Wade Nigeria Nightly News Nikki Haley No Free Will Nobel Prize Nobel Prized Nobosuke Kishi Nordics North Africa North Korea Northern Ireland Northwest Europe Norway NSA NSA Surveillance Nuclear Proliferation Nuclear War Nuclear Weapons Null Result Nurture Nurture Assumption Nutrition Nuts NYPD O Mio Babbino Caro Obama Obamacare Obesity Obscured American Occam's Razor Occupy Occupy Wall Street Oceania Oil Oil Industry Old Folks At Home Olfaction Oliver Stone Olympics Omega Males Ominous Signs Once You Go Black Open To Experience Openness To Experience Operational Sex Ratio Opiates Opioids Orban Organ Transplants Orlando Shooting Orthodoxy Osama Bin Laden Ottoman Empire Our Political Nature Out Of Africa Model Outbreeding Oxtr Oxytocin Paekchong Pakistan Pakistani Palatability Paleoamerindians Paleocons Paleolibertarianism Palestine Palestinians Pamela Geller Panama Canal Panama Papers Parasite Parasite Burden Parasite Manipulation Parent-child Interactions Parenting Parenting Parenting Behavioral Genetics Paris Attacks Paris Spring Parsi Paternal Investment Pathogens Patriot Act Patriotism Paul Ewald Paul Krugman Paul Lepage Paul Manafort Paul Ryan Paul Singer Paul Wolfowitz Pavel Grudinin Peace Index Peak Jobs Pearl Harbor Pedophilia Peers Peggy Seagrave Pennsylvania Pentagon Perception Management Personality Peru Peter Frost Peter Thiel Peter Turchin Phil Onderdonk Phil Rushton Philip Breedlove Philippines Physical Anthropology Pierre Van Den Berghe Pieter Van Ostaeyen Piigs Pioneer Hypothesis Pioneers PISA Pizzagate Planets Planned Parenthood Pledge Of Allegiance Pleiotropy Pol Pot Poland Police State Police Training Politics Poll Results Polls Polygenic Score Polygyny Pope Francis Population Growth Population Replacement Populism Pornography Portugal Post 199 Post 201 Post 99 Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc Post-Nationalism Pot Poverty PRC Prenatal Hormones Prescription Drugs Press Censorship Pretty Graphs Prince Bandar Priti Patel Privatization Progressives Project Plowshares Propaganda Prostitution Protestantism Proud To Be Black Psychology Psychometrics Psychopaths Psychopathy Pubertal Timing Public Schools Puerto Rico Punishment Puritans Putin Pwc Qatar Quakers Quantitative Genetics Quebec Quebecois Race Race And Crime Race And Genomics Race And Iq Race And Religion Race/Crime Race Denialism Race Riots Rachel Dolezal Rachel Maddow Racial Intelligence Racial Reality Racism Radical Islam Ralph And Coop Ralph Nader Rand Paul Randy Fine Rap Music Raqqa Rating People Rationality Raul Pedrozo Razib Khan Reaction Time Reading Real Estate Real Women Really Stop The Armchair Psychoanalysis Recep Tayyip Erdogan Reciprocal Altruism Reconstruction Red Hair Red State Blue State Red States Blue States Refugee Crisis Regional Differences Regional Populations Regression To The Mean Religion Religion Religion And Philosophy Rena Wing Renewable Energy Rentier Reprint Reproductive Strategy Republican Jesus Republican Party Responsibility Reuel Gerecht Reverend Moon Revolution Of 1905 Revolutions Rex Tillerson Richard Dawkins Richard Dyer Richard Lewontin Richard Lynn Richard Nixon Richard Pryor Richard Pryor Live On The Sunset Strip Richard Russell Rick Perry Rickets Rikishi Robert Ford Robert Kraft Robert Lindsay Robert McNamara Robert Mueller Robert Mugabe Robert Plomin Robert Putnam Robert Reich Robert Spencer Robocop Robots Roe Vs. Wade Roger Ailes Rohingya Roman Empire Rome Ron Paul Ron Unz Ronald Reagan Rooshv Rosemary Hopcroft Ross Douthat Ross Perot Rotherham Roy Moore RT International Rupert Murdoch Rural Liberals Rushton Russell Kirk Russia-Georgia War Russiagate Russian Elections 2018 Russian Hack Russian History Russian Military Russian Orthodox Church Ruth Benedict Saakashvili Sam Harris Same Sex Attraction Same-sex Marriage Same-sex Parents Samoans Samuel George Morton San Bernadino Massacre Sandra Beleza Sandusky Sandy Hook Sarah Palin Sarin Gas Satoshi Kanazawa saudi Saudi Arabia Saying What You Have To Say Scandinavia Scandinavians Scarborough Shoal Schizophrenia Science: It Works Bitches Scientism Scotch-irish Scotland Scots Irish Scott Ritter Scrabble Secession Seduced By Food Semai Senate Separating The Truth From The Nonsense Serbia Serenity Sergei Magnitsky Sergei Skripal Sex Sex Ratio Sex Ratio At Birth Sex Recognition Sex Tape Sex Work Sexism Sexual Antagonistic Selection Sexual Dimorphism Sexual Division Of Labor Sexual Fluidity Sexual Identity Sexual Maturation Sexual Orientation Sexual Selection Sexually Transmitted Diseases Seymour Hersh Shai Masot Shame Culture Shanghai Cooperation Organisation Shanghai Stock Exchange Shared Environment Shekhovstov Sheldon Adelson Shias And Sunnis Shimon Arad Shimon Peres Shinzo Abe Shmuley Boteach Shorts And Funnies Shoshana Bryen Shurat HaDin Shyness Siamak Namazi Sibel Edmonds Siberia Silicon Valley Simon Baron Cohen Singapore Single Men Single Motherhood Single Mothers Single Women Sisyphean Six Day War SJWs Skin Bleaching Skin Color Skin Tone Slate Slave Trade Slavery Slavoj Zizek Slavs SLC24A5 Sleep Slobodan Milosevic Smart Fraction Smell Smoking Snow Snyderman Social Constructs Social Justice Warriors Socialism Sociopathy Sociosexuality Solar Energy Solutions Somalia Sometimes You Don't Like The Answer South Africa South Asia South China Sea South Korea South Sudan Southern Italians Southern Poverty Law Center Soviet Union Space Space Space Program Space Race Spain Spanish Paradox Speech SPLC Sports Sputnik News Squid Ink Srebrenica Stabby Somali Staffan Stalinism Stanislas Dehaene Star Trek State Department State Formation States Rights Statins Steny Hoyer Stephan Guyenet Stephen Cohen Stephen Colbert Stephen Hadley Stephen Jay Gould Sterling Seagrave Steve Bannon Steve Sailer Steven Mnuchin Steven Pinker Still Not Free Buddy Stolen Generations Strategic Affairs Ministry Stroke Belt Student Loans Stuxnet SU-57 Sub-replacement Fertility Sub-Saharan Africa Sub-Saharan Africans Subprime Mortgage Crisis Subsistence Living Suffrage Sugar Suicide Summing It All Up Supernatural Support Me Support The Jayman Supreme Court Supression Surveillance Susan Glasser Susan Rice Sweden Swiss Switzerland Syed Farook Syrian Refugees Syriza Ta-Nehisi Coates Taiwan Tale Of Two Maps Taliban Tamerlan Tsarnaev TAS2R16 Tashfeen Malik Taste Tastiness Tatars Tatu Vanhanen Tawang Tax Cuts Tax Evasion Taxes Tea Party Team Performance Technology Ted Cruz Tell Me About You Tell The Truth Terman Terman's Termites Terroris Terrorists Tesla Testosterone Thailand The 10000 Year Explosion The Bible The Breeder's Equation The Confederacy The Dark Knight The Dark Triad The Death Penalty The Deep South The Devil Is In The Details The Dustbowl The Economist The Far West The Future The Great Plains The Great Wall The Left The Left Coast The New York Times The Pursuit Of Happyness The Rock The Saker The Son Also Rises The South The Walking Dead The Washington Post The Wide Environment The World Theodore Roosevelt Theresa May Things Going Sour Third World Thomas Aquinas Thomas Friedman Thomas Perez Thomas Sowell Thomas Talhelm Thorstein Veblen Thurgood Marshall Tibet Tidewater Tiger Mom Time Preference Timmons Title IX Tobin Tax Tom Cotton Tom Naughton Tone It Down Guys Seriously Tony Blair Torture Toxoplasma Gondii TPP Traffic Traffic Fatalities Tragedy Trans-Species Polymorphism Transgender Transgenderism Transsexuals Treasury Tropical Humans Trump Trust TTIP Tuition Tulsi Gabbard Turkheimer TWA 800 Twin Study Twins Twins Raised Apart Twintuition Twitter Two Party System UKIP Ukrainian Crisis UN Security Council Unemployment Unions United Kingdom United Nations United States Universalism University Admissions Upper Paleolithic Urban Riots Ursula Gauthier Uruguay US Blacks USS Liberty Utopian Uttar Pradesh UV Uyghurs Vaginal Yeast Valerie Plame Vassopressin Vdare Veep Venezuela Veterans Administration Victor Canfield Victor Davis Hanson Victoria Nuland Victorian England Victorianism Video Games Vietnam Vietnam War Vietnamese Vikings Violence Vioxx Virginia Visa Waivers Visual Word Form Area Vitamin D Voronezh Vote Fraud Vouchers Vwfa W.E.I.R.D. W.E.I.R.D.O. Wahhabis Wall Street Walter Bodmer Wang Jing War On Christmas War On Terror Washington Post WasPage Watergate Watsoning We Are What We Are We Don't Know All The Environmental Causes Weight Loss WEIRDO Welfare Western Europe Western European Marriage Pattern Western Media Western Religion Westerns What Can You Do What's The Cause Where They're At Where's The Fallout White America White Americans White Conservative Males White Death White Helmets White Nationalist Nuttiness White Nationalists White Privilege White Slavery White Supremacy White Wife Why We Believe Hbd Wikileaks Wild Life Wilhelm Furtwangler William Browder William Buckley William D. Hamilton William Graham Sumner William McGougall WINEP Winston Churchill Women In The Workplace Woodley Effect Woodrow Wilson WORDSUM Workers Working Class Working Memory World Values Survey World War I World War Z Writing WTO X Little Miss JayLady Xhosa Xi Jinping Xinjiang Yankeedom Yankees Yazidis Yemen Yes I Am A Brother Yes I Am Liberal - But That Kind Of Liberal Yochi Dreazen You Can't Handle The Truth You Don't Know Shit Youtube Ban Yugoslavia Zbigniew Brzezinski Zhang Yimou Zika Zika Virus Zimbabwe Zionism Zombies Zones Of Thought Zulfikar Ali Bhutto
Nothing found
All Commenters • My
Comments
• Followed
Commenters
All Comments / By Andrei Martyanov
 All Comments / By Andrei Martyanov
    Size does matter and so does range and speed whenever anyone talks about weapons. It seems that there is a great deal of confusion which perpetuates itself in regards to a relatively small Russian military contingent in Syria. The most popular indicator of this confusion is a never ending discussion of a possible American attack...
  • huh…

    funny what one can stumble on to just looking for J R Shepley’s book on “The Bomb”

    & yet, clearly our fearless leaders could care less…

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • This otherwise enlightening paper seems to have missed an important point. It does not require a military-technology expert to assess the outcome of a military attack on Russian forces in Syria. So far, the Russians have held back from attacking America’s allies in the region in response to Western attacks on its ally Syria, but an attack on Russian forces proper would certainly change all that.
    The soft belly of the West is the Gulf. What are the consequences to the West if Russia chooses to retaliate by disabling much of the oil-export facilities in the Gulf along with much of the oil refining capacity there? The consequences are predictable with great certainty:
    1. The oil price could reach USD200-USD400 per barrel.
    2. The economic impact on the West will be far worse than that experienced during the 1973 oil-embargo in the wake of the October War. It is possible that the West will be plunged into an economic depression comparable to the Great Depression. The duration of that depression will depend on the response of the West, as discussed hereunder.
    3. The likely political fallout from a severe Western economic contraction triggered by Western Adventurism is political and social turmoil in the West that is likely to accelerate the political power shift in the West away from the plutocracy, which has grown increasingly powerful since the 1980s, to the masses. Indeed, this process is already underway in some degree as evidenced by the rise of the likes of Sanders, Trump, the failure of traditional political parties in France and elsewhere in Europe and so on so forth.
    4. As a result of this political shift, the warmongers in the West, particularly the neocons, will be discredited and replaced by more sensible elements, giving rise to more peaceful international relations.
    5. Established institutions such as NATO and even the European Union will be at risk of a break-up or major remodeling.
    6. Russian, Iranian and Iraqi oil facilities will remain secure because any damage to them will greatly exasperate the economic situation faced by the West.
    7. With their oil facilities intact, Russia, Iran, and Iraq will reap an enormous financial windfall from the tremendous rise in oil and gas prices.
    8. By disabling, but not obliterating the oil facilities in the Gulf, Russia can offer the West the option of a relatively quick resumption of oil exports from the Gulf provided the West accepts its conditions, which are likely to include:
    a. Removal of US bases from the Gulf.
    b. Reduction in the level of oil and gas production from the Gulf to maintain a higher level of oil prices.
    c. Recognition that the world has become multi-polar, requiring a major revision of the UN charter and relocation of its headquarters to reflect the new realities.
    In the light of the foregoing, it would be surprising if the Russians, noted for being accomplished chess grandmaster, don’t secretly welcome the opportunity that an American attack on their forces in Syria presents. Indeed, given the cards they can play they have been suspiciously docile to Western bullying in Syria. They seem to be heeding the advice of Napoleon: “Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.”
    The writer is the author of Two Centuries of Parasitic Economics: The Struggle for Economic and Political Democracy on the Eve of the Financial Collapse of the West.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Y.L.

    Here, I diverge with author of otherwise thoughtful piece dramatically. As former military professional I, apart from considering resources factor, calculate forces on both sides and what they can do to each-other. April 13 salvo showed to those who have eyes not exactly what author tries to imply. In more general way, American military mythology is being destroyed on a daily bases.

     

    Thanks Andrei, that's why I asked for and appreciate your insight. Perhaps you'd consider expanding as an article for Unz, I hope.

    Thanks Andrei, that’s why I asked for and appreciate your insight. Perhaps you’d consider expanding as an article for Unz, I hope.

    Absolutely, I’ll try. I just need several days more to see how it plays out. Saker already posted two days ago a good piece on this matter.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Erebus

    US military knows the score.
     
    Maybe not all of them, but there's clearheaded men at the top.

    I'm familiar with Lang's site and "Publius Tacitus'" writing and have a high regard for both. It's where PT says "Frankly, General Mattis and General Dunford have dishonored themselves by going along with this charade." that I think he could have dug deeper and asked "Why did they do it?". He may have found that they weren't covering up an ordinary failure, but an intended failure. If he went on to consider some of the corollary questions that come along with asking that, I'd wager things would get interesting.
    Having said that, it's equally (or even more) possible that Dunford and Mattis et al weren't prepared for this level of failure and are a little shocked themselves.

    Maybe not all of them, but there’s clearheaded men at the top.

    As long as Shoigu talks to Mattis, Gerasimov talks to Dunford and Scaparotti–there is a certain air of certainty since those are professionals talking and at that level they, indeed, know the score.

    Having said that, it’s equally (or even more) possible that Dunford and Mattis et al weren’t prepared for this level of failure and are a little shocked themselves.

    This is most likely, once one begins to consider John Hyten’s public admission three days ago to Space Forum.

    http://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/2018/04/rma.html

    It is difficult to overestimate what Hyten said. Except, of course, his lack of “desire” to reveal his sources since I would go an a limb here and propose that Russia, actually, deliberately “exposed” the progress on hyper-sonic weapons to US satellites.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Thud
    You do know that we are at full employment in U.K. ? insurgency here...oh you funny man ,please continue with the wankfest Boris.

    Your girls are raped by the tens of thousands, for decades, while your pussy formerly-great formerly-Britain submits to it. Yeah, you’re in a position to lecture Russia.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Andrei Martyanov

    I doubt that message sent with the latest “missile fiasco” will be able to penetrate the ideological shield defending Western capitalism’s strategy. Finessing a stronger, more violent message, or a series of them will require truly exceptional skill, lest one them provokes the response no-one wants to see.
     
    US military knows the score. Here is from someone who lives on those ever important operational levels:

    Do not believe a word you have heard from the Pentagon and the White House about the "success" of the cruise missile strikes on Friday last. A fraud is being perpetrated on the American people and the world at large. Frankly, General Mattis and General Dunford have dishonored themselves by going along with this charade.

    If you could go to the CAOC (i.e., the Combined Air Operations Center) located at the Al Udeid Air Force Base in Qatar and speak to officers working for CENTCOM, you would hear a mixture of disgust, shock and anger from many over the President's claim of "Mission Accomplished." And I am talking about people who have been supportive of President Trump. But Trump, with the sycophants at the Pentagon and the Joint Staff, has crossed a line into delusional thinking.
     
    The problem is two-fold: it is both existential in a sense of capitalism dying out across the board to a rather peculiar combination of traditional ignorance and arrogance embodied in Trump and his Administration--this is a local phenomenon. Albeit, truth to be told, Western institution can not produce anymore normal competent elites and this, of course, could be tried to this very crisis on a more general level.

    US military knows the score.

    Maybe not all of them, but there’s clearheaded men at the top.

    I’m familiar with Lang’s site and “Publius Tacitus’” writing and have a high regard for both. It’s where PT says “Frankly, General Mattis and General Dunford have dishonored themselves by going along with this charade.” that I think he could have dug deeper and asked “Why did they do it?”. He may have found that they weren’t covering up an ordinary failure, but an intended failure. If he went on to consider some of the corollary questions that come along with asking that, I’d wager things would get interesting.
    Having said that, it’s equally (or even more) possible that Dunford and Mattis et al weren’t prepared for this level of failure and are a little shocked themselves.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov

    Maybe not all of them, but there’s clearheaded men at the top.
     
    As long as Shoigu talks to Mattis, Gerasimov talks to Dunford and Scaparotti--there is a certain air of certainty since those are professionals talking and at that level they, indeed, know the score.

    Having said that, it’s equally (or even more) possible that Dunford and Mattis et al weren’t prepared for this level of failure and are a little shocked themselves.
     
    This is most likely, once one begins to consider John Hyten's public admission three days ago to Space Forum.

    http://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/2018/04/rma.html

    It is difficult to overestimate what Hyten said. Except, of course, his lack of "desire" to reveal his sources since I would go an a limb here and propose that Russia, actually, deliberately "exposed" the progress on hyper-sonic weapons to US satellites.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Erebus
    That is a must-read article. The author pulls much of the big picture together. I encourage you to re-link it in other threads on UR (or I will!).

    I've been barking up this tree for a long time; Western capitalism has run out of real capital. Financialization papered over the cracks far better, and for longer than I imagined it could back in 2007/08, but the cracks are opening up again. It needs more real capital NOW!, or it will come crashing down. I don't know, but I suspect that it may have passed the point-of-no-return already.

    Russia, as one of the greatest repositories of real capital (land, natural & human resources), and having turned its recent resurrection to great power status to defending other nations' real capital, is a prize it must win or die trying.

    It's as simple, as complex and as existential as that.

    Recently, like the author, I too have developed some doubts that Russia's strategy of rope-a-doping can be maintained for long enough to see them through the crisis unscathed. I doubt that message sent with the latest "missile fiasco" will be able to penetrate the ideological shield defending Western capitalism's strategy. Finessing a stronger, more violent message, or a series of them will require truly exceptional skill, lest one them provokes the response no-one wants to see.

    That is a must-read article. The author pulls much of the big picture together. I encourage you to re-link it in other threads on UR (or I will!).

    Feel free; I’m glad you appreciated it.

    And I hope Andrei elaborates on the topic in a larger article for this site.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Andrei Martyanov
    Author is generally correct in economic political sense but we knew all along that the "model", financial capitalism is dying. It simply doesn't work. It, actually, never did. But author is missing one very important point and this is approach to war. What he calls appeasement is not appeasement at all and one is only left to wonder what is going on in Syria on Russian side since the flow of heavy equipment there is non-stop and massive. This hardly qualifies as "appeasement". It is also known that Air Defense there was improved greatly. So, here are the questions and answers to some of them:

    1. Is Russia preparing for war? Yes.
    2. Does Russia see Syria as possible theater where it all will start? Yes.
    3. Is Russia playing for time? Absolutely.
    4. Does United States have actual resources to fight Russia? No.

    I don’t see war can be avoided, i.e. conflict between U.S. and Russia. The old Soviets wouldn’t have put up with so much crap from NATO, Israel and America.
     
    War is already in progress and, as I stated not for once, it matters who controls escalation. There is a huge difference, again, between what United States call "our forces" meaning the bunch of jihadist proxies and Kurds and Russia's forces, which are Russian. I understand that there are many people who readily produce all kinds of cataclysmic scenarios but the scale of hysteria, not to mention a volume of self-assuring BS which US started already to use at the top political level testifies to the fact that as Graham Allison noted: “However demonic, however destructive, however devious, however deserving of being strangled Russia is, the brute fact is that we cannot kill this bastard without committing suicide." I wrote the book precisely on this matter and it is about the fact that American military-technological bluff was called. Russia controls escalation, she controls it, even in Syria, by:

    1. Readiness to bear the costs;
    2. Ability to exert an extremely high price from the US for any Syria's misadventure.

    Here, I diverge with author of otherwise thoughtful piece dramatically. As former military professional I, apart from considering resources factor, calculate forces on both sides and what they can do to each-other. April 13 salvo showed to those who have eyes not exactly what author tries to imply. In more general way, American military mythology is being destroyed on a daily bases.

    Here, I diverge with author of otherwise thoughtful piece dramatically. As former military professional I, apart from considering resources factor, calculate forces on both sides and what they can do to each-other. April 13 salvo showed to those who have eyes not exactly what author tries to imply. In more general way, American military mythology is being destroyed on a daily bases.

    Thanks Andrei, that’s why I asked for and appreciate your insight. Perhaps you’d consider expanding as an article for Unz, I hope.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov

    Thanks Andrei, that’s why I asked for and appreciate your insight. Perhaps you’d consider expanding as an article for Unz, I hope.
     
    Absolutely, I'll try. I just need several days more to see how it plays out. Saker already posted two days ago a good piece on this matter.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Erebus
    That is a must-read article. The author pulls much of the big picture together. I encourage you to re-link it in other threads on UR (or I will!).

    I've been barking up this tree for a long time; Western capitalism has run out of real capital. Financialization papered over the cracks far better, and for longer than I imagined it could back in 2007/08, but the cracks are opening up again. It needs more real capital NOW!, or it will come crashing down. I don't know, but I suspect that it may have passed the point-of-no-return already.

    Russia, as one of the greatest repositories of real capital (land, natural & human resources), and having turned its recent resurrection to great power status to defending other nations' real capital, is a prize it must win or die trying.

    It's as simple, as complex and as existential as that.

    Recently, like the author, I too have developed some doubts that Russia's strategy of rope-a-doping can be maintained for long enough to see them through the crisis unscathed. I doubt that message sent with the latest "missile fiasco" will be able to penetrate the ideological shield defending Western capitalism's strategy. Finessing a stronger, more violent message, or a series of them will require truly exceptional skill, lest one them provokes the response no-one wants to see.

    I doubt that message sent with the latest “missile fiasco” will be able to penetrate the ideological shield defending Western capitalism’s strategy. Finessing a stronger, more violent message, or a series of them will require truly exceptional skill, lest one them provokes the response no-one wants to see.

    US military knows the score. Here is from someone who lives on those ever important operational levels:

    Do not believe a word you have heard from the Pentagon and the White House about the “success” of the cruise missile strikes on Friday last. A fraud is being perpetrated on the American people and the world at large. Frankly, General Mattis and General Dunford have dishonored themselves by going along with this charade.

    If you could go to the CAOC (i.e., the Combined Air Operations Center) located at the Al Udeid Air Force Base in Qatar and speak to officers working for CENTCOM, you would hear a mixture of disgust, shock and anger from many over the President’s claim of “Mission Accomplished.” And I am talking about people who have been supportive of President Trump. But Trump, with the sycophants at the Pentagon and the Joint Staff, has crossed a line into delusional thinking.

    The problem is two-fold: it is both existential in a sense of capitalism dying out across the board to a rather peculiar combination of traditional ignorance and arrogance embodied in Trump and his Administration–this is a local phenomenon. Albeit, truth to be told, Western institution can not produce anymore normal competent elites and this, of course, could be tried to this very crisis on a more general level.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Erebus

    US military knows the score.
     
    Maybe not all of them, but there's clearheaded men at the top.

    I'm familiar with Lang's site and "Publius Tacitus'" writing and have a high regard for both. It's where PT says "Frankly, General Mattis and General Dunford have dishonored themselves by going along with this charade." that I think he could have dug deeper and asked "Why did they do it?". He may have found that they weren't covering up an ordinary failure, but an intended failure. If he went on to consider some of the corollary questions that come along with asking that, I'd wager things would get interesting.
    Having said that, it's equally (or even more) possible that Dunford and Mattis et al weren't prepared for this level of failure and are a little shocked themselves.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Y.L.
    Andrei, I have to pester you one last time. I read this article on SouthFront today:

    https://southfront.org/us-missile-strikes-in-syria-throw-down-the-gauntlet-to-russia-how-will-putin-respond/

    And I'd like your thoughts on these points the author makes. Is Putin making things worse? Are hardliners now finally getting through to him? Doesn't he realize the enemy is like Nazi Germany and will only be satisfied with:

    The U.S. strategy for full spectrum dominance over Eurasia will not be complete until the theocratic regime in Iran has been overthrown and a pro-Western puppet installed in power. Once this has been accomplished then the West can focus upon its ultimate goal of overthrowing the nationalist regime in Moscow and breaking up Russia into a myriad of small puppet states. The gigantic mineral resources and land mass would then be at the disposal of Western imperialism.

     

    And here then are the author's observations that interest me.

    In many respects Trump and his coalition of the killing have put the ball in back Putin’s court.

    Putin can continue to patiently play the diplomacy card while trying to build up Russia’s trade in non dollar terms, and acquiring more and more gold, while building ever closer economic, military and political links to China. Will this be enough to stave off further Western encroachments upon Russia’s economy and its geopolitical position in Syria and Eastern Ukraine?

    The history of the Cold War and the appeasement period of the 1930s show that trying to negotiate while building up your economic/military resources is not enough to stop a “Terminator’’ like aggressor who just will not stop their aggressive actions towards you. During the Cold War there were times such as the Cuban Missile Crisis where U.S. imperialism was prepared to see nuclear armageddon rather than negotiate a compromise solution to the situation. It was only Kruschev’s willingness to back down, which cost him his position a year later, that averted World War 3.
    Cuba was thousands of miles away from Russia so Khrushchev could afford to make such a climbdown. However, if he had been faced with U.S. aggression on Russia’s border then that would have been a completely different and much more difficult situation.

    During the Cold War American imperialism was the dominant economic power on the planet which led to its aggressive foreign policy in defence of that economic position. Now the American empire is in decline it has become even more aggressive in a desperate effort to maintain its hegemony over the global economy. This imperial overreach is driven by several interlinked processes. Central to these processes has been the qualitative change to the nature of capitalism itself.

    Global capitalism, whose epicentre remains the United States has been suffering from a general tendency towards stagnation since the 1970s. This has been partially solved for short periods of time by the financialization of the world economy that has provided an outlet for the development of a huge orgy of speculative capital to produce massive returns. This greater financialization of the global economy has increased the rate of wealth transfer to the super rich built upon a gigantic explosion of debt that has built instability into the foundations of capitalism. The dangers of this for the imperial centre of capitalism in Washington are clearly defined by the economic historians John Bellamy Foster and Fred Magdoff:

    “The financialization of capitalism has resulted in a more uncontrollable system. [They observe -Saltycat] … a clear sense of the growing volatility and instability of the system. It is characteristic of speculative bubbles that once they stop expanding they burst. Continual increase of risk and more and more cash infusions into the financial system therefore become stronger imperatives the more fragile the financial structure becomes. The whole context is that of a financialization so out of control that unexpected and severe shocks to the system and resulting financial contagion are looked upon as inevitable’’.

    U.S. imperialism has increasingly relied upon ever greater infusions of debt into the capitalist system to maintain profitable outlets for finance capital. Finance capital must have free rein over the global economy to do as it pleases. It cannot afford to let upstarts such as Russia and China challenge its position of dominance over the resources and people of Eurasia. It is forced to take economic. political and military action to defend its interests. At the moment those interests are focused upon preserving its position in the Middle East. After “victories’’ in Iraq and Libya the U.S. feels threatened by Assad’s regime in Syria that is trying to pursue an alliance with a newly resurgent Russia under Putin. The logic of this policy means that U.S. imperialism cannot even countenance a compromise deal over Syria with Russia. Nothing less than the overthrow of Assad and the installation of a pro-Western puppet government will do.

    This brings us back to Putin’s dilemma in Syria. The relative failure of the recent missile strikes in Syria has been celebrated by some in the alternative media as a ‘victory’ for Putin/Assad and that the U.S. will now refrain from any more attacks. Such a view fails to understand that U.S. imperialism, which is an empire decline, cannot afford to let its rivals such as Russia challenge its supremacy over the economic resources and politics of the Middle East. Putin understands this but is caught in a dilemma.

    Putin represents the interests of the billionaire oligarchs, who emerged after the collapse of Stalinism and the reintroduction of capitalism in the 1990s. In the 1990s Putin was part of Yeltsin’s inner circle known affectionately as the “Family’’. Was their major concern the well being of ordinary Russian citizens? Of course not. It was the re-establishment of capitalism in Russia under the control of the oligarchs. Once firmly in power Putin has taken a more nationalist position than Yeltsin but still his foreign policy has followed the same lines of trying to maintain friendly, conciliatory relations with Western imperialism.

    Circa 2018 Putin is subject to a number of major problems. Despite his election victory Putin is acutely aware that sections of the population, particularly the youth feel disenfranchised both economically and politically. Meanwhile, older generations still harken back to the stability and certainties of the Soviet period. Putin has played the nationalist card rather skilfully in an attempt to bolster support for himself while large sections of the public are critical of public institutions in general due to widespread corruption and poverty.

    The Russian intervention in Syria has been used by Putin to appeal to nationalist sentiment amongst the population while also being motivated by military and geopolitical concerns.

    Putin is no doubt happy with the progress of the Syrian Armed Forces and their shia allies, with the help of Russian air support, in gradually liberating region after region from jihadi control. However, he still has major problems with regard to his Syrian strategy.

    There are the Kurds protected in Eastern Syria by the U.S. which is actively building military bases in that area. Just as big a problem is the wild card of Turkey. Putin has successfully pulled President Erodgan of Turkey in to the Russian sphere of influence by the oil pipeline and nuclear power plant deals they have signed. However, Erdogan is an unstable and unreliable ally who is trying to play off the U.S., its ally for many decades, against his new found ally in the form of Russia.

    Putin now has the added complication of Western imperialism resorting to open military intervention, after the failure of their jihadi allies to overthrow Assad’s government. The U.S. has made it clear that any more chemical attacks and the next missile strike will be much more formidable. U.S. Vice President Mike Pence has warned Russia and Assad that President Trump has:

    “made clear that the United States of America is prepared to sustain this effort to re-establish the deterrent framework that exists in order that the Syrian regime and its patrons know there will be a price to pay if chemicals weapons are used again against men, women and children,”

    Recent history has show that as sure as night follows day the genocidal jihadi groups will try and repeat their tired old trick of screaming “chemical weapons’’ if they keep losing ground on the battlefield. The Russian Foreign Ministry have warned of these tactics repeatedly in recent months.

    Now Putin has to face up to the fact that Western imperialism will continue using this propaganda ruse as an excuse for much greater missile attacks against Assad and his military over the next period. What are his options?

    He can simply try and wait it out until the jihadi groups have all been defeated by the SAA and its allies. A dangerous tactic as this may take some time yet, particularly the jihadi bastions in Idlib province.

    Putin could try once again the diplomatic card and try to stall further U.S. military action. Yet he is aware the U.S. has no intention of leaving Syria over the next period and is waiting like a hawk for further excuses to attack/overthrow his ally President Assad.

    The problem with this approach is that Russia is continuing with its appeasement of Western imperialism. The general notes how Moscow has not armed Syria with S300 systems out of deference to its “Western partners’’. Has concern for Russia’s feelings stopped the U.S. from installing its Aegis Ballistic Missile Defence System in Poland and Rumania? Of course not.

    Putin could of course, promise Assad that Russia will shoot down any future missile strikes entailing the risk of course of open military confrontation with the U.S. and its allies. This is something he is loathe to do as ultimately he just wants peaceful cohabitation with the West not war.
     
    I don't see war can be avoided, i.e. conflict between U.S. and Russia. The old Soviets wouldn't have put up with so much crap from NATO, Israel and America.

    Author is generally correct in economic political sense but we knew all along that the “model”, financial capitalism is dying. It simply doesn’t work. It, actually, never did. But author is missing one very important point and this is approach to war. What he calls appeasement is not appeasement at all and one is only left to wonder what is going on in Syria on Russian side since the flow of heavy equipment there is non-stop and massive. This hardly qualifies as “appeasement”. It is also known that Air Defense there was improved greatly. So, here are the questions and answers to some of them:

    1. Is Russia preparing for war? Yes.
    2. Does Russia see Syria as possible theater where it all will start? Yes.
    3. Is Russia playing for time? Absolutely.
    4. Does United States have actual resources to fight Russia? No.

    I don’t see war can be avoided, i.e. conflict between U.S. and Russia. The old Soviets wouldn’t have put up with so much crap from NATO, Israel and America.

    War is already in progress and, as I stated not for once, it matters who controls escalation. There is a huge difference, again, between what United States call “our forces” meaning the bunch of jihadist proxies and Kurds and Russia’s forces, which are Russian. I understand that there are many people who readily produce all kinds of cataclysmic scenarios but the scale of hysteria, not to mention a volume of self-assuring BS which US started already to use at the top political level testifies to the fact that as Graham Allison noted: “However demonic, however destructive, however devious, however deserving of being strangled Russia is, the brute fact is that we cannot kill this bastard without committing suicide.” I wrote the book precisely on this matter and it is about the fact that American military-technological bluff was called. Russia controls escalation, she controls it, even in Syria, by:

    1. Readiness to bear the costs;
    2. Ability to exert an extremely high price from the US for any Syria’s misadventure.

    Here, I diverge with author of otherwise thoughtful piece dramatically. As former military professional I, apart from considering resources factor, calculate forces on both sides and what they can do to each-other. April 13 salvo showed to those who have eyes not exactly what author tries to imply. In more general way, American military mythology is being destroyed on a daily bases.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Y.L.

    Here, I diverge with author of otherwise thoughtful piece dramatically. As former military professional I, apart from considering resources factor, calculate forces on both sides and what they can do to each-other. April 13 salvo showed to those who have eyes not exactly what author tries to imply. In more general way, American military mythology is being destroyed on a daily bases.

     

    Thanks Andrei, that's why I asked for and appreciate your insight. Perhaps you'd consider expanding as an article for Unz, I hope.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @TheJester
    Your sources, please.

    “It was touch and go, just as risky as the Cuban missile crisis of 1962. The chances for total war were high, as the steely wills of America and Eurasia had crossed in the Eastern Mediterranean. The most dramatic event of September 2013 was the high-noon stand-off near the Levantine shore, with five US destroyers pointing their Tomahawks towards Damascus and facing them – the Russian flotilla of eleven ships led by the carrier-killer Missile Cruiser Moskva and supported by Chinese warships. Apparently, two missiles were launched towards the Syrian coast, and both failed to reach their destination. (We shall return to these two missiles later)….
    And now back to those two missiles of 2013. They were sent by the Israelis, whether they were trying to jump-start the shoot-out or just observed the clouds, as they claim. The missiles never reached its destination, shot down by the Russian ship-based sea-to-air defence system, or perhaps rendered useless by Russian GPS jammers….The Cape of Good Hope. http://www.unz.com/ishamir/the-cape-of-good-hope/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Y.L.
    Andrei, I have to pester you one last time. I read this article on SouthFront today:

    https://southfront.org/us-missile-strikes-in-syria-throw-down-the-gauntlet-to-russia-how-will-putin-respond/

    And I'd like your thoughts on these points the author makes. Is Putin making things worse? Are hardliners now finally getting through to him? Doesn't he realize the enemy is like Nazi Germany and will only be satisfied with:

    The U.S. strategy for full spectrum dominance over Eurasia will not be complete until the theocratic regime in Iran has been overthrown and a pro-Western puppet installed in power. Once this has been accomplished then the West can focus upon its ultimate goal of overthrowing the nationalist regime in Moscow and breaking up Russia into a myriad of small puppet states. The gigantic mineral resources and land mass would then be at the disposal of Western imperialism.

     

    And here then are the author's observations that interest me.

    In many respects Trump and his coalition of the killing have put the ball in back Putin’s court.

    Putin can continue to patiently play the diplomacy card while trying to build up Russia’s trade in non dollar terms, and acquiring more and more gold, while building ever closer economic, military and political links to China. Will this be enough to stave off further Western encroachments upon Russia’s economy and its geopolitical position in Syria and Eastern Ukraine?

    The history of the Cold War and the appeasement period of the 1930s show that trying to negotiate while building up your economic/military resources is not enough to stop a “Terminator’’ like aggressor who just will not stop their aggressive actions towards you. During the Cold War there were times such as the Cuban Missile Crisis where U.S. imperialism was prepared to see nuclear armageddon rather than negotiate a compromise solution to the situation. It was only Kruschev’s willingness to back down, which cost him his position a year later, that averted World War 3.
    Cuba was thousands of miles away from Russia so Khrushchev could afford to make such a climbdown. However, if he had been faced with U.S. aggression on Russia’s border then that would have been a completely different and much more difficult situation.

    During the Cold War American imperialism was the dominant economic power on the planet which led to its aggressive foreign policy in defence of that economic position. Now the American empire is in decline it has become even more aggressive in a desperate effort to maintain its hegemony over the global economy. This imperial overreach is driven by several interlinked processes. Central to these processes has been the qualitative change to the nature of capitalism itself.

    Global capitalism, whose epicentre remains the United States has been suffering from a general tendency towards stagnation since the 1970s. This has been partially solved for short periods of time by the financialization of the world economy that has provided an outlet for the development of a huge orgy of speculative capital to produce massive returns. This greater financialization of the global economy has increased the rate of wealth transfer to the super rich built upon a gigantic explosion of debt that has built instability into the foundations of capitalism. The dangers of this for the imperial centre of capitalism in Washington are clearly defined by the economic historians John Bellamy Foster and Fred Magdoff:

    “The financialization of capitalism has resulted in a more uncontrollable system. [They observe -Saltycat] … a clear sense of the growing volatility and instability of the system. It is characteristic of speculative bubbles that once they stop expanding they burst. Continual increase of risk and more and more cash infusions into the financial system therefore become stronger imperatives the more fragile the financial structure becomes. The whole context is that of a financialization so out of control that unexpected and severe shocks to the system and resulting financial contagion are looked upon as inevitable’’.

    U.S. imperialism has increasingly relied upon ever greater infusions of debt into the capitalist system to maintain profitable outlets for finance capital. Finance capital must have free rein over the global economy to do as it pleases. It cannot afford to let upstarts such as Russia and China challenge its position of dominance over the resources and people of Eurasia. It is forced to take economic. political and military action to defend its interests. At the moment those interests are focused upon preserving its position in the Middle East. After “victories’’ in Iraq and Libya the U.S. feels threatened by Assad’s regime in Syria that is trying to pursue an alliance with a newly resurgent Russia under Putin. The logic of this policy means that U.S. imperialism cannot even countenance a compromise deal over Syria with Russia. Nothing less than the overthrow of Assad and the installation of a pro-Western puppet government will do.

    This brings us back to Putin’s dilemma in Syria. The relative failure of the recent missile strikes in Syria has been celebrated by some in the alternative media as a ‘victory’ for Putin/Assad and that the U.S. will now refrain from any more attacks. Such a view fails to understand that U.S. imperialism, which is an empire decline, cannot afford to let its rivals such as Russia challenge its supremacy over the economic resources and politics of the Middle East. Putin understands this but is caught in a dilemma.

    Putin represents the interests of the billionaire oligarchs, who emerged after the collapse of Stalinism and the reintroduction of capitalism in the 1990s. In the 1990s Putin was part of Yeltsin’s inner circle known affectionately as the “Family’’. Was their major concern the well being of ordinary Russian citizens? Of course not. It was the re-establishment of capitalism in Russia under the control of the oligarchs. Once firmly in power Putin has taken a more nationalist position than Yeltsin but still his foreign policy has followed the same lines of trying to maintain friendly, conciliatory relations with Western imperialism.

    Circa 2018 Putin is subject to a number of major problems. Despite his election victory Putin is acutely aware that sections of the population, particularly the youth feel disenfranchised both economically and politically. Meanwhile, older generations still harken back to the stability and certainties of the Soviet period. Putin has played the nationalist card rather skilfully in an attempt to bolster support for himself while large sections of the public are critical of public institutions in general due to widespread corruption and poverty.

    The Russian intervention in Syria has been used by Putin to appeal to nationalist sentiment amongst the population while also being motivated by military and geopolitical concerns.

    Putin is no doubt happy with the progress of the Syrian Armed Forces and their shia allies, with the help of Russian air support, in gradually liberating region after region from jihadi control. However, he still has major problems with regard to his Syrian strategy.

    There are the Kurds protected in Eastern Syria by the U.S. which is actively building military bases in that area. Just as big a problem is the wild card of Turkey. Putin has successfully pulled President Erodgan of Turkey in to the Russian sphere of influence by the oil pipeline and nuclear power plant deals they have signed. However, Erdogan is an unstable and unreliable ally who is trying to play off the U.S., its ally for many decades, against his new found ally in the form of Russia.

    Putin now has the added complication of Western imperialism resorting to open military intervention, after the failure of their jihadi allies to overthrow Assad’s government. The U.S. has made it clear that any more chemical attacks and the next missile strike will be much more formidable. U.S. Vice President Mike Pence has warned Russia and Assad that President Trump has:

    “made clear that the United States of America is prepared to sustain this effort to re-establish the deterrent framework that exists in order that the Syrian regime and its patrons know there will be a price to pay if chemicals weapons are used again against men, women and children,”

    Recent history has show that as sure as night follows day the genocidal jihadi groups will try and repeat their tired old trick of screaming “chemical weapons’’ if they keep losing ground on the battlefield. The Russian Foreign Ministry have warned of these tactics repeatedly in recent months.

    Now Putin has to face up to the fact that Western imperialism will continue using this propaganda ruse as an excuse for much greater missile attacks against Assad and his military over the next period. What are his options?

    He can simply try and wait it out until the jihadi groups have all been defeated by the SAA and its allies. A dangerous tactic as this may take some time yet, particularly the jihadi bastions in Idlib province.

    Putin could try once again the diplomatic card and try to stall further U.S. military action. Yet he is aware the U.S. has no intention of leaving Syria over the next period and is waiting like a hawk for further excuses to attack/overthrow his ally President Assad.

    The problem with this approach is that Russia is continuing with its appeasement of Western imperialism. The general notes how Moscow has not armed Syria with S300 systems out of deference to its “Western partners’’. Has concern for Russia’s feelings stopped the U.S. from installing its Aegis Ballistic Missile Defence System in Poland and Rumania? Of course not.

    Putin could of course, promise Assad that Russia will shoot down any future missile strikes entailing the risk of course of open military confrontation with the U.S. and its allies. This is something he is loathe to do as ultimately he just wants peaceful cohabitation with the West not war.
     
    I don't see war can be avoided, i.e. conflict between U.S. and Russia. The old Soviets wouldn't have put up with so much crap from NATO, Israel and America.

    That is a must-read article. The author pulls much of the big picture together. I encourage you to re-link it in other threads on UR (or I will!).

    I’ve been barking up this tree for a long time; Western capitalism has run out of real capital. Financialization papered over the cracks far better, and for longer than I imagined it could back in 2007/08, but the cracks are opening up again. It needs more real capital NOW!, or it will come crashing down. I don’t know, but I suspect that it may have passed the point-of-no-return already.

    Russia, as one of the greatest repositories of real capital (land, natural & human resources), and having turned its recent resurrection to great power status to defending other nations’ real capital, is a prize it must win or die trying.

    It’s as simple, as complex and as existential as that.

    Recently, like the author, I too have developed some doubts that Russia’s strategy of rope-a-doping can be maintained for long enough to see them through the crisis unscathed. I doubt that message sent with the latest “missile fiasco” will be able to penetrate the ideological shield defending Western capitalism’s strategy. Finessing a stronger, more violent message, or a series of them will require truly exceptional skill, lest one them provokes the response no-one wants to see.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov

    I doubt that message sent with the latest “missile fiasco” will be able to penetrate the ideological shield defending Western capitalism’s strategy. Finessing a stronger, more violent message, or a series of them will require truly exceptional skill, lest one them provokes the response no-one wants to see.
     
    US military knows the score. Here is from someone who lives on those ever important operational levels:

    Do not believe a word you have heard from the Pentagon and the White House about the "success" of the cruise missile strikes on Friday last. A fraud is being perpetrated on the American people and the world at large. Frankly, General Mattis and General Dunford have dishonored themselves by going along with this charade.

    If you could go to the CAOC (i.e., the Combined Air Operations Center) located at the Al Udeid Air Force Base in Qatar and speak to officers working for CENTCOM, you would hear a mixture of disgust, shock and anger from many over the President's claim of "Mission Accomplished." And I am talking about people who have been supportive of President Trump. But Trump, with the sycophants at the Pentagon and the Joint Staff, has crossed a line into delusional thinking.
     
    The problem is two-fold: it is both existential in a sense of capitalism dying out across the board to a rather peculiar combination of traditional ignorance and arrogance embodied in Trump and his Administration--this is a local phenomenon. Albeit, truth to be told, Western institution can not produce anymore normal competent elites and this, of course, could be tried to this very crisis on a more general level.
    , @Y.L.

    That is a must-read article. The author pulls much of the big picture together. I encourage you to re-link it in other threads on UR (or I will!).

     

    Feel free; I'm glad you appreciated it.

    And I hope Andrei elaborates on the topic in a larger article for this site.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Y.L. says:
    @Andrei Martyanov
    Since I wrote this piece in September 2017 a lot, and I mean a lot, has changed in Syria re: Air-Defense. How many new complexes, apart from officially admitted 40 S1s delivered specifically to Syrian AD, Russia has now at her disposal in Syria--I don't know. I know the number grew dramatically, as did capability, since those assets, including now Syria's own AD, are fully integrated. State of Israel, who supports jihadists and terrorists of all kind is a huge part of a problem in the area, as I already pointed out in Israel Shamir's piece thread, and is going apoplectic as I type this. The reason being that IDF DOES KNOW the score of the latest attack and they do understand what appearance of increasing numbers of modern Russian AD systems means for Israel. Recent IAF's attack from Lebanon, where it obviously wanted to provoke Russian response speaks volumes. Considering a glittering track record of Israel in exaggerations, boasting and bluster it is not surprising to see their increased bellicosity because the bluff will be called. They know that. Considering Israel's influence on or, rather, complete ownership of totally corrupt American political "elite", Israel will continue her efforts to provoke the United States against Russia in Syria.

    Andrei, I have to pester you one last time. I read this article on SouthFront today:

    https://southfront.org/us-missile-strikes-in-syria-throw-down-the-gauntlet-to-russia-how-will-putin-respond/

    And I’d like your thoughts on these points the author makes. Is Putin making things worse? Are hardliners now finally getting through to him? Doesn’t he realize the enemy is like Nazi Germany and will only be satisfied with:

    The U.S. strategy for full spectrum dominance over Eurasia will not be complete until the theocratic regime in Iran has been overthrown and a pro-Western puppet installed in power. Once this has been accomplished then the West can focus upon its ultimate goal of overthrowing the nationalist regime in Moscow and breaking up Russia into a myriad of small puppet states. The gigantic mineral resources and land mass would then be at the disposal of Western imperialism.

    And here then are the author’s observations that interest me.

    [MORE]

    In many respects Trump and his coalition of the killing have put the ball in back Putin’s court.

    Putin can continue to patiently play the diplomacy card while trying to build up Russia’s trade in non dollar terms, and acquiring more and more gold, while building ever closer economic, military and political links to China. Will this be enough to stave off further Western encroachments upon Russia’s economy and its geopolitical position in Syria and Eastern Ukraine?

    The history of the Cold War and the appeasement period of the 1930s show that trying to negotiate while building up your economic/military resources is not enough to stop a “Terminator’’ like aggressor who just will not stop their aggressive actions towards you. During the Cold War there were times such as the Cuban Missile Crisis where U.S. imperialism was prepared to see nuclear armageddon rather than negotiate a compromise solution to the situation. It was only Kruschev’s willingness to back down, which cost him his position a year later, that averted World War 3.
    Cuba was thousands of miles away from Russia so Khrushchev could afford to make such a climbdown. However, if he had been faced with U.S. aggression on Russia’s border then that would have been a completely different and much more difficult situation.

    During the Cold War American imperialism was the dominant economic power on the planet which led to its aggressive foreign policy in defence of that economic position. Now the American empire is in decline it has become even more aggressive in a desperate effort to maintain its hegemony over the global economy. This imperial overreach is driven by several interlinked processes. Central to these processes has been the qualitative change to the nature of capitalism itself.

    Global capitalism, whose epicentre remains the United States has been suffering from a general tendency towards stagnation since the 1970s. This has been partially solved for short periods of time by the financialization of the world economy that has provided an outlet for the development of a huge orgy of speculative capital to produce massive returns. This greater financialization of the global economy has increased the rate of wealth transfer to the super rich built upon a gigantic explosion of debt that has built instability into the foundations of capitalism. The dangers of this for the imperial centre of capitalism in Washington are clearly defined by the economic historians John Bellamy Foster and Fred Magdoff:

    “The financialization of capitalism has resulted in a more uncontrollable system. [They observe -Saltycat] … a clear sense of the growing volatility and instability of the system. It is characteristic of speculative bubbles that once they stop expanding they burst. Continual increase of risk and more and more cash infusions into the financial system therefore become stronger imperatives the more fragile the financial structure becomes. The whole context is that of a financialization so out of control that unexpected and severe shocks to the system and resulting financial contagion are looked upon as inevitable’’.

    U.S. imperialism has increasingly relied upon ever greater infusions of debt into the capitalist system to maintain profitable outlets for finance capital. Finance capital must have free rein over the global economy to do as it pleases. It cannot afford to let upstarts such as Russia and China challenge its position of dominance over the resources and people of Eurasia. It is forced to take economic. political and military action to defend its interests. At the moment those interests are focused upon preserving its position in the Middle East. After “victories’’ in Iraq and Libya the U.S. feels threatened by Assad’s regime in Syria that is trying to pursue an alliance with a newly resurgent Russia under Putin. The logic of this policy means that U.S. imperialism cannot even countenance a compromise deal over Syria with Russia. Nothing less than the overthrow of Assad and the installation of a pro-Western puppet government will do.

    This brings us back to Putin’s dilemma in Syria. The relative failure of the recent missile strikes in Syria has been celebrated by some in the alternative media as a ‘victory’ for Putin/Assad and that the U.S. will now refrain from any more attacks. Such a view fails to understand that U.S. imperialism, which is an empire decline, cannot afford to let its rivals such as Russia challenge its supremacy over the economic resources and politics of the Middle East. Putin understands this but is caught in a dilemma.

    Putin represents the interests of the billionaire oligarchs, who emerged after the collapse of Stalinism and the reintroduction of capitalism in the 1990s. In the 1990s Putin was part of Yeltsin’s inner circle known affectionately as the “Family’’. Was their major concern the well being of ordinary Russian citizens? Of course not. It was the re-establishment of capitalism in Russia under the control of the oligarchs. Once firmly in power Putin has taken a more nationalist position than Yeltsin but still his foreign policy has followed the same lines of trying to maintain friendly, conciliatory relations with Western imperialism.

    Circa 2018 Putin is subject to a number of major problems. Despite his election victory Putin is acutely aware that sections of the population, particularly the youth feel disenfranchised both economically and politically. Meanwhile, older generations still harken back to the stability and certainties of the Soviet period. Putin has played the nationalist card rather skilfully in an attempt to bolster support for himself while large sections of the public are critical of public institutions in general due to widespread corruption and poverty.

    The Russian intervention in Syria has been used by Putin to appeal to nationalist sentiment amongst the population while also being motivated by military and geopolitical concerns.

    Putin is no doubt happy with the progress of the Syrian Armed Forces and their shia allies, with the help of Russian air support, in gradually liberating region after region from jihadi control. However, he still has major problems with regard to his Syrian strategy.

    There are the Kurds protected in Eastern Syria by the U.S. which is actively building military bases in that area. Just as big a problem is the wild card of Turkey. Putin has successfully pulled President Erodgan of Turkey in to the Russian sphere of influence by the oil pipeline and nuclear power plant deals they have signed. However, Erdogan is an unstable and unreliable ally who is trying to play off the U.S., its ally for many decades, against his new found ally in the form of Russia.

    Putin now has the added complication of Western imperialism resorting to open military intervention, after the failure of their jihadi allies to overthrow Assad’s government. The U.S. has made it clear that any more chemical attacks and the next missile strike will be much more formidable. U.S. Vice President Mike Pence has warned Russia and Assad that President Trump has:

    “made clear that the United States of America is prepared to sustain this effort to re-establish the deterrent framework that exists in order that the Syrian regime and its patrons know there will be a price to pay if chemicals weapons are used again against men, women and children,”

    Recent history has show that as sure as night follows day the genocidal jihadi groups will try and repeat their tired old trick of screaming “chemical weapons’’ if they keep losing ground on the battlefield. The Russian Foreign Ministry have warned of these tactics repeatedly in recent months.

    Now Putin has to face up to the fact that Western imperialism will continue using this propaganda ruse as an excuse for much greater missile attacks against Assad and his military over the next period. What are his options?

    He can simply try and wait it out until the jihadi groups have all been defeated by the SAA and its allies. A dangerous tactic as this may take some time yet, particularly the jihadi bastions in Idlib province.

    Putin could try once again the diplomatic card and try to stall further U.S. military action. Yet he is aware the U.S. has no intention of leaving Syria over the next period and is waiting like a hawk for further excuses to attack/overthrow his ally President Assad.

    The problem with this approach is that Russia is continuing with its appeasement of Western imperialism. The general notes how Moscow has not armed Syria with S300 systems out of deference to its “Western partners’’. Has concern for Russia’s feelings stopped the U.S. from installing its Aegis Ballistic Missile Defence System in Poland and Rumania? Of course not.

    Putin could of course, promise Assad that Russia will shoot down any future missile strikes entailing the risk of course of open military confrontation with the U.S. and its allies. This is something he is loathe to do as ultimately he just wants peaceful cohabitation with the West not war.

    I don’t see war can be avoided, i.e. conflict between U.S. and Russia. The old Soviets wouldn’t have put up with so much crap from NATO, Israel and America.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Erebus
    That is a must-read article. The author pulls much of the big picture together. I encourage you to re-link it in other threads on UR (or I will!).

    I've been barking up this tree for a long time; Western capitalism has run out of real capital. Financialization papered over the cracks far better, and for longer than I imagined it could back in 2007/08, but the cracks are opening up again. It needs more real capital NOW!, or it will come crashing down. I don't know, but I suspect that it may have passed the point-of-no-return already.

    Russia, as one of the greatest repositories of real capital (land, natural & human resources), and having turned its recent resurrection to great power status to defending other nations' real capital, is a prize it must win or die trying.

    It's as simple, as complex and as existential as that.

    Recently, like the author, I too have developed some doubts that Russia's strategy of rope-a-doping can be maintained for long enough to see them through the crisis unscathed. I doubt that message sent with the latest "missile fiasco" will be able to penetrate the ideological shield defending Western capitalism's strategy. Finessing a stronger, more violent message, or a series of them will require truly exceptional skill, lest one them provokes the response no-one wants to see.
    , @Andrei Martyanov
    Author is generally correct in economic political sense but we knew all along that the "model", financial capitalism is dying. It simply doesn't work. It, actually, never did. But author is missing one very important point and this is approach to war. What he calls appeasement is not appeasement at all and one is only left to wonder what is going on in Syria on Russian side since the flow of heavy equipment there is non-stop and massive. This hardly qualifies as "appeasement". It is also known that Air Defense there was improved greatly. So, here are the questions and answers to some of them:

    1. Is Russia preparing for war? Yes.
    2. Does Russia see Syria as possible theater where it all will start? Yes.
    3. Is Russia playing for time? Absolutely.
    4. Does United States have actual resources to fight Russia? No.

    I don’t see war can be avoided, i.e. conflict between U.S. and Russia. The old Soviets wouldn’t have put up with so much crap from NATO, Israel and America.
     
    War is already in progress and, as I stated not for once, it matters who controls escalation. There is a huge difference, again, between what United States call "our forces" meaning the bunch of jihadist proxies and Kurds and Russia's forces, which are Russian. I understand that there are many people who readily produce all kinds of cataclysmic scenarios but the scale of hysteria, not to mention a volume of self-assuring BS which US started already to use at the top political level testifies to the fact that as Graham Allison noted: “However demonic, however destructive, however devious, however deserving of being strangled Russia is, the brute fact is that we cannot kill this bastard without committing suicide." I wrote the book precisely on this matter and it is about the fact that American military-technological bluff was called. Russia controls escalation, she controls it, even in Syria, by:

    1. Readiness to bear the costs;
    2. Ability to exert an extremely high price from the US for any Syria's misadventure.

    Here, I diverge with author of otherwise thoughtful piece dramatically. As former military professional I, apart from considering resources factor, calculate forces on both sides and what they can do to each-other. April 13 salvo showed to those who have eyes not exactly what author tries to imply. In more general way, American military mythology is being destroyed on a daily bases.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Andrei Martyanov
    Since I wrote this piece in September 2017 a lot, and I mean a lot, has changed in Syria re: Air-Defense. How many new complexes, apart from officially admitted 40 S1s delivered specifically to Syrian AD, Russia has now at her disposal in Syria--I don't know. I know the number grew dramatically, as did capability, since those assets, including now Syria's own AD, are fully integrated. State of Israel, who supports jihadists and terrorists of all kind is a huge part of a problem in the area, as I already pointed out in Israel Shamir's piece thread, and is going apoplectic as I type this. The reason being that IDF DOES KNOW the score of the latest attack and they do understand what appearance of increasing numbers of modern Russian AD systems means for Israel. Recent IAF's attack from Lebanon, where it obviously wanted to provoke Russian response speaks volumes. Considering a glittering track record of Israel in exaggerations, boasting and bluster it is not surprising to see their increased bellicosity because the bluff will be called. They know that. Considering Israel's influence on or, rather, complete ownership of totally corrupt American political "elite", Israel will continue her efforts to provoke the United States against Russia in Syria.

    Hi, Andrei,

    Thanks. I read your blog post today and a lot of the technical language is beyond me but AD means Air Defense, not Area Denial I think?

    http://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/2018/04/rma.html

    This part I understand:

    The issue here is extremely, like almost kindergarten level, simple—the US and her so called Russia’s “military expertdom”, bar some very few (and I mean a very small number: 5-6 at most, if not fewer) real professionals and true experts, is pathetic. It has a “stellar” record of neither predicting nor understanding Soviet/Russian military-technological realities nor operational, strategic or political ramifications of just about anything Russia (or USSR) ever produced in her military technology. It is akin to explaining the aliens from other galaxy who procreate by spawning what is the meaning of unprotected sex.

    I think your point is America-France-Britain-Saudi-Arabia-Israel have no counter measures now. But perhaps want to attack soon because Russia doesn’t have huge volume of such missiles yet. I wish Putin hadn’t jumped the gun with his speech. A.Z. Empire doesn’t either listen or talk; as The Saker says it only says, “Fall on your knees and worship me.”

    You wrote comment # 19 on Shamir’s post today this and I won’t disagree because you’re the expert.

    Anything Israel’s military says on this issue is irrelevant and, as always, driven by purely ideological and political considerations. Here is a taste:

    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-04-19/new-russian-weapons-alarm-israel-may-trigger-next-syrian-crisis

    Israel’s worst nightmare is competent and properly armed Syrian Air Defense and this is precisely where it is going right now in the area. Per best–subsonic TLAMs of any variety represent with appropriate targeting within integrated system easy targets for something like S1s, which were created from the inception as anti-TLAM systems. Recent IAF strike in Syria (about couple weeks ago) was to prevent deployment of Iranian TOR-M1 in Syria. So, Israelis’ opinions on this issue can not absolutely, especially having IDF “stellar” record of bluster and boasting, be taken seriously. Here is an opinion of high ranking US military-intelligence officer which is rather revealing.

    http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2018/04/trumps-big-flop-in-syria-by-publius-tacitus.html

    What I think this means is that there is no way for America not to be pushed by its slave masters, not just Israel but the government and its global oligarchs appear to be the masters, into a war with Russia.

    I suppose the world is in God’s hands but this war is a terrible sin. So many evil people.

    https://russian-faith.com/culture/great-early-20th-c-russian-christian-philosopher-devils-role-history-n1370

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Y.L.
    Hi, Andrei, I tried commenting a few moments ago and was informed my comment was marked as spam. Here is the latest news from Bloomberg:

    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-04-19/new-russian-weapons-alarm-israel-may-trigger-next-syrian-crisis

    Israeli analysts and former defense officials say there’s only one likely response from the Jewish state if the S-300 surface-to-air missile systems are delivered to Syria: An immediate attempt to blow them up.

    That would upend the delicate relationship between Israel and Russia, who’ve kept channels open despite supporting opposite sides in Syria. And it could create another dangerous moment with the potential to escalate the seven-year civil war into a wider conflict...

    “Syria already has some good short and medium-range systems,’’ said Jeremy Binnie, Middle East and Africa editor at Jane’s Defence Weekly. Add the S-300s, and “they would be able to form a fairly comprehensive, multi-layered air defense umbrella over their country.”

    In any attempt to destroy the new weapons, Israel would probably use U.S.-built F-35 stealth aircraft and electronic warfare, he said.

    Russian military experts say that while the S-300 is very powerful, it isn’t foolproof.

    “There’s no invincible air-defense system,’’ said Viktor Murakhovsky, a former army colonel who’s now a government adviser. “Just like there are no invincible aircraft.’’
     

    See also: https://kek.gg/u/CFhS

    What is odd is that, according to pro-Syrian regime sources, they’re unloading their cargo in secret — under the cover of smoke and aerosol gas intended to block prying eyes, satellite and drone sensors.

    What the ships are carrying is unknown. They have been tracked by military analysts and watchers passing through the Black Sea and the Bosphorus Strait into the Mediterranean in recent days.
     

    Since I wrote this piece in September 2017 a lot, and I mean a lot, has changed in Syria re: Air-Defense. How many new complexes, apart from officially admitted 40 S1s delivered specifically to Syrian AD, Russia has now at her disposal in Syria–I don’t know. I know the number grew dramatically, as did capability, since those assets, including now Syria’s own AD, are fully integrated. State of Israel, who supports jihadists and terrorists of all kind is a huge part of a problem in the area, as I already pointed out in Israel Shamir’s piece thread, and is going apoplectic as I type this. The reason being that IDF DOES KNOW the score of the latest attack and they do understand what appearance of increasing numbers of modern Russian AD systems means for Israel. Recent IAF’s attack from Lebanon, where it obviously wanted to provoke Russian response speaks volumes. Considering a glittering track record of Israel in exaggerations, boasting and bluster it is not surprising to see their increased bellicosity because the bluff will be called. They know that. Considering Israel’s influence on or, rather, complete ownership of totally corrupt American political “elite”, Israel will continue her efforts to provoke the United States against Russia in Syria.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Y.L.
    Hi, Andrei,

    Thanks. I read your blog post today and a lot of the technical language is beyond me but AD means Air Defense, not Area Denial I think?

    http://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/2018/04/rma.html

    This part I understand:

    The issue here is extremely, like almost kindergarten level, simple—the US and her so called Russia's "military expertdom", bar some very few (and I mean a very small number: 5-6 at most, if not fewer) real professionals and true experts, is pathetic. It has a "stellar" record of neither predicting nor understanding Soviet/Russian military-technological realities nor operational, strategic or political ramifications of just about anything Russia (or USSR) ever produced in her military technology. It is akin to explaining the aliens from other galaxy who procreate by spawning what is the meaning of unprotected sex.


    I think your point is America-France-Britain-Saudi-Arabia-Israel have no counter measures now. But perhaps want to attack soon because Russia doesn't have huge volume of such missiles yet. I wish Putin hadn't jumped the gun with his speech. A.Z. Empire doesn't either listen or talk; as The Saker says it only says, "Fall on your knees and worship me."

    You wrote comment # 19 on Shamir's post today this and I won't disagree because you're the expert.


    Anything Israel’s military says on this issue is irrelevant and, as always, driven by purely ideological and political considerations. Here is a taste:

    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-04-19/new-russian-weapons-alarm-israel-may-trigger-next-syrian-crisis

    Israel’s worst nightmare is competent and properly armed Syrian Air Defense and this is precisely where it is going right now in the area. Per best–subsonic TLAMs of any variety represent with appropriate targeting within integrated system easy targets for something like S1s, which were created from the inception as anti-TLAM systems. Recent IAF strike in Syria (about couple weeks ago) was to prevent deployment of Iranian TOR-M1 in Syria. So, Israelis’ opinions on this issue can not absolutely, especially having IDF “stellar” record of bluster and boasting, be taken seriously. Here is an opinion of high ranking US military-intelligence officer which is rather revealing.

    http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2018/04/trumps-big-flop-in-syria-by-publius-tacitus.html
     

    What I think this means is that there is no way for America not to be pushed by its slave masters, not just Israel but the government and its global oligarchs appear to be the masters, into a war with Russia.

    I suppose the world is in God's hands but this war is a terrible sin. So many evil people.

    https://russian-faith.com/culture/great-early-20th-c-russian-christian-philosopher-devils-role-history-n1370

    , @Y.L.
    Andrei, I have to pester you one last time. I read this article on SouthFront today:

    https://southfront.org/us-missile-strikes-in-syria-throw-down-the-gauntlet-to-russia-how-will-putin-respond/

    And I'd like your thoughts on these points the author makes. Is Putin making things worse? Are hardliners now finally getting through to him? Doesn't he realize the enemy is like Nazi Germany and will only be satisfied with:

    The U.S. strategy for full spectrum dominance over Eurasia will not be complete until the theocratic regime in Iran has been overthrown and a pro-Western puppet installed in power. Once this has been accomplished then the West can focus upon its ultimate goal of overthrowing the nationalist regime in Moscow and breaking up Russia into a myriad of small puppet states. The gigantic mineral resources and land mass would then be at the disposal of Western imperialism.

     

    And here then are the author's observations that interest me.

    In many respects Trump and his coalition of the killing have put the ball in back Putin’s court.

    Putin can continue to patiently play the diplomacy card while trying to build up Russia’s trade in non dollar terms, and acquiring more and more gold, while building ever closer economic, military and political links to China. Will this be enough to stave off further Western encroachments upon Russia’s economy and its geopolitical position in Syria and Eastern Ukraine?

    The history of the Cold War and the appeasement period of the 1930s show that trying to negotiate while building up your economic/military resources is not enough to stop a “Terminator’’ like aggressor who just will not stop their aggressive actions towards you. During the Cold War there were times such as the Cuban Missile Crisis where U.S. imperialism was prepared to see nuclear armageddon rather than negotiate a compromise solution to the situation. It was only Kruschev’s willingness to back down, which cost him his position a year later, that averted World War 3.
    Cuba was thousands of miles away from Russia so Khrushchev could afford to make such a climbdown. However, if he had been faced with U.S. aggression on Russia’s border then that would have been a completely different and much more difficult situation.

    During the Cold War American imperialism was the dominant economic power on the planet which led to its aggressive foreign policy in defence of that economic position. Now the American empire is in decline it has become even more aggressive in a desperate effort to maintain its hegemony over the global economy. This imperial overreach is driven by several interlinked processes. Central to these processes has been the qualitative change to the nature of capitalism itself.

    Global capitalism, whose epicentre remains the United States has been suffering from a general tendency towards stagnation since the 1970s. This has been partially solved for short periods of time by the financialization of the world economy that has provided an outlet for the development of a huge orgy of speculative capital to produce massive returns. This greater financialization of the global economy has increased the rate of wealth transfer to the super rich built upon a gigantic explosion of debt that has built instability into the foundations of capitalism. The dangers of this for the imperial centre of capitalism in Washington are clearly defined by the economic historians John Bellamy Foster and Fred Magdoff:

    “The financialization of capitalism has resulted in a more uncontrollable system. [They observe -Saltycat] … a clear sense of the growing volatility and instability of the system. It is characteristic of speculative bubbles that once they stop expanding they burst. Continual increase of risk and more and more cash infusions into the financial system therefore become stronger imperatives the more fragile the financial structure becomes. The whole context is that of a financialization so out of control that unexpected and severe shocks to the system and resulting financial contagion are looked upon as inevitable’’.

    U.S. imperialism has increasingly relied upon ever greater infusions of debt into the capitalist system to maintain profitable outlets for finance capital. Finance capital must have free rein over the global economy to do as it pleases. It cannot afford to let upstarts such as Russia and China challenge its position of dominance over the resources and people of Eurasia. It is forced to take economic. political and military action to defend its interests. At the moment those interests are focused upon preserving its position in the Middle East. After “victories’’ in Iraq and Libya the U.S. feels threatened by Assad’s regime in Syria that is trying to pursue an alliance with a newly resurgent Russia under Putin. The logic of this policy means that U.S. imperialism cannot even countenance a compromise deal over Syria with Russia. Nothing less than the overthrow of Assad and the installation of a pro-Western puppet government will do.

    This brings us back to Putin’s dilemma in Syria. The relative failure of the recent missile strikes in Syria has been celebrated by some in the alternative media as a ‘victory’ for Putin/Assad and that the U.S. will now refrain from any more attacks. Such a view fails to understand that U.S. imperialism, which is an empire decline, cannot afford to let its rivals such as Russia challenge its supremacy over the economic resources and politics of the Middle East. Putin understands this but is caught in a dilemma.

    Putin represents the interests of the billionaire oligarchs, who emerged after the collapse of Stalinism and the reintroduction of capitalism in the 1990s. In the 1990s Putin was part of Yeltsin’s inner circle known affectionately as the “Family’’. Was their major concern the well being of ordinary Russian citizens? Of course not. It was the re-establishment of capitalism in Russia under the control of the oligarchs. Once firmly in power Putin has taken a more nationalist position than Yeltsin but still his foreign policy has followed the same lines of trying to maintain friendly, conciliatory relations with Western imperialism.

    Circa 2018 Putin is subject to a number of major problems. Despite his election victory Putin is acutely aware that sections of the population, particularly the youth feel disenfranchised both economically and politically. Meanwhile, older generations still harken back to the stability and certainties of the Soviet period. Putin has played the nationalist card rather skilfully in an attempt to bolster support for himself while large sections of the public are critical of public institutions in general due to widespread corruption and poverty.

    The Russian intervention in Syria has been used by Putin to appeal to nationalist sentiment amongst the population while also being motivated by military and geopolitical concerns.

    Putin is no doubt happy with the progress of the Syrian Armed Forces and their shia allies, with the help of Russian air support, in gradually liberating region after region from jihadi control. However, he still has major problems with regard to his Syrian strategy.

    There are the Kurds protected in Eastern Syria by the U.S. which is actively building military bases in that area. Just as big a problem is the wild card of Turkey. Putin has successfully pulled President Erodgan of Turkey in to the Russian sphere of influence by the oil pipeline and nuclear power plant deals they have signed. However, Erdogan is an unstable and unreliable ally who is trying to play off the U.S., its ally for many decades, against his new found ally in the form of Russia.

    Putin now has the added complication of Western imperialism resorting to open military intervention, after the failure of their jihadi allies to overthrow Assad’s government. The U.S. has made it clear that any more chemical attacks and the next missile strike will be much more formidable. U.S. Vice President Mike Pence has warned Russia and Assad that President Trump has:

    “made clear that the United States of America is prepared to sustain this effort to re-establish the deterrent framework that exists in order that the Syrian regime and its patrons know there will be a price to pay if chemicals weapons are used again against men, women and children,”

    Recent history has show that as sure as night follows day the genocidal jihadi groups will try and repeat their tired old trick of screaming “chemical weapons’’ if they keep losing ground on the battlefield. The Russian Foreign Ministry have warned of these tactics repeatedly in recent months.

    Now Putin has to face up to the fact that Western imperialism will continue using this propaganda ruse as an excuse for much greater missile attacks against Assad and his military over the next period. What are his options?

    He can simply try and wait it out until the jihadi groups have all been defeated by the SAA and its allies. A dangerous tactic as this may take some time yet, particularly the jihadi bastions in Idlib province.

    Putin could try once again the diplomatic card and try to stall further U.S. military action. Yet he is aware the U.S. has no intention of leaving Syria over the next period and is waiting like a hawk for further excuses to attack/overthrow his ally President Assad.

    The problem with this approach is that Russia is continuing with its appeasement of Western imperialism. The general notes how Moscow has not armed Syria with S300 systems out of deference to its “Western partners’’. Has concern for Russia’s feelings stopped the U.S. from installing its Aegis Ballistic Missile Defence System in Poland and Rumania? Of course not.

    Putin could of course, promise Assad that Russia will shoot down any future missile strikes entailing the risk of course of open military confrontation with the U.S. and its allies. This is something he is loathe to do as ultimately he just wants peaceful cohabitation with the West not war.
     
    I don't see war can be avoided, i.e. conflict between U.S. and Russia. The old Soviets wouldn't have put up with so much crap from NATO, Israel and America.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Andrei Martyanov

    I just hope Syria gets more Pantsirs and S-300s.
     
    It is clear now that Syria WILL get S-300s for sure. Some country to the South of Syria may go apoplectic.

    Hi, Andrei, I tried commenting a few moments ago and was informed my comment was marked as spam. Here is the latest news from Bloomberg:

    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-04-19/new-russian-weapons-alarm-israel-may-trigger-next-syrian-crisis

    Israeli analysts and former defense officials say there’s only one likely response from the Jewish state if the S-300 surface-to-air missile systems are delivered to Syria: An immediate attempt to blow them up.

    That would upend the delicate relationship between Israel and Russia, who’ve kept channels open despite supporting opposite sides in Syria. And it could create another dangerous moment with the potential to escalate the seven-year civil war into a wider conflict…

    “Syria already has some good short and medium-range systems,’’ said Jeremy Binnie, Middle East and Africa editor at Jane’s Defence Weekly. Add the S-300s, and “they would be able to form a fairly comprehensive, multi-layered air defense umbrella over their country.”

    In any attempt to destroy the new weapons, Israel would probably use U.S.-built F-35 stealth aircraft and electronic warfare, he said.

    Russian military experts say that while the S-300 is very powerful, it isn’t foolproof.

    “There’s no invincible air-defense system,’’ said Viktor Murakhovsky, a former army colonel who’s now a government adviser. “Just like there are no invincible aircraft.’’

    See also: https://kek.gg/u/CFhS

    What is odd is that, according to pro-Syrian regime sources, they’re unloading their cargo in secret — under the cover of smoke and aerosol gas intended to block prying eyes, satellite and drone sensors.

    What the ships are carrying is unknown. They have been tracked by military analysts and watchers passing through the Black Sea and the Bosphorus Strait into the Mediterranean in recent days.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
    Since I wrote this piece in September 2017 a lot, and I mean a lot, has changed in Syria re: Air-Defense. How many new complexes, apart from officially admitted 40 S1s delivered specifically to Syrian AD, Russia has now at her disposal in Syria--I don't know. I know the number grew dramatically, as did capability, since those assets, including now Syria's own AD, are fully integrated. State of Israel, who supports jihadists and terrorists of all kind is a huge part of a problem in the area, as I already pointed out in Israel Shamir's piece thread, and is going apoplectic as I type this. The reason being that IDF DOES KNOW the score of the latest attack and they do understand what appearance of increasing numbers of modern Russian AD systems means for Israel. Recent IAF's attack from Lebanon, where it obviously wanted to provoke Russian response speaks volumes. Considering a glittering track record of Israel in exaggerations, boasting and bluster it is not surprising to see their increased bellicosity because the bluff will be called. They know that. Considering Israel's influence on or, rather, complete ownership of totally corrupt American political "elite", Israel will continue her efforts to provoke the United States against Russia in Syria.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • During the August 2008 Russo-Georgian War, the operations of Russia's 58th Army were termed as “coercion into peace”. It is an appropriate term once one recalls what truly was at stake then. Russians did win that war and, indeed, coerced Georgia into a much more peaceful mood. In Clausewitzian terms the Russians achieved the main...
  • The biggest problem for every empire is arrogance, corruption and culture of stagnation. That has happened to Roman Empire, Soviet Union and more likely in USA. The “victory” (1991) bred that arrogance and since it things have getting worse and worse.

    It looks like all empires are doomed – sooner or later. Nowadays we don’t have to wait for 500 years. Things goes at least 10 times faster. But here’s the point: when Empire had done, there is chance for better America for Americans. I doubt does any American really love their military industrial complex if prize is destruction of civil society.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Size does matter and so does range and speed whenever anyone talks about weapons. It seems that there is a great deal of confusion which perpetuates itself in regards to a relatively small Russian military contingent in Syria. The most popular indicator of this confusion is a never ending discussion of a possible American attack...
  • @Andrei Martyanov

    I just hope Syria gets more Pantsirs and S-300s.
     
    It is clear now that Syria WILL get S-300s for sure. Some country to the South of Syria may go apoplectic.

    Syria needs to ring Al Tanf with an s-300 and about 20 Pantsirs and then attempt a reconciliation agreement with the “rebel” leaders there. Once that fails, they should announce a pending offensive, stockpile s-300 and Pantsir missiles, and then follow through with the offensive downing attacking aircraft as needed.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @myself
    How to hit back? A most vital question.

    Aside from the usual ways: In Iraq, in Afghanistan, possibly even in the Ukraine, there are some other possible avenues.

    One, America's allies must be made to feel pain. As bombs take Russian lives, and destroy Russian allies, America's allies must pay a price. Israel and Saudi Arabia can be attacked with ballistic and cruise missiles. The formulation is simple - when American/British/French cruise missiles and smart bombs rain down on Russian allies, ballistic, hypersonic and cruise missiles will rain down on Israel and Saudi Arabia. As Russia is made to look weak, America must be made to appear unable to protect allies. This sort of war can and would certainly go on for a very long time, a slow grinding war that is more a test of will than one of firepower.

    Does Saudi Arabia sponsor proxies in Syria? Does Israel sponsor portions of the "Free Syrian Army?" Do both nations seek to topple Russia's Syrian ally?
    Then loudly and constantly portray these groups as terrorists (a believable descriptor indeed). Portray the Syrian state as the victim, aided by their heroic Russian friends. Beyond that, there is the real option of arms and advisors to Yemen against Saudi Arabia, and the same to Hamas against Israel. Let your tormentors feel pain, the more pain for all, the better! You will feel it as well. But as Russia is under existential threat, what of it?

    Russia must be ready for a rekindling of Chechen hostilities, courtesy of the CIA, Mossad and MI 6. Russia must be ready for intense domestic terror.

    Russia can reply to this with recognizing the very real and growing ethnic divisions within the United States, Britain and France (if France looks like going neutral, leave them off the list).

    In Britain, Russia can exploit racial tensions that are ready to boil over. The disaffected millions of Muslim and African immigrants, most alienated and jobless, are rife for arming and organizing. Start a low-level but pernicious and ineradicable insurgency in Britain itself - a British analog to arming Hamas and the Yemenis.

    In America, there is the tens of millions strong and unassimilable Hispanic population in the south-western states, many of whom are keen on the idea of Mexican identitarianism. Perfect breeding conditions for a low-grade insurgency, long running guerrilla war. There are also large inner-city ethnic gangs all across America, most or all of whom have no stake in society, all of whom feel antagonistic to the law. Arm them and set them loose.

    NONE of these insurgent and criminal trends will topple the U.S. or British governments. That's unrealistic.

    The idea is simply to make the American and British populations know that the wars their leaders have begun, have come home to roost. Russia must force the United States and the United Kingdom to become increasingly and openly authoritarian or even totalitarian.

    Russia's living standards will fall, sanctions will bite, the luxuries and necessities will run low. Russia must draw on the strengths of the ethnostate, of a cohesive national patriotism, and exploit the many and deep fissures in America and Britain.

    Agony and Terror, Agony and Terror!

    THESE will be Russia's reality. Let them be undeniably real to Russia's enemies, in turn!

    You do know that we are at full employment in U.K. ? insurgency here…oh you funny man ,please continue with the wankfest Boris.

    Read More
    • Replies: @RadicalCenter
    Your girls are raped by the tens of thousands, for decades, while your pussy formerly-great formerly-Britain submits to it. Yeah, you’re in a position to lecture Russia.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @myself
    The answer is BODYBAGS. LOTS OF BODYBAGS.

    We shall see if the Russians are truly as tough and resilient as history has made them out to be. The goal is indeed regime change in Moscow, and of course the break-up and essentially the erasure of Russia and all its people from history and memory.

    There are no more doubts about that, unless the Russian people are still delusional and oh-so-idealistic. Yes, starry-eyed idealism, one of the great failings of Russia - the whole-hearted support for the early Communist Revolution, and the belief that Utopia was just around the corner, was proof enough of that. Russians have a truly astounding ability to ignore real world evidence.

    In counter-balance , I suggest the approach of Vo Nguyen Giap, late of North Vietnam fame/infamy. He said, in the 1960s, something to the effect of "We will fight far, far beyond the year 2000. You will kill many of us, we will hurt few of you. In the end, you will lose. And we will still be here".

    So it came to pass.

    If Russia is to perish, then it must inflict as much pain and harm as it can on its tormentors in the process. It must become, to put it one way, "Asiatic". What that means is this: Russia must now accept that it will die, and decide to die heroically, sword in hand. To renounce reconciliation, and to choose as its legacy unyielding resistance.

    The ploy of the Empire is obvious. Signal willingness to compromise, say that we seek merely to inflict lessons, not total subjugation. Yes, muddy the waters and Russia's judgment with hopes of "partnership". All the while making real moves to weaken, erode and destroy Russia.

    I am reminded of something I read in some old Chinese strategy manual.

    "When the foreign state sends envoys and gifts, and uses words of respect and friendship, and yet they mass and meneuver their forces for war - it is a sure sign that they are about to attack". So it is with the Empire.

    Forget about not "upsetting" the West. Restart and widen the Wars and Insurgencies in Iraq and Afghanistan. Restart and intensify the Ukraine War. Give the latest arms and equipment to North Korea. Widely share advanced designs and technologies with China, Iran and other states targeted by the Empire.

    Escalate - and choose, nay embrace its own suffering, in the grim consolation that it delays the Empire's triumph. When it is nearing the point of no return, then Russia must make good on its promise - as America would in that circumstance - and unleash the unthinkable. Otherwise, the strategic arsenal will have been for nought.

    The supreme irony here, IMHO, is that in degrading Western power as it dies, Russia shall have posthumous vengeance.

    There is one power that shall greatly benefit from the West's exhaustion. It is not America.

    who gives a crap the Chinese will have bought Russia in a generation…cheaply too given its a dump.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Y.L.
    Thanks, Andrei. You wrote:

    Because it is not easy to wipe out 2017 Nobel Peace Prize nominees–yes, this terrorist and USAID (read: CIA) supported outlet was nominated by imbeciles in Nobel Prize Committee. There are huge reputational risks involved with wiping them out, technically, however, it is not difficult.
     
    But my point:

    Why aren’t those transmissions found and jammed?
     
    Perhaps because they use cell phones and Russia would have to disable the entire network? You see, I made suggestions other than military action. Although Russia shouldn't give a damn because as long as they live and breathe, the Neocons and their slaves will hate them no matter what they do.

    Anyway, thanks and again, I think many Americans--if not the majority--don't buy the propaganda and hate incessant hate towards Russia and don't want war. Look at Alex Jones, Michael Savage, Tucker Carlson and so many others, even Roger Stone the other day.

    https://stonecoldtruth.com/the-presidents-syrian-mistake/

    But I think no one in power will listen. I just hope Syria gets more Pantsirs and S-300s.

    Your latest is here and worth reading:

    http://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/2018/04/publius-tacitus-brings-good-points.html


    I am not going to lie, I do not freaking enjoy writing on military and geopolitical issues—I would rather be writing about progressive rock, jazz and discuss architecture, nature and maybe write an article, here and there, on some strategic issues and history. I was denied this pleasure in 2014. I am, however, very encouraged by the fact that there are many American military professionals who are, well, professionals and as such remain true to their skills and knowledge. Doing so, they preserve their professional and human integrity which is not only admirable in itself but becomes increasingly important in the midst of media ignorant bacchanalia.
     

    I just hope Syria gets more Pantsirs and S-300s.

    It is clear now that Syria WILL get S-300s for sure. Some country to the South of Syria may go apoplectic.

    Read More
    • Replies: @The Scalpel
    Syria needs to ring Al Tanf with an s-300 and about 20 Pantsirs and then attempt a reconciliation agreement with the "rebel" leaders there. Once that fails, they should announce a pending offensive, stockpile s-300 and Pantsir missiles, and then follow through with the offensive downing attacking aircraft as needed.
    , @Y.L.
    Hi, Andrei, I tried commenting a few moments ago and was informed my comment was marked as spam. Here is the latest news from Bloomberg:

    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-04-19/new-russian-weapons-alarm-israel-may-trigger-next-syrian-crisis

    Israeli analysts and former defense officials say there’s only one likely response from the Jewish state if the S-300 surface-to-air missile systems are delivered to Syria: An immediate attempt to blow them up.

    That would upend the delicate relationship between Israel and Russia, who’ve kept channels open despite supporting opposite sides in Syria. And it could create another dangerous moment with the potential to escalate the seven-year civil war into a wider conflict...

    “Syria already has some good short and medium-range systems,’’ said Jeremy Binnie, Middle East and Africa editor at Jane’s Defence Weekly. Add the S-300s, and “they would be able to form a fairly comprehensive, multi-layered air defense umbrella over their country.”

    In any attempt to destroy the new weapons, Israel would probably use U.S.-built F-35 stealth aircraft and electronic warfare, he said.

    Russian military experts say that while the S-300 is very powerful, it isn’t foolproof.

    “There’s no invincible air-defense system,’’ said Viktor Murakhovsky, a former army colonel who’s now a government adviser. “Just like there are no invincible aircraft.’’
     

    See also: https://kek.gg/u/CFhS

    What is odd is that, according to pro-Syrian regime sources, they’re unloading their cargo in secret — under the cover of smoke and aerosol gas intended to block prying eyes, satellite and drone sensors.

    What the ships are carrying is unknown. They have been tracked by military analysts and watchers passing through the Black Sea and the Bosphorus Strait into the Mediterranean in recent days.
     

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • How to hit back? A most vital question.

    Aside from the usual ways: In Iraq, in Afghanistan, possibly even in the Ukraine, there are some other possible avenues.

    One, America’s allies must be made to feel pain. As bombs take Russian lives, and destroy Russian allies, America’s allies must pay a price. Israel and Saudi Arabia can be attacked with ballistic and cruise missiles. The formulation is simple – when American/British/French cruise missiles and smart bombs rain down on Russian allies, ballistic, hypersonic and cruise missiles will rain down on Israel and Saudi Arabia. As Russia is made to look weak, America must be made to appear unable to protect allies. This sort of war can and would certainly go on for a very long time, a slow grinding war that is more a test of will than one of firepower.

    Does Saudi Arabia sponsor proxies in Syria? Does Israel sponsor portions of the “Free Syrian Army?” Do both nations seek to topple Russia’s Syrian ally?
    Then loudly and constantly portray these groups as terrorists (a believable descriptor indeed). Portray the Syrian state as the victim, aided by their heroic Russian friends. Beyond that, there is the real option of arms and advisors to Yemen against Saudi Arabia, and the same to Hamas against Israel. Let your tormentors feel pain, the more pain for all, the better! You will feel it as well. But as Russia is under existential threat, what of it?

    Russia must be ready for a rekindling of Chechen hostilities, courtesy of the CIA, Mossad and MI 6. Russia must be ready for intense domestic terror.

    Russia can reply to this with recognizing the very real and growing ethnic divisions within the United States, Britain and France (if France looks like going neutral, leave them off the list).

    In Britain, Russia can exploit racial tensions that are ready to boil over. The disaffected millions of Muslim and African immigrants, most alienated and jobless, are rife for arming and organizing. Start a low-level but pernicious and ineradicable insurgency in Britain itself – a British analog to arming Hamas and the Yemenis.

    In America, there is the tens of millions strong and unassimilable Hispanic population in the south-western states, many of whom are keen on the idea of Mexican identitarianism. Perfect breeding conditions for a low-grade insurgency, long running guerrilla war. There are also large inner-city ethnic gangs all across America, most or all of whom have no stake in society, all of whom feel antagonistic to the law. Arm them and set them loose.

    NONE of these insurgent and criminal trends will topple the U.S. or British governments. That’s unrealistic.

    The idea is simply to make the American and British populations know that the wars their leaders have begun, have come home to roost. Russia must force the United States and the United Kingdom to become increasingly and openly authoritarian or even totalitarian.

    Russia’s living standards will fall, sanctions will bite, the luxuries and necessities will run low. Russia must draw on the strengths of the ethnostate, of a cohesive national patriotism, and exploit the many and deep fissures in America and Britain.

    Agony and Terror, Agony and Terror!

    THESE will be Russia’s reality. Let them be undeniably real to Russia’s enemies, in turn!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Thud
    You do know that we are at full employment in U.K. ? insurgency here...oh you funny man ,please continue with the wankfest Boris.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @myself
    The answer is BODYBAGS. LOTS OF BODYBAGS.

    We shall see if the Russians are truly as tough and resilient as history has made them out to be. The goal is indeed regime change in Moscow, and of course the break-up and essentially the erasure of Russia and all its people from history and memory.

    There are no more doubts about that, unless the Russian people are still delusional and oh-so-idealistic. Yes, starry-eyed idealism, one of the great failings of Russia - the whole-hearted support for the early Communist Revolution, and the belief that Utopia was just around the corner, was proof enough of that. Russians have a truly astounding ability to ignore real world evidence.

    In counter-balance , I suggest the approach of Vo Nguyen Giap, late of North Vietnam fame/infamy. He said, in the 1960s, something to the effect of "We will fight far, far beyond the year 2000. You will kill many of us, we will hurt few of you. In the end, you will lose. And we will still be here".

    So it came to pass.

    If Russia is to perish, then it must inflict as much pain and harm as it can on its tormentors in the process. It must become, to put it one way, "Asiatic". What that means is this: Russia must now accept that it will die, and decide to die heroically, sword in hand. To renounce reconciliation, and to choose as its legacy unyielding resistance.

    The ploy of the Empire is obvious. Signal willingness to compromise, say that we seek merely to inflict lessons, not total subjugation. Yes, muddy the waters and Russia's judgment with hopes of "partnership". All the while making real moves to weaken, erode and destroy Russia.

    I am reminded of something I read in some old Chinese strategy manual.

    "When the foreign state sends envoys and gifts, and uses words of respect and friendship, and yet they mass and meneuver their forces for war - it is a sure sign that they are about to attack". So it is with the Empire.

    Forget about not "upsetting" the West. Restart and widen the Wars and Insurgencies in Iraq and Afghanistan. Restart and intensify the Ukraine War. Give the latest arms and equipment to North Korea. Widely share advanced designs and technologies with China, Iran and other states targeted by the Empire.

    Escalate - and choose, nay embrace its own suffering, in the grim consolation that it delays the Empire's triumph. When it is nearing the point of no return, then Russia must make good on its promise - as America would in that circumstance - and unleash the unthinkable. Otherwise, the strategic arsenal will have been for nought.

    The supreme irony here, IMHO, is that in degrading Western power as it dies, Russia shall have posthumous vengeance.

    There is one power that shall greatly benefit from the West's exhaustion. It is not America.

    Islam and China will benefit from the downfall of the USA. Both very bad for Russians. But the US is leaving Russia no choice but to distrust us, get closer to China than they otherwise would, and prepare for a wider war.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Andrei Martyanov

    Why doesn’t Russia and/or Syria prevent the White Helmets and their minions for staging another false flag, which is clearly asked for by the actions of the White House?
     
    Because it is not easy to wipe out 2017 Nobel Peace Prize nominees--yes, this terrorist and USAID (read: CIA) supported outlet was nominated by imbeciles in Nobel Prize Committee. There are huge reputational risks involved with wiping them out, technically, however, it is not difficult.

    Thanks, Andrei. You wrote:

    Because it is not easy to wipe out 2017 Nobel Peace Prize nominees–yes, this terrorist and USAID (read: CIA) supported outlet was nominated by imbeciles in Nobel Prize Committee. There are huge reputational risks involved with wiping them out, technically, however, it is not difficult.

    But my point:

    Why aren’t those transmissions found and jammed?

    Perhaps because they use cell phones and Russia would have to disable the entire network? You see, I made suggestions other than military action. Although Russia shouldn’t give a damn because as long as they live and breathe, the Neocons and their slaves will hate them no matter what they do.

    Anyway, thanks and again, I think many Americans–if not the majority–don’t buy the propaganda and hate incessant hate towards Russia and don’t want war. Look at Alex Jones, Michael Savage, Tucker Carlson and so many others, even Roger Stone the other day.

    https://stonecoldtruth.com/the-presidents-syrian-mistake/

    But I think no one in power will listen. I just hope Syria gets more Pantsirs and S-300s.

    Your latest is here and worth reading:

    http://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/2018/04/publius-tacitus-brings-good-points.html

    I am not going to lie, I do not freaking enjoy writing on military and geopolitical issues—I would rather be writing about progressive rock, jazz and discuss architecture, nature and maybe write an article, here and there, on some strategic issues and history. I was denied this pleasure in 2014. I am, however, very encouraged by the fact that there are many American military professionals who are, well, professionals and as such remain true to their skills and knowledge. Doing so, they preserve their professional and human integrity which is not only admirable in itself but becomes increasingly important in the midst of media ignorant bacchanalia.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov

    I just hope Syria gets more Pantsirs and S-300s.
     
    It is clear now that Syria WILL get S-300s for sure. Some country to the South of Syria may go apoplectic.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Allow me to do some layman’s speculation and thought-experimentation.

    The premise: Here I will use the IMF (considered the gold standard when it comes to economic figures) data for GDP, and also the Purchasing Power Parity figure, which is a very much better reflection of actual national economic size than the Exchange Rate figure, which is in turn a better measure of a nation’s ability to import and to invest abroad. I am using the PPP figure often used by economists.

    2017 figures: Russia has a 4 Trillion Dollar economy, while the United States has a 19.3 Trillion Dollar economy. The America vs Russia contest is the primary one. America’s staunch allies, at least until the cost becomes unbearable, are Britain and France, each with 2.8 Trillion Dollar GDPs.

    In sheer warmaking capacity, it would seems that Russia has little prospect of surviving in the long run. The combined total of America, Britain and France is 24.9 trillion, facing Russia’s 4 trillion.

    But wait, not so fast. First, America, Britain and France are not ONE unitary nation state, they are 3 states. The fracturing and breaking of alliances is a time-honored tenet of grand strategy.

    I do not know precisely how committed the elites of Britain and France are to Russia’s destruction, but it must be an integral part of Russia’s strategy to convince and cajole France and Britain to break ranks with the United States.

    It has been done before, and with the right approach, can be done again. Witness the diplomatic defeat of America when it tried to convince its vassals not to join the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. Who was first to jump ship? None other than the noble, principled U.S. ally, the United Kingdom! The only hold-outs are the United States and Japan, with Japan not ruling out joining.

    So diplomacy for Russia remains a prime tool. They key is identifying who wants Russia dead at all costs, and who don’t mind seeing Russia dead, but only if it doesn’t cause too much pain. I think Britain and France fall into the latter category. They can, in time and with effort and smart diplomacy, be induced to break ranks with America.

    That would immediately remove 23% of the war-making power arrayed against Russia. A small but important victory, if it can be done. More importantly, it would make the geographical position of the U.S. more awkward in Europe. Without French ports to bring land forces to the the Ukraine (via Germany), the United States would have to access Polish and Baltic ports – which are much easier for Russia to interdict in case of a shooting war. Not to mention that American supply convoys in the narrow Baltic Sea are more easily targeted by aircraft and missile from Russia itself.

    (I did not bother mentioning ports in the Adriatic – the nations in that region much more aligned with Russia than the Empire.)

    So, it is essential to woo France and detach it from America.

    Then there are many Europeans not keen on the anti-Russian crusade. The chief of these is Germany, but there’s also Italy, the Low Countries and Scandinavia. If no shooting war is afoot, Russia can continue to have trade relations with much of Europe via the Baltic, North, Black and Mediterranean Seas. Germany would seem a prime target for Russia to engage. With Germany still trading with Russia, the access to European technology is secured. If BOTH Germany and France can be made to break ranks with America, that is so much better.

    As to Eurasia, the Russian southern and eastern theaters are secure and not cause for concern. China, S. Korea and Japan all but ignored the Empire’s sanctions during the Ukraine crisis. Iran will anchor Russia’s southern flank.

    Iran is most certainly a target for regime change and cultural erasure. The 3,000+-year-old Persian identity, callously and viciously threatened for destruction. More on that later.

    So, what fate awaits Russia?

    The most direct and existential, barring thermonuclear war (highly, highly unlikely) is a land invasion to install a Western puppet government. This can only be realistically mounted in Europe.

    A coalition of Americans, supplied via the Baltic and Polish ports, plus allied British, French, Polish, and Ukrainian contingents, would make massive inroads into Russia’s defenses. A great many Russians would suffer genocide. The cities would burn, and the armies be decimated.

    Russia must trade space for time, conducting a fighting retreat, forcing the Empire’s Coalition to over-extend itself logistically – the classic Russian survival strategy. It must be prepared to retreat all the way to the Urals and beyond. At the same time, Russia’s population must prepare for insurgency in defense of the heartland. Caches of weapons and munitions must be made ready, and resistance units must be ready for activation from higher headquarters. Assume total enemy air-superiority, cyber-superiority and comms/sensor supremacy. Guerrilla units should be given broad instructions to raid and harass enemy rear area troops, and Russian special forces units must practice training and leading the insurgents.

    Russia must be prepared for rapid mass-evacuation of factories and machinery from the western regions, all under conditions of panic, chaos and under constant air-attack.

    4 trillion dollars per annum’s worth of Russian war capacity vs at least 19.3 trillion of the enemy’s, possibly as much as 24.9 trillion- those are fearful odds indeed! But these straight comparisons are a bit misleading, in themselves. 37% of the Russian economy is manufacturing, versus only 22% of the United States’. Inasmuch as industry is the portion of the economy most relevant to war, Russia’s prospects improve, but just a bit.

    Russia will have to display its legendary doggedness and will, in order to survive the ultimate threat of a land war.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • The answer is BODYBAGS. LOTS OF BODYBAGS.

    We shall see if the Russians are truly as tough and resilient as history has made them out to be. The goal is indeed regime change in Moscow, and of course the break-up and essentially the erasure of Russia and all its people from history and memory.

    There are no more doubts about that, unless the Russian people are still delusional and oh-so-idealistic. Yes, starry-eyed idealism, one of the great failings of Russia – the whole-hearted support for the early Communist Revolution, and the belief that Utopia was just around the corner, was proof enough of that. Russians have a truly astounding ability to ignore real world evidence.

    In counter-balance , I suggest the approach of Vo Nguyen Giap, late of North Vietnam fame/infamy. He said, in the 1960s, something to the effect of “We will fight far, far beyond the year 2000. You will kill many of us, we will hurt few of you. In the end, you will lose. And we will still be here“.

    So it came to pass.

    If Russia is to perish, then it must inflict as much pain and harm as it can on its tormentors in the process. It must become, to put it one way, “Asiatic”. What that means is this: Russia must now accept that it will die, and decide to die heroically, sword in hand. To renounce reconciliation, and to choose as its legacy unyielding resistance.

    The ploy of the Empire is obvious. Signal willingness to compromise, say that we seek merely to inflict lessons, not total subjugation. Yes, muddy the waters and Russia’s judgment with hopes of “partnership”. All the while making real moves to weaken, erode and destroy Russia.

    I am reminded of something I read in some old Chinese strategy manual.

    “When the foreign state sends envoys and gifts, and uses words of respect and friendship, and yet they mass and meneuver their forces for war – it is a sure sign that they are about to attack”. So it is with the Empire.

    Forget about not “upsetting” the West. Restart and widen the Wars and Insurgencies in Iraq and Afghanistan. Restart and intensify the Ukraine War. Give the latest arms and equipment to North Korea. Widely share advanced designs and technologies with China, Iran and other states targeted by the Empire.

    Escalate – and choose, nay embrace its own suffering, in the grim consolation that it delays the Empire’s triumph. When it is nearing the point of no return, then Russia must make good on its promise – as America would in that circumstance – and unleash the unthinkable. Otherwise, the strategic arsenal will have been for nought.

    The supreme irony here, IMHO, is that in degrading Western power as it dies, Russia shall have posthumous vengeance.

    There is one power that shall greatly benefit from the West’s exhaustion. It is not America.

    Read More
    • Replies: @RadicalCenter
    Islam and China will benefit from the downfall of the USA. Both very bad for Russians. But the US is leaving Russia no choice but to distrust us, get closer to China than they otherwise would, and prepare for a wider war.
    , @Thud
    who gives a crap the Chinese will have bought Russia in a generation...cheaply too given its a dump.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Y.L.

    War is already raging, now it is just the matter of where the next theater of operations will completely open. It could be Ukraine, judging by drunk diatribe of Porky, who, obviously is losing his faculties from stress, or, indeed, it could be Syria.
     
    Andrei, back to Syria, since you have expertise that I acknowledge I lack. Why doesn't Russia and/or Syria prevent the White Helmets and their minions for staging another false flag, which is clearly asked for by the actions of the White House? As to those actions, if they cannot be identified and targeted, since we were told they transmit by satellites, why aren't those transmissions found and jammed?

    Just a thought. Thanks.

    Why doesn’t Russia and/or Syria prevent the White Helmets and their minions for staging another false flag, which is clearly asked for by the actions of the White House?

    Because it is not easy to wipe out 2017 Nobel Peace Prize nominees–yes, this terrorist and USAID (read: CIA) supported outlet was nominated by imbeciles in Nobel Prize Committee. There are huge reputational risks involved with wiping them out, technically, however, it is not difficult.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Y.L.
    Thanks, Andrei. You wrote:

    Because it is not easy to wipe out 2017 Nobel Peace Prize nominees–yes, this terrorist and USAID (read: CIA) supported outlet was nominated by imbeciles in Nobel Prize Committee. There are huge reputational risks involved with wiping them out, technically, however, it is not difficult.
     
    But my point:

    Why aren’t those transmissions found and jammed?
     
    Perhaps because they use cell phones and Russia would have to disable the entire network? You see, I made suggestions other than military action. Although Russia shouldn't give a damn because as long as they live and breathe, the Neocons and their slaves will hate them no matter what they do.

    Anyway, thanks and again, I think many Americans--if not the majority--don't buy the propaganda and hate incessant hate towards Russia and don't want war. Look at Alex Jones, Michael Savage, Tucker Carlson and so many others, even Roger Stone the other day.

    https://stonecoldtruth.com/the-presidents-syrian-mistake/

    But I think no one in power will listen. I just hope Syria gets more Pantsirs and S-300s.

    Your latest is here and worth reading:

    http://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/2018/04/publius-tacitus-brings-good-points.html


    I am not going to lie, I do not freaking enjoy writing on military and geopolitical issues—I would rather be writing about progressive rock, jazz and discuss architecture, nature and maybe write an article, here and there, on some strategic issues and history. I was denied this pleasure in 2014. I am, however, very encouraged by the fact that there are many American military professionals who are, well, professionals and as such remain true to their skills and knowledge. Doing so, they preserve their professional and human integrity which is not only admirable in itself but becomes increasingly important in the midst of media ignorant bacchanalia.
     
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • During the August 2008 Russo-Georgian War, the operations of Russia's 58th Army were termed as “coercion into peace”. It is an appropriate term once one recalls what truly was at stake then. Russians did win that war and, indeed, coerced Georgia into a much more peaceful mood. In Clausewitzian terms the Russians achieved the main...
  • @Anonymous
    Putin’s speech was brilliant. The neocons couldn’t have asked for better content. A CIA writer like Tom Friedman couldn’t glorify militarism any better. The US has no choice but to ramp up defense spending to even more extreme levels to counter the new Russian threat.

    The U.S. is ramping up defense spending — to build more ships for the navy that are sitting ducks for hypersonic anti-ship missiles.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • fact is, Russia should not leave the US/UK/France (and wtf is France doing in there) agression unanswered. Sadly, as dangerous as it is, Russia must respond with actions that, if at all possible, are comparable to what was done in Syria by the three israel slaves.

    Doing nothing is not an option.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Size does matter and so does range and speed whenever anyone talks about weapons. It seems that there is a great deal of confusion which perpetuates itself in regards to a relatively small Russian military contingent in Syria. The most popular indicator of this confusion is a never ending discussion of a possible American attack...
  • @Andrei Martyanov
    So many people think Trump and the Empire are bluffing and no attack will happen. To me it seems that war is inevitable.

    War is already raging, now it is just the matter of where the next theater of operations will completely open. It could be Ukraine, judging by drunk diatribe of Porky, who, obviously is losing his faculties from stress, or, indeed, it could be Syria. It is difficult to predict where but, one way or another Trump presidency is finished. He is not fit to run the country and I long ago do not view him as some kind of "hostage" of Deep State--he is himself blood and flesh of this very establishment he promised to fight in his desperate desire to get to the highest office. Appointing draft-dodger and coward (with his aggressiveness being an obverse side of him feeling how pathetic he is) Bolton as NSA was the last drop. In fact, combined West's slide into oblivion of totalitarianism and disintegration, fast--as a result of real war, or relatively slow is unstoppable now. If Russia will be able to control escalation, and there are some signs of that, we may yet live through it.

    War is already raging, now it is just the matter of where the next theater of operations will completely open. It could be Ukraine, judging by drunk diatribe of Porky, who, obviously is losing his faculties from stress, or, indeed, it could be Syria.

    Andrei, back to Syria, since you have expertise that I acknowledge I lack. Why doesn’t Russia and/or Syria prevent the White Helmets and their minions for staging another false flag, which is clearly asked for by the actions of the White House? As to those actions, if they cannot be identified and targeted, since we were told they transmit by satellites, why aren’t those transmissions found and jammed?

    Just a thought. Thanks.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov

    Why doesn’t Russia and/or Syria prevent the White Helmets and their minions for staging another false flag, which is clearly asked for by the actions of the White House?
     
    Because it is not easy to wipe out 2017 Nobel Peace Prize nominees--yes, this terrorist and USAID (read: CIA) supported outlet was nominated by imbeciles in Nobel Prize Committee. There are huge reputational risks involved with wiping them out, technically, however, it is not difficult.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @The Scalpel
    The difference between Syria and Afghanistan is that Syria contains a separationist population in the Kurds. Given air support, dislodging them would not be possible without unacceptable losses

    Yes, Syria is an artificial construct (because its borders were drawn by a Frenchman and an Englishman) – but there are tribes in Afghanistan who would be happy to form a separate nation given the chance.

    The Kurds’ territory was sliced-and-diced by Sykes and Picot – leaving some in Turkey, some in Iraq, some in Syria, and some in Iran; any attempt to sticky-tape that back together into a single political entity would be destined for significant pushback by Iran and Turkey.

    No Western nation has any incentive to stick their wang into that specific hornet’s nest for any length of time, and the Kurdish leadership know that full well: they are not silly enough to think that they can rely on the US or NATO to do anything concrete to advance Kurdish territorial aspirations for more than two or three news cycles.

    The Syrian Kurdish area is both a small part of the total Kurdish-inhabited region (5%), and a small part of Syria (about 7% – basically everything North-east of a line joining Eziziyr -> al-Mnajeer -> al-Hasakah -> al-Haul).

    More importantly, it’s the most fertile areas of the Syrian part of the al-Jazira region: it’s some of Syria’s best agricultural land, so Syria would not permit it to be lost.

    Bear in mind that the US has had untrammelled access to the sky above the region (neither the Syrian/Russian air defenses, nor the Turks, were prepared to risk the consequences of shooting down US planes that violated Syrian airspace in support of US-supplied terrorists)… but their preferred terrorists still lost.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • During the August 2008 Russo-Georgian War, the operations of Russia's 58th Army were termed as “coercion into peace”. It is an appropriate term once one recalls what truly was at stake then. Russians did win that war and, indeed, coerced Georgia into a much more peaceful mood. In Clausewitzian terms the Russians achieved the main...
  • If these weapons systems are not used, and everyone, including and especially the US, knows they will not be used, then that’s the most important ‘implication’ right there, isn’t it?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Size does matter and so does range and speed whenever anyone talks about weapons. It seems that there is a great deal of confusion which perpetuates itself in regards to a relatively small Russian military contingent in Syria. The most popular indicator of this confusion is a never ending discussion of a possible American attack...
  • @Kratoklastes
    You appear to hold the view that once you can provide air support to an area, you somehow win it forever.

    To paraphrase your position: "If Syria cannot prevent US fighters from providing air support, Syria will be partitioned."

    That is unrealistic.

    Let's look at another example where the US has absolutely untrammeled air-superiority... you will recognise the name once it's mentioned.

    AFGHANISTAN.

    After a decade and a half, the US and its satraps and Quislings control maybe 5 city blocks in central Kabul, on a good day.

    The US's long-held plan to destabilise Syria (and Iran) has been going badly for three decades now - but it's immensely profitable for the cronies of the people doing the planning, so the plan doesn't change.

    That's a hint for anyone who is not caught up in some infantile nationalist fervour: a hint as to the actual aim.

    The aim of isn't to do anything specific, anywhere, ever... the actual aim is simply to ensure that the rich river of MIC-procurement gravy continues flowing into the pockets of political cronies - the US's own IG Farbens.

    The difference between Syria and Afghanistan is that Syria contains a separationist population in the Kurds. Given air support, dislodging them would not be possible without unacceptable losses

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kratoklastes
    Yes, Syria is an artificial construct (because its borders were drawn by a Frenchman and an Englishman) - but there are tribes in Afghanistan who would be happy to form a separate nation given the chance.

    The Kurds' territory was sliced-and-diced by Sykes and Picot - leaving some in Turkey, some in Iraq, some in Syria, and some in Iran; any attempt to sticky-tape that back together into a single political entity would be destined for significant pushback by Iran and Turkey.

    No Western nation has any incentive to stick their wang into that specific hornet's nest for any length of time, and the Kurdish leadership know that full well: they are not silly enough to think that they can rely on the US or NATO to do anything concrete to advance Kurdish territorial aspirations for more than two or three news cycles.

    The Syrian Kurdish area is both a small part of the total Kurdish-inhabited region (5%), and a small part of Syria (about 7% - basically everything North-east of a line joining Eziziyr -> al-Mnajeer -> al-Hasakah -> al-Haul).

    More importantly, it's the most fertile areas of the Syrian part of the al-Jazira region: it's some of Syria's best agricultural land, so Syria would not permit it to be lost.

    Bear in mind that the US has had untrammelled access to the sky above the region (neither the Syrian/Russian air defenses, nor the Turks, were prepared to risk the consequences of shooting down US planes that violated Syrian airspace in support of US-supplied terrorists)... but their preferred terrorists still lost.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Wally
    Got proof?

    You want him to prove the future? That’s kinda dumb.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • During the August 2008 Russo-Georgian War, the operations of Russia's 58th Army were termed as “coercion into peace”. It is an appropriate term once one recalls what truly was at stake then. Russians did win that war and, indeed, coerced Georgia into a much more peaceful mood. In Clausewitzian terms the Russians achieved the main...
  • @DESERT FOX
    Thank God for Russia and Putin, at last their is a country and a man who the Zionist neocons in the U.S. and Israel and Britain can not invade and destroy for the Zionist NWO, the tide has changed.

    Yes, thank God for Russia. The world enjoyed their nearly a whole century’s worth of keeping everyone on edge and their KGB poisoning U.S. institutions. Unfortunately for them, the poisoning of those institutions is largely why the U.S. is currently so sick, and therefore incapable of reassessing its relationship with Russia in a more positive direction.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Hi all,
    I quote the last sentence: “After all, Russia did try a kind word alone, it didn’t work and the United States has only itself to blame.
    I don’t agree fully : The US can blame the Zionists that exhausted the US after the GB, and many others before since antiquity. Read Douglas Reed, The Controversy of Zion to understand how GB and US diplomacies where enslaved to Zionist interests during the XXth century.
    Free pdf download:

    https://www.controversyofzion.info/Controversybook/reeedcontrov.pdf

    Kind regards,
    Walt

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Size does matter and so does range and speed whenever anyone talks about weapons. It seems that there is a great deal of confusion which perpetuates itself in regards to a relatively small Russian military contingent in Syria. The most popular indicator of this confusion is a never ending discussion of a possible American attack...
  • @CanSpeccy
    Excuse me for intervening in a conversation I have not followed, but will anyone cast light on the outcome of the US/Empire missile attack on Syrian targets. It was reported that 70 or so of the missiles were downed by Syrian air defenses, but US sources are saying all missiles reached their target. Who is lying? Or are both sides lying? Or is it impossible to know what happened?

    Oops. Ignore that. I see the discussion of the missile strike is on Karlin’s post.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Excuse me for intervening in a conversation I have not followed, but will anyone cast light on the outcome of the US/Empire missile attack on Syrian targets. It was reported that 70 or so of the missiles were downed by Syrian air defenses, but US sources are saying all missiles reached their target. Who is lying? Or are both sides lying? Or is it impossible to know what happened?

    Read More
    • Replies: @CanSpeccy
    Oops. Ignore that. I see the discussion of the missile strike is on Karlin's post.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Anonymous[418] • Disclaimer says:

    Russia and USA won’t go to war over Syria, please, let’s be realistic. Russia knows it cannot (with or without Iran) compete with NATO, nor would it benefit them at all to do so – and US top command are aware they are sitting ducks in the eastern Mediterranean. That’s Russia’s neighborhood.

    Could you imagine the disaster if Russian long-range missiles scuttle just the USS Truman? It would take them minutes to do so.

    The real worry here is, as usual, the dark horse: Turkey!
    Erdogan’s Turkey is the single biggest threat to the Western world right now, and it’s flying completely under the radar. Why do journalists barely mention Turkey’s role in all this?

    Remember the 2015 ‘migrant crisis’? – Turkey deliberately orchestrating migrant flow towards Europe, and then calling them “Europe’s responsibility”, because EU countries assisted the US intervening in Syria. Nevermind many of those ‘refugees’ were actually Pakistani or Afghan.

    Turkey profitted enormously from the crisis by blackmailing European governments, asking for billions of dollars to “seal the borders” (i.e. not giving them maps and free transport from east to west)

    And remember the Russian plane that was shot down, initially speculated to be a CIA-effort, almost escalating the conflict into a full-blown conflict between NATO and Russia? Turns out that was also orchestrated by Turkey, in an attempt to create bad blood between US/Israel/Saudi and Russia/Iran.

    And how did IS sustain their economy? They exported oil from Turkish harbors, and Erdogan was fully aware of it.

    IIRC Turkey even seized slices of territory in northern Syria during the conflict, when the other participants “weren’t looking”. I may be wrong on that though.

    Beyond Syria, Turkey has also been caught trading nuclear weapon-components and intelligence to terrorist organizations, turning a blind eye to human traficking of migrants (organized crime in Turkey has turned many Syrian women into sex slaves) – and not to forget: the conflict in Syria is weakening Kurdish resistance.

    I wish more attention would be paid to Turkey’s role here, and Erdogan’s dirty tactics to play other nations against each other. It’s more or less acting like rogue state at this point, and has become an enormous threat to Western stability under Erdogan.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Ron Unz
    In support of the strategic thesis advanced in this important article, I seem to recall that the original Russian military intervention in Syria was accompanied by a volley of ultra-long-range cruise missiles, whose capabilities greatly surprised American military analysts.

    At the time, such a high-tech attack on ISIS positions seemed rather cost-ineffective to me, but presumably a major purpose was to dissuade America (and Israel) from considering any future attack on what was a rather small and isolated Russian expeditionary force.

    Also, since Russia, Iran, and Iraq have become de facto allies in the Syria War, I'd think that the use of Iranian and Iraqi airspace as the launch point for the latest bombardment is also meant to raise much greater doubts in Trump's military advisors about the huge risks in any future attack against Iran or attempt to forcefully renegotiate the existing nuclear treaty.

    For the last hundred years Russia has been trying to invalidate the Sykes-Picot division of areas of influence in the Middle East. It never succeeded. The Western alliance formed in WWI is still operative and the old balance of forces has not changed.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Kratoklastes
    Google "Millennium Challenge 2002" and/or "Paul K Van Riper".

    Here's a LMGTFY ("Let Me Google That For You") link to Millennium Challenge 2002 - a link to LtGen Van Riper's bio should appear in the results.

    Van Riper - without advanced anti-shipping missiles - unambiguously sunk a carrier during MC02. Yes, it was only 'simulated', but for the purposes of the exercise: Blue had to admit that it lost a carrier.

    Carriers have been penis-extenders for Admirals and politicians since WWII - prior to that they used to get all tumescent about battleships, until they were shown to be insanely vulnerable to attack from the air.

    There has been no useful advance in defensive tools for warships since ARM (which is shit).

    To put vulnerability into context: consider an old-fashioned missile - an Exocet. Short range, sub-sonic, small payload, no volatile end-path guidance... 1980s battletech.

    Should be a non-starter, right?

    Well, now get this: AEGIS and PHALANX cannot acquire firing solutions between the time a missile is in sensor range, and the time it slams into the hull... even for an Exocet.

    I first wrote about the SS-NX-26 Yakhonts (now P-800 Onyx) in Reasons to be fearful - PArt 3 in November 2004; it's a bunch of things that an Exocet isn't - and all in very bad ways for anything blue-grey with a number on its bow... including aircraft carriers.

    Carriers have been penis-extenders for Admirals and politicians since WWII…

    However many penises need extending, geo-politically they used to project power. With todays’ wide distribution of effective anti-shipping missiles, their primary task has morphed into sovereignty/territory extension. Attacking a carrier, unlike lesser surface combatants, is the political equivalent of attacking the USA itself.

    IOW, they still project power against those unable to defend themselves against it, and act as trip-wire against those who can. That’s why one is sailing into the Med now.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Kratoklastes
    Google "Millennium Challenge 2002" and/or "Paul K Van Riper".

    Here's a LMGTFY ("Let Me Google That For You") link to Millennium Challenge 2002 - a link to LtGen Van Riper's bio should appear in the results.

    Van Riper - without advanced anti-shipping missiles - unambiguously sunk a carrier during MC02. Yes, it was only 'simulated', but for the purposes of the exercise: Blue had to admit that it lost a carrier.

    Carriers have been penis-extenders for Admirals and politicians since WWII - prior to that they used to get all tumescent about battleships, until they were shown to be insanely vulnerable to attack from the air.

    There has been no useful advance in defensive tools for warships since ARM (which is shit).

    To put vulnerability into context: consider an old-fashioned missile - an Exocet. Short range, sub-sonic, small payload, no volatile end-path guidance... 1980s battletech.

    Should be a non-starter, right?

    Well, now get this: AEGIS and PHALANX cannot acquire firing solutions between the time a missile is in sensor range, and the time it slams into the hull... even for an Exocet.

    I first wrote about the SS-NX-26 Yakhonts (now P-800 Onyx) in Reasons to be fearful - PArt 3 in November 2004; it's a bunch of things that an Exocet isn't - and all in very bad ways for anything blue-grey with a number on its bow... including aircraft carriers.

    Reply to self…

    Further to how vulnerable a CBG is: I forgot to mention two quite-interesting things that happened in the naughties – namely

    ① 2006: a Chinese Song-class deisel-electric sub was able to surface within 5km of the USS Kitty Hawk, having been undetected. Kitty Hawk’s CBG was in the middle of an actual exercise at the time, but apparently USN’s operational manual doesn’t include “It’s a good idea to look out for enemy submarines“;

    Now Kitty Hawk was an old lady – it was decommissioned in 2009, so, y’know, it’s not applicable to modern naval stuff. Plus, them Chinee – inscrutable, makin’ an old lady look bad.

    But wait…

    ② in 2005, a single Swedish Gotland-class sub was able to get inside the defences of the USS Ronald Reagan and its entire battle group, acquire targeting solutions and score at least 5 hits. (In other words, it was able to pretty much empty its torpedo arsenal). That time, the CBG knew that the sub was in theatre, because it was part of the exercise.

    So, y’know…

    “Sinking a 100,000 ton aircraft carrier has not yet been done”

    Should be translated as

    “No US Navy CBG has been involved in a real-life peer-rival blue-water engagement yet.”

    Think back to the Falklands (arguably the Argentines were not a ‘peer’ rival in the sense that Russia would be a peer rival to the US).

    The English kept HMS Hermes outside of the range of Argentine aircraft precisely because of the missile threat. That meant that her Harriers were operating right on the edge of their range.

    That’s an interesting thing – that your flagship is virtually kept out of the battle, because of its vulnerability to anti-shipping missiles.

    The other carrier – HMS Invincible – was permitted to get closer, and may well have been hit by the last Exocet the Argentines possessed. The Poms dispute this, however for some reason Invincible waited 2 months after the fall of Port Stanley to arrive in port there, and there was a big stripe of fresh paint on her port side.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @The Scalpel
    Here is where I see things are heading:

    The Syrian government will retake the Damascus area, the Qualamoun area, the Homs area pocket, and the desert on the south and west of the Euphrates. Then things will get sticky.

    At that point,the Syrian government will come up directly against Turkey, Israel, or the US . Ultimately that boils down to coming up against the US. If diplomacy fails, there can be no further territorial gains by Syria if US aircraft are allowed to intervene.

    Russia will attempt to counter this both diplomatically and by significantly boosting Syrian SAM numbers, quality, and training. At this point, diplomacy does not appear to be close to any sort of overall solution to the crisis. If diplomacy fails, then ultimately, it all boils down to this:

    Will Syria (with Russian help) be willing to shoot down US fighter aircraft who are attacking Syrian ground forces?

    If the answer is no – then Syria will certainly be partitioned.

    If the answer is yes – will the US escalate?

    – If no, then Syria will eventually regain all of it’s territory.

    – If the US does escalate, will Russian SAM’s (fired by Syrian armed forces) be able to neutralize US aircraft?

    – If that answer is yes, the global balance of power will have shifted, the world will have entered a new era of warfare, and Syria will regain all of it’s territory

    – If that answer is no, then Syria will remain partitioned and the global balance of power will remain relatively unchanged

    You appear to hold the view that once you can provide air support to an area, you somehow win it forever.

    To paraphrase your position: “If Syria cannot prevent US fighters from providing air support, Syria will be partitioned.”

    That is unrealistic.

    Let’s look at another example where the US has absolutely untrammeled air-superiority… you will recognise the name once it’s mentioned.

    AFGHANISTAN.

    After a decade and a half, the US and its satraps and Quislings control maybe 5 city blocks in central Kabul, on a good day.

    The US’s long-held plan to destabilise Syria (and Iran) has been going badly for three decades now – but it’s immensely profitable for the cronies of the people doing the planning, so the plan doesn’t change.

    That’s a hint for anyone who is not caught up in some infantile nationalist fervour: a hint as to the actual aim.

    The aim of isn’t to do anything specific, anywhere, ever… the actual aim is simply to ensure that the rich river of MIC-procurement gravy continues flowing into the pockets of political cronies – the US’s own IG Farbens.

    Read More
    • Replies: @The Scalpel
    The difference between Syria and Afghanistan is that Syria contains a separationist population in the Kurds. Given air support, dislodging them would not be possible without unacceptable losses
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @unit472
    Sinking a 100,000 ton aircraft carrier has not yet been done. They are pretty resilient ships and unless you can catch them with their decks full of fueled and armed aircraft as happened to the Japanese at Midway or hole them with torpedoes they tend to stay afloat even after being hit with conventional explosives.

    The Forrestal survived multiple detonations and explosions on its flight deck back in 1967 though over 100 sailors died. Smaller US WW2 era carriers survived direct hits from Kamikazi attacks so it is one thing to knock them out of action but another to sink them.

    Google “Millennium Challenge 2002″ and/or “Paul K Van Riper”.

    Here’s a LMGTFY (“Let Me Google That For You”) link to Millennium Challenge 2002 – a link to LtGen Van Riper’s bio should appear in the results.

    Van Riper – without advanced anti-shipping missiles – unambiguously sunk a carrier during MC02. Yes, it was only ‘simulated’, but for the purposes of the exercise: Blue had to admit that it lost a carrier.

    Carriers have been penis-extenders for Admirals and politicians since WWII – prior to that they used to get all tumescent about battleships, until they were shown to be insanely vulnerable to attack from the air.

    There has been no useful advance in defensive tools for warships since ARM (which is shit).

    To put vulnerability into context: consider an old-fashioned missile – an Exocet. Short range, sub-sonic, small payload, no volatile end-path guidance… 1980s battletech.

    Should be a non-starter, right?

    Well, now get this: AEGIS and PHALANX cannot acquire firing solutions between the time a missile is in sensor range, and the time it slams into the hull… even for an Exocet.

    I first wrote about the SS-NX-26 Yakhonts (now P-800 Onyx) in Reasons to be fearful – PArt 3 in November 2004; it’s a bunch of things that an Exocet isn’t – and all in very bad ways for anything blue-grey with a number on its bow… including aircraft carriers.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Kratoklastes
    Reply to self...

    Further to how vulnerable a CBG is: I forgot to mention two quite-interesting things that happened in the naughties - namely

    ① 2006: a Chinese Song-class deisel-electric sub was able to surface within 5km of the USS Kitty Hawk, having been undetected. Kitty Hawk's CBG was in the middle of an actual exercise at the time, but apparently USN's operational manual doesn't include "It's a good idea to look out for enemy submarines";

    Now Kitty Hawk was an old lady - it was decommissioned in 2009, so, y'know, it's not applicable to modern naval stuff. Plus, them Chinee - inscrutable, makin' an old lady look bad.

    But wait...

    ② in 2005, a single Swedish Gotland-class sub was able to get inside the defences of the USS Ronald Reagan and its entire battle group, acquire targeting solutions and score at least 5 hits. (In other words, it was able to pretty much empty its torpedo arsenal). That time, the CBG knew that the sub was in theatre, because it was part of the exercise.


    So, y'know...

    "Sinking a 100,000 ton aircraft carrier has not yet been done"
     
    Should be translated as

    "No US Navy CBG has been involved in a real-life peer-rival blue-water engagement yet."
     
    Think back to the Falklands (arguably the Argentines were not a 'peer' rival in the sense that Russia would be a peer rival to the US).

    The English kept HMS Hermes outside of the range of Argentine aircraft precisely because of the missile threat. That meant that her Harriers were operating right on the edge of their range.

    That's an interesting thing - that your flagship is virtually kept out of the battle, because of its vulnerability to anti-shipping missiles.

    The other carrier - HMS Invincible - was permitted to get closer, and may well have been hit by the last Exocet the Argentines possessed. The Poms dispute this, however for some reason Invincible waited 2 months after the fall of Port Stanley to arrive in port there, and there was a big stripe of fresh paint on her port side.
    , @Erebus

    Carriers have been penis-extenders for Admirals and politicians since WWII...
     
    However many penises need extending, geo-politically they used to project power. With todays' wide distribution of effective anti-shipping missiles, their primary task has morphed into sovereignty/territory extension. Attacking a carrier, unlike lesser surface combatants, is the political equivalent of attacking the USA itself.

    IOW, they still project power against those unable to defend themselves against it, and act as trip-wire against those who can. That's why one is sailing into the Med now.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • During the August 2008 Russo-Georgian War, the operations of Russia's 58th Army were termed as “coercion into peace”. It is an appropriate term once one recalls what truly was at stake then. Russians did win that war and, indeed, coerced Georgia into a much more peaceful mood. In Clausewitzian terms the Russians achieved the main...
  • @Aedib
    There are several well-grounded sources claimed that Kinzhal is just an aeroballistic version of the land-based Iskander missile. If so, I’m amazed with the range increase, from 500 km to 2000km. I know that this may be given by changing “initial conditions” from 0-km heigth, 0-mach to 20-km height 2+mach provided by the MiG-31BM.
    I consider the Tu-22M3 as a more “logical carrier” since, it can replace the liquid fueled Kh-22/Kh-32 by Kinzhal and so a bomber can launch up to 3 aeroballistic missiles. In such a case (10 km height 2- mach initial conditions) what will be the practical range? 1000km?
    MiG-31BM will provide the extreme range but you will need at least a dozen of them to attack a carrier group. Tu-22M3 can trade range for a higher fire volume.
    I suspect also that the missile is aimed at circumventing the INF treaty just by air-launching the missile toward land targets in west Europe.

    INF treaty.

    Quote -” This failure to bargain does explain Gorbachev, Shevardnadze and their “team” being extremely unwelcoming of Soviet military professionals during April 1987 negotiations with Americans. In fact, the Soviet military was excluded from negotiations altogether—a first indicator of shady intentions on Gorbachev’s part. The compromise reached was so one-sided that even Gorbachev himself started to feel very uncomfortable. He expressed his concerns to…US Secretary of State George Shultz, instead of conferring with his own military.

    In fact, Gorbachev’s behavior was absolutely bizarre and betrayed for any trained eye his desperate desire to be liked by the combined West regardless of costs for his own country.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Size does matter and so does range and speed whenever anyone talks about weapons. It seems that there is a great deal of confusion which perpetuates itself in regards to a relatively small Russian military contingent in Syria. The most popular indicator of this confusion is a never ending discussion of a possible American attack...
  • @Y.L.
    Hello, Andrei,

    You were posted today on Sic Semper Tyrabnnis blog and I recommend everyone read it.

    http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2018/04/mutually-assured-suicide.html

    Most people in Pentagon and, obviously, some in the so called IC understand consequences of attacking Russians directly--they know the score, they have calculated probabilities for a number of contingencies and none of them, obviously, looks good for CENTCOM assets in the area. But for the BORG there is no way back--and the reasons for that are way larger than Syria. We are talking about global realignment and major shift in power balance. This is not an easy thing to take to self-proclaimed "exceptional" people in Washington plus add here their utter lack of grasp of scales and proportions involved in a purely military aspect--it is difficult to those who never spent a day in uniform and whose military "expertise" is limited to few seminars on strategy and weapons and on, not always first class, work by Congressional Research Service. Thus, on American side we have today not rational players." Pen Name - Smoothiex12

     

    But I wonder about these thoughts of Larchmonter445 posted on The Saker's site today. Do you think these are being considered? So many people think Trump and the Empire are bluffing and no attack will happen. To me it seems that war is inevitable.

    http://thesaker.is/what-price-will-mankind-have-to-pay-for-the-collapse-of-the-empire/#comment-509925

    In simple terms, Russia has to be more than willing to kill Americans inside Syria. Al Tanf and Hassake bases should be on the target list for retribution. They are indefensible and packed with troops, proxies and equipment. But neither is fortified nor could they sustain under Kalibr or better, Iskander ballistic missile attack.

    The defeat would shock the US public like the Tet Offensive did in ’68.

    More so, prisoners should be taken and held until the US withdraws.

    There is nothing the US public could accept if they saw a few hundred dead and a few hundred marched as prisoners. They would demand immediate withdrawal.

    With Pompeo bragging today at his confirmation hearing in the Senate about killing 200 Russians as punishment for Moscow, and bragging on America’s exceptionalism, it’s long past time to shame the American goon elite and shock their world with a counter-strike.

    As for Ukraine, there is a ready solution to the expense of taking on Novorossiya’s cost for rebuilding and development. China. They would come in with money to build and farm and extract minerals. Take Odessa, Mariupol and turn them into Chinese vacation locations, with casinos. Russia would have two huge cash cows, not losses sucking their treasury dry.

    Destroy as much of Ukraine as you can, take what you want, hand the rest over to China. They’ll move 30 million Chinese in and transform Ukraine completely.

    The loss of NS2 will be temporary. The Chinese will use the power in Ukraine.

    Eventually, the hold on Europe will be lost.

    The Empire cannot hold its colonies while it has to fight Russia, Iran and China. It is impossible.

    Defeat of the Hegemon is entirely possible.

    We don’t have to wait for some collapse, some falling apart, some Black Swan event.

    You do what Vietnam did. You kill them, break the public support, crush their will, and triumph.

     

    Thanks.

    So many people think Trump and the Empire are bluffing and no attack will happen. To me it seems that war is inevitable.

    War is already raging, now it is just the matter of where the next theater of operations will completely open. It could be Ukraine, judging by drunk diatribe of Porky, who, obviously is losing his faculties from stress, or, indeed, it could be Syria. It is difficult to predict where but, one way or another Trump presidency is finished. He is not fit to run the country and I long ago do not view him as some kind of “hostage” of Deep State–he is himself blood and flesh of this very establishment he promised to fight in his desperate desire to get to the highest office. Appointing draft-dodger and coward (with his aggressiveness being an obverse side of him feeling how pathetic he is) Bolton as NSA was the last drop. In fact, combined West’s slide into oblivion of totalitarianism and disintegration, fast–as a result of real war, or relatively slow is unstoppable now. If Russia will be able to control escalation, and there are some signs of that, we may yet live through it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Y.L.

    War is already raging, now it is just the matter of where the next theater of operations will completely open. It could be Ukraine, judging by drunk diatribe of Porky, who, obviously is losing his faculties from stress, or, indeed, it could be Syria.
     
    Andrei, back to Syria, since you have expertise that I acknowledge I lack. Why doesn't Russia and/or Syria prevent the White Helmets and their minions for staging another false flag, which is clearly asked for by the actions of the White House? As to those actions, if they cannot be identified and targeted, since we were told they transmit by satellites, why aren't those transmissions found and jammed?

    Just a thought. Thanks.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Andrei Martyanov
    Hopefully, this will not come to this.

    Hello, Andrei,

    You were posted today on Sic Semper Tyrabnnis blog and I recommend everyone read it.

    http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2018/04/mutually-assured-suicide.html

    Most people in Pentagon and, obviously, some in the so called IC understand consequences of attacking Russians directly–they know the score, they have calculated probabilities for a number of contingencies and none of them, obviously, looks good for CENTCOM assets in the area. But for the BORG there is no way back–and the reasons for that are way larger than Syria. We are talking about global realignment and major shift in power balance. This is not an easy thing to take to self-proclaimed “exceptional” people in Washington plus add here their utter lack of grasp of scales and proportions involved in a purely military aspect–it is difficult to those who never spent a day in uniform and whose military “expertise” is limited to few seminars on strategy and weapons and on, not always first class, work by Congressional Research Service. Thus, on American side we have today not rational players.” Pen Name – Smoothiex12

    But I wonder about these thoughts of Larchmonter445 posted on The Saker’s site today. Do you think these are being considered? So many people think Trump and the Empire are bluffing and no attack will happen. To me it seems that war is inevitable.

    http://thesaker.is/what-price-will-mankind-have-to-pay-for-the-collapse-of-the-empire/#comment-509925

    In simple terms, Russia has to be more than willing to kill Americans inside Syria. Al Tanf and Hassake bases should be on the target list for retribution. They are indefensible and packed with troops, proxies and equipment. But neither is fortified nor could they sustain under Kalibr or better, Iskander ballistic missile attack.

    The defeat would shock the US public like the Tet Offensive did in ’68.

    More so, prisoners should be taken and held until the US withdraws.

    There is nothing the US public could accept if they saw a few hundred dead and a few hundred marched as prisoners. They would demand immediate withdrawal.

    With Pompeo bragging today at his confirmation hearing in the Senate about killing 200 Russians as punishment for Moscow, and bragging on America’s exceptionalism, it’s long past time to shame the American goon elite and shock their world with a counter-strike.

    As for Ukraine, there is a ready solution to the expense of taking on Novorossiya’s cost for rebuilding and development. China. They would come in with money to build and farm and extract minerals. Take Odessa, Mariupol and turn them into Chinese vacation locations, with casinos. Russia would have two huge cash cows, not losses sucking their treasury dry.

    Destroy as much of Ukraine as you can, take what you want, hand the rest over to China. They’ll move 30 million Chinese in and transform Ukraine completely.

    The loss of NS2 will be temporary. The Chinese will use the power in Ukraine.

    Eventually, the hold on Europe will be lost.

    The Empire cannot hold its colonies while it has to fight Russia, Iran and China. It is impossible.

    Defeat of the Hegemon is entirely possible.

    We don’t have to wait for some collapse, some falling apart, some Black Swan event.

    You do what Vietnam did. You kill them, break the public support, crush their will, and triumph.

    Thanks.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
    So many people think Trump and the Empire are bluffing and no attack will happen. To me it seems that war is inevitable.

    War is already raging, now it is just the matter of where the next theater of operations will completely open. It could be Ukraine, judging by drunk diatribe of Porky, who, obviously is losing his faculties from stress, or, indeed, it could be Syria. It is difficult to predict where but, one way or another Trump presidency is finished. He is not fit to run the country and I long ago do not view him as some kind of "hostage" of Deep State--he is himself blood and flesh of this very establishment he promised to fight in his desperate desire to get to the highest office. Appointing draft-dodger and coward (with his aggressiveness being an obverse side of him feeling how pathetic he is) Bolton as NSA was the last drop. In fact, combined West's slide into oblivion of totalitarianism and disintegration, fast--as a result of real war, or relatively slow is unstoppable now. If Russia will be able to control escalation, and there are some signs of that, we may yet live through it.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • During the August 2008 Russo-Georgian War, the operations of Russia's 58th Army were termed as “coercion into peace”. It is an appropriate term once one recalls what truly was at stake then. Russians did win that war and, indeed, coerced Georgia into a much more peaceful mood. In Clausewitzian terms the Russians achieved the main...
  • @Andrei Martyanov

    What do you think?
     
    I usually do not watch that kind of videos.

    I usually do not watch that kind of videos.

    Very well. I don’t think it says anything I’m not reading from The Saker.

    I notice you just commented on your blog on Trump’s true nature.

    And perhaps it’s pointless to try to predict the future.

    But The Saker just posted on Unz today here: http://www.unz.com/tsaker/what-price-for-collapse-of-the-empire/

    But there are also posts on ZeroHedge. President Carter issued a warning to Trump. And there’s this:

    https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-04-13/taking-world-brink-annihilation

    Today there is the imminent possibility of a major attack based on the allegations of a clearly biased source. What ever happened to international law and legal due process? Why is violence being threatened before there is a serious objective investigation of the chemical incident? If the accusations against Syria are true, why not have a serious investigation, especially now that the area has been liberated today (9 April) and safe access can be provided?

    The drums of war are pounding. After over one year of incessant Russia bashing and disinformation, is the public ready to go to war with Russia over Syria? Neoconservative hawks and their Israeli and Saudi allies seem to want this. Their plans and predictions for Iraq, Libya and Yemen were delusional fantasies with the price paid in blood by the people of those countries and in treasure by Americans as well. Sadly, there has not been any accountability for the media and political establishment that promoted and launched these wars. Now they want to escalate the aggression by attacking Syria, causing vastly more blood to flow and risking confrontation with a country which can fight back.

    And I just found out Prof. Stephen Cohen was on Tucker Carlson last night:

    Here’s Haley:

    It looks to me that only prediction of the future I can make that is accurate is that there will be war.

    And even if the majority of Americans want to stop it, the demon possessed won’t listen to us. May the wrath of God and eternal torment be their future.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Carlton Meyer
    Russian technology is not superior, but they are not burdened with as much "free market" corruption as the USA. Billions of American dollars are wasted on fraudulent programs like lasers:

    http://www.g2mil.com/Laser_Scams.htm

    and the SM-3 missile defense scam:

    http://www.g2mil.com/NMD_Fraud.htm

    The USA should return to the method used before the 1980s where government organizations developed weapons and then contracted production to the private sector. Most of these military/government organizations still exist, but have been sidelined, so crap is developed by a free market profit seeking monopoly, like the F-35.

    In my book free on-line book:

    http://www.g2mil.com/war.htm

    I list the major areas that modern military forces choose to ignore:

    1. The lethality of of precision guided munitions to easily destroy ultra-expensive ships, tanks, and aircraft has been dismissed.

    2. The use of small lasers to blind combatants. The US Marine Corps recently added expensive "dazzlers" to its machine guns that will prove more effective than the gun itself. (pictured)

    3. The inability to replace munitions stocks in a timely manner. Most nations have limited stockpiles and the complexity of some make rapid production impossible. If the USA becomes involved in a major war that lasts longer than a month, it will have to pause for several months until new munitions are produced and delivered.

    4. The humanitarian disaster that would result by disrupting the fragile economy of megacities. This occurred during World War II, but today's big cities are ten times larger! Armies may face hoards of millions of starving people begging for help.

    5. The millions of civilian vehicles on the world's roads. It is impossible to tell if they are friend or foe unless inspected up close. Soldiers can use this to their advantage, which makes urban operations very dangerous for both civilians and soldiers.

    6. The problem of thousands of commercial aircraft roaming the globe. Agents aboard can collect intelligence and these present long-range targeting problems for precision guided munitions that may kill hundreds of innocents.

    7. Adding warheads to inexpensive, commercial, hobbyist UAVs create deadly "suicide micro-drones."

    8. Modern anti-tank weapons are equally effective anti-aircraft weapons against slower targets like low flying helicopters and aircraft transports. A helicopter assault or airborne drop near a modern army will be disastrous as anti-tank missiles shoot upwards and knock down aircraft.

    9. Modern body armor has made 5.56mm and even 7.62mm bullets less lethal.

    10. Fleets of surface ships cannot hide for long in big oceans.

    I recall, a post around two years or so, of a column related to the Russian rocket engine. I believe it was written by Lockheed-Martin {not sure if they were the author} that they had purchased 100 Russian rocket engines, stating that we were, at a minimum, at least decade behind the Russian system. Seems to me we just never admit that anyone, anywhere could be better than us. It is not only foolish, it is top limit dangerous.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Y.L.
    Andrei, SouthFront just posted this video. Saker reposted.

    What do you think?

    Syria Escalation Scenarios: US Military Options, Russian Responses

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LuHijPT8TTk

    What do you think?

    I usually do not watch that kind of videos.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Y.L.

    I usually do not watch that kind of videos.
     
    Very well. I don't think it says anything I'm not reading from The Saker.

    I notice you just commented on your blog on Trump's true nature.

    And perhaps it's pointless to try to predict the future.

    But The Saker just posted on Unz today here: http://www.unz.com/tsaker/what-price-for-collapse-of-the-empire/

    But there are also posts on ZeroHedge. President Carter issued a warning to Trump. And there's this:

    https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-04-13/taking-world-brink-annihilation


    Today there is the imminent possibility of a major attack based on the allegations of a clearly biased source. What ever happened to international law and legal due process? Why is violence being threatened before there is a serious objective investigation of the chemical incident? If the accusations against Syria are true, why not have a serious investigation, especially now that the area has been liberated today (9 April) and safe access can be provided?

    The drums of war are pounding. After over one year of incessant Russia bashing and disinformation, is the public ready to go to war with Russia over Syria? Neoconservative hawks and their Israeli and Saudi allies seem to want this. Their plans and predictions for Iraq, Libya and Yemen were delusional fantasies with the price paid in blood by the people of those countries and in treasure by Americans as well. Sadly, there has not been any accountability for the media and political establishment that promoted and launched these wars. Now they want to escalate the aggression by attacking Syria, causing vastly more blood to flow and risking confrontation with a country which can fight back.
     

    And I just found out Prof. Stephen Cohen was on Tucker Carlson last night:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ppzI1va3hsg

    Here's Haley:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CBm6xKJgBFI

    It looks to me that only prediction of the future I can make that is accurate is that there will be war.

    And even if the majority of Americans want to stop it, the demon possessed won't listen to us. May the wrath of God and eternal torment be their future.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Size does matter and so does range and speed whenever anyone talks about weapons. It seems that there is a great deal of confusion which perpetuates itself in regards to a relatively small Russian military contingent in Syria. The most popular indicator of this confusion is a never ending discussion of a possible American attack...
  • @R3ALi5T
    US Aircraft Carrier versus RF Zircon Hypersonic Missiles = Watery grave for 4000+ US Navy Sailors / Carrier.

    Hopefully, this will not come to this.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Y.L.
    Hello, Andrei,

    You were posted today on Sic Semper Tyrabnnis blog and I recommend everyone read it.

    http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2018/04/mutually-assured-suicide.html

    Most people in Pentagon and, obviously, some in the so called IC understand consequences of attacking Russians directly--they know the score, they have calculated probabilities for a number of contingencies and none of them, obviously, looks good for CENTCOM assets in the area. But for the BORG there is no way back--and the reasons for that are way larger than Syria. We are talking about global realignment and major shift in power balance. This is not an easy thing to take to self-proclaimed "exceptional" people in Washington plus add here their utter lack of grasp of scales and proportions involved in a purely military aspect--it is difficult to those who never spent a day in uniform and whose military "expertise" is limited to few seminars on strategy and weapons and on, not always first class, work by Congressional Research Service. Thus, on American side we have today not rational players." Pen Name - Smoothiex12

     

    But I wonder about these thoughts of Larchmonter445 posted on The Saker's site today. Do you think these are being considered? So many people think Trump and the Empire are bluffing and no attack will happen. To me it seems that war is inevitable.

    http://thesaker.is/what-price-will-mankind-have-to-pay-for-the-collapse-of-the-empire/#comment-509925

    In simple terms, Russia has to be more than willing to kill Americans inside Syria. Al Tanf and Hassake bases should be on the target list for retribution. They are indefensible and packed with troops, proxies and equipment. But neither is fortified nor could they sustain under Kalibr or better, Iskander ballistic missile attack.

    The defeat would shock the US public like the Tet Offensive did in ’68.

    More so, prisoners should be taken and held until the US withdraws.

    There is nothing the US public could accept if they saw a few hundred dead and a few hundred marched as prisoners. They would demand immediate withdrawal.

    With Pompeo bragging today at his confirmation hearing in the Senate about killing 200 Russians as punishment for Moscow, and bragging on America’s exceptionalism, it’s long past time to shame the American goon elite and shock their world with a counter-strike.

    As for Ukraine, there is a ready solution to the expense of taking on Novorossiya’s cost for rebuilding and development. China. They would come in with money to build and farm and extract minerals. Take Odessa, Mariupol and turn them into Chinese vacation locations, with casinos. Russia would have two huge cash cows, not losses sucking their treasury dry.

    Destroy as much of Ukraine as you can, take what you want, hand the rest over to China. They’ll move 30 million Chinese in and transform Ukraine completely.

    The loss of NS2 will be temporary. The Chinese will use the power in Ukraine.

    Eventually, the hold on Europe will be lost.

    The Empire cannot hold its colonies while it has to fight Russia, Iran and China. It is impossible.

    Defeat of the Hegemon is entirely possible.

    We don’t have to wait for some collapse, some falling apart, some Black Swan event.

    You do what Vietnam did. You kill them, break the public support, crush their will, and triumph.

     

    Thanks.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • During the August 2008 Russo-Georgian War, the operations of Russia's 58th Army were termed as “coercion into peace”. It is an appropriate term once one recalls what truly was at stake then. Russians did win that war and, indeed, coerced Georgia into a much more peaceful mood. In Clausewitzian terms the Russians achieved the main...
  • @Andrei Martyanov
    Deployment of Kinzhal in Southern Military District (and I speculate--possible redeployment of Mig-31BMs which carry it to Crimea), the same as a possibility (how probable? I don't know) of SSGNs to carry 3M22 Zircon effectively annuls any NATO naval asset in Med. That is why desperate plea from Macron not to retaliate against French naval assets, as one of the examples of awareness of the consequences. The US bluff effectively has been called and it has everything to do with my earlier piece about 800-pound gorilla which effectively described such a scenario but without (at that time unknown) factor of Kinzhal and Zircon.

    http://www.unz.com/article/russia-the-800-pound-gorilla/

    So, PCR's comment has a technical merit. I do disagree, however, with his military-political conclusion about Russia "denying herself a decisive victory". What happened this morning testifies to the contrary.

    Andrei, SouthFront just posted this video. Saker reposted.

    What do you think?

    Syria Escalation Scenarios: US Military Options, Russian Responses

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov

    What do you think?
     
    I usually do not watch that kind of videos.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Andrei Martyanov

    What happened this morning? I’ll have to turn on the TV.
     
    I explain it here:

    http://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/2018/04/are-we-there-yet.html

    I explain it here:

    http://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/2018/04/are-we-there-yet.html

    Including:

    Basically, Trump not only humiliates himself and the country, whose geopolitical weight is dwindling on hourly basis, he destroyed any chance of meaningful discussion with Russia on any serious geopolitical issue. From here Russia will take it alone and I really doubt that Vladimir Putin will lower himself to traveling to Washington for an alleged summit. There is no reason for it anyway. Russia called Trump’s bluff and the picture is going to be increasingly ugly from now on. He still, probably, will launch some kind of salvo at some point of time to indicate relevance but, I think, Trump’s presidency is finished and once mid-term elections of 2018 are held, who knows where it will go from there.The rest is for political pseudo-scientists and talking heads to decide. He and his “team” really chose wrong people and country to fvck with. Just to demonstrate the cultural abyss in relation to real war. Yesterday’s broadcast on one of the major TV networks. No panic, just business.

    Thank you!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Y.L.

    So, PCR’s comment has a technical merit. I do disagree, however, with his military-political conclusion about Russia “denying herself a decisive victory”. What happened this morning testifies to the contrary.
     
    What happened this morning? I'll have to turn on the TV.

    I did cite your 800 Pound Gorilla on The Saker's site yesterday answering other people's questions.

    Thanks so much for your expertise and kind reply.

    What happened this morning? I’ll have to turn on the TV.

    I explain it here:

    http://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/2018/04/are-we-there-yet.html

    Read More
    • Replies: @Y.L.

    I explain it here:

    http://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/2018/04/are-we-there-yet.html
     
    Including:

    Basically, Trump not only humiliates himself and the country, whose geopolitical weight is dwindling on hourly basis, he destroyed any chance of meaningful discussion with Russia on any serious geopolitical issue. From here Russia will take it alone and I really doubt that Vladimir Putin will lower himself to traveling to Washington for an alleged summit. There is no reason for it anyway. Russia called Trump's bluff and the picture is going to be increasingly ugly from now on. He still, probably, will launch some kind of salvo at some point of time to indicate relevance but, I think, Trump's presidency is finished and once mid-term elections of 2018 are held, who knows where it will go from there.The rest is for political pseudo-scientists and talking heads to decide. He and his "team" really chose wrong people and country to fvck with. Just to demonstrate the cultural abyss in relation to real war. Yesterday's broadcast on one of the major TV networks. No panic, just business.
     
    Thank you!
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Andrei Martyanov
    Deployment of Kinzhal in Southern Military District (and I speculate--possible redeployment of Mig-31BMs which carry it to Crimea), the same as a possibility (how probable? I don't know) of SSGNs to carry 3M22 Zircon effectively annuls any NATO naval asset in Med. That is why desperate plea from Macron not to retaliate against French naval assets, as one of the examples of awareness of the consequences. The US bluff effectively has been called and it has everything to do with my earlier piece about 800-pound gorilla which effectively described such a scenario but without (at that time unknown) factor of Kinzhal and Zircon.

    http://www.unz.com/article/russia-the-800-pound-gorilla/

    So, PCR's comment has a technical merit. I do disagree, however, with his military-political conclusion about Russia "denying herself a decisive victory". What happened this morning testifies to the contrary.

    What happened this morning? I’ll have to turn on the TV.

    Wait, do you mean Germany?

    https://sputniknews.com/world/201804121063479088-germany-syria-strikes-merkel/

    “Germany will not take part in possible military action — I want to make clear again that there are no decisions — but we see, and support this, that everything is being done to send a signal that this use of chemical weapons is not acceptable,” Chancellor Merkel said on Thursday.

    Is that the news?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Andrei Martyanov
    Deployment of Kinzhal in Southern Military District (and I speculate--possible redeployment of Mig-31BMs which carry it to Crimea), the same as a possibility (how probable? I don't know) of SSGNs to carry 3M22 Zircon effectively annuls any NATO naval asset in Med. That is why desperate plea from Macron not to retaliate against French naval assets, as one of the examples of awareness of the consequences. The US bluff effectively has been called and it has everything to do with my earlier piece about 800-pound gorilla which effectively described such a scenario but without (at that time unknown) factor of Kinzhal and Zircon.

    http://www.unz.com/article/russia-the-800-pound-gorilla/

    So, PCR's comment has a technical merit. I do disagree, however, with his military-political conclusion about Russia "denying herself a decisive victory". What happened this morning testifies to the contrary.

    So, PCR’s comment has a technical merit. I do disagree, however, with his military-political conclusion about Russia “denying herself a decisive victory”. What happened this morning testifies to the contrary.

    What happened this morning? I’ll have to turn on the TV.

    I did cite your 800 Pound Gorilla on The Saker’s site yesterday answering other people’s questions.

    Thanks so much for your expertise and kind reply.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov

    What happened this morning? I’ll have to turn on the TV.
     
    I explain it here:

    http://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/2018/04/are-we-there-yet.html
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Y.L.
    Andrei, I am not asking you to speculate given recent news, but I wonder if Paul Craig Roberts' comments here have any technical merit:

    https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2018/04/10/last-days-hell-breaks-loose/

    It is difficult not be be pessimistic when we learn that the Washington Insane Asylum has sent a Carrier Strike Group accompanied by seven missile ships to join the one missile ship already offshore the Russian base in Syria. Whether any of these sitting ducks survive or are permitted to launch a single missile or the carrier to launch a single fighter is entirely up to the Russians.

    The Russians know that they can, at will within a few minutes, sink the entire US fleet, destroy every US airplane and ship in the Middle East and within range of the Middle East, completely destroy all of Israel’s military capability and wipe out the military of the two-bit punk state of Saudi Arabia. All the sitting ducks have been set up for Russia by the arrogant and stupid Americans. Just a few minutes of Russian attack and all ability to conduct war would be stripped from the Middle East. This would be a good thing.,

    All Russia has to do to insure that the US has no choice but to accept instant defeat is to put Russian nuclear forces on red alert. Any resort by the idiots in Washington of a nuclear nature would mean the end of the United States and all of Western Europe along with the UK. It would mean the total end of the West for all time, an event the rest of the world would consider to be a good thing. Hopefully the US military, the last and constantly besieged source of honor in the US, understands this and would not comply with a suicidal order from an insane war cabinet.

    In my opinion the Russians will not go so far and will deny themselves a decisive victory, because they do not comprehend the total evil that is concentrated in Washington and Israel. There are enough naive Atlanticist Integrationists left in the Russian government to argue that Russia must give Washington and Europe one more chance to come to their senses. One more chance is what Russia and the world cannot afford.
     
    Now, are his thoughts about "sitting ducks" and "sink the entire US fleet" born out by facts? As to putting nuclear forces on red alert, that sounds like a Soviet tactic and Putin is (far too?) restrained.

    Thanks if you're reading these still. I appreciate your thoughts. We all do.

    Deployment of Kinzhal in Southern Military District (and I speculate–possible redeployment of Mig-31BMs which carry it to Crimea), the same as a possibility (how probable? I don’t know) of SSGNs to carry 3M22 Zircon effectively annuls any NATO naval asset in Med. That is why desperate plea from Macron not to retaliate against French naval assets, as one of the examples of awareness of the consequences. The US bluff effectively has been called and it has everything to do with my earlier piece about 800-pound gorilla which effectively described such a scenario but without (at that time unknown) factor of Kinzhal and Zircon.

    http://www.unz.com/article/russia-the-800-pound-gorilla/

    So, PCR’s comment has a technical merit. I do disagree, however, with his military-political conclusion about Russia “denying herself a decisive victory”. What happened this morning testifies to the contrary.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Y.L.

    So, PCR’s comment has a technical merit. I do disagree, however, with his military-political conclusion about Russia “denying herself a decisive victory”. What happened this morning testifies to the contrary.
     
    What happened this morning? I'll have to turn on the TV.

    I did cite your 800 Pound Gorilla on The Saker's site yesterday answering other people's questions.

    Thanks so much for your expertise and kind reply.
    , @Y.L.

    What happened this morning? I’ll have to turn on the TV.
     
    Wait, do you mean Germany?

    https://sputniknews.com/world/201804121063479088-germany-syria-strikes-merkel/

    "Germany will not take part in possible military action — I want to make clear again that there are no decisions — but we see, and support this, that everything is being done to send a signal that this use of chemical weapons is not acceptable," Chancellor Merkel said on Thursday.
     
    Is that the news?
    , @Y.L.
    Andrei, SouthFront just posted this video. Saker reposted.

    What do you think?

    Syria Escalation Scenarios: US Military Options, Russian Responses

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LuHijPT8TTk
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Andrei Martyanov

    I think they truly think they’re exceptional and invincible.
     
    Some of them do. Not all. Many real American military and intelligence professionals don't think this way. There are rules of PR which must be obeyed. Plus, as Saker described in his excellent article--there are several stages of grief.

    BTW, this is a good piece on the F-22 vs. the Su-35.

     

    I don't read that kind of analyses. Wars are not fought as one weapon system vs another, it is way more complex than that, plus no US fighter since Vietnam faced real serious AD and EW system. Nor did it face competent pilots. Today these are networks which fight, not just separate weapon systems. F-22 is a good aircraft but that's about it.

    Andrei, I am not asking you to speculate given recent news, but I wonder if Paul Craig Roberts’ comments here have any technical merit:

    https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2018/04/10/last-days-hell-breaks-loose/

    It is difficult not be be pessimistic when we learn that the Washington Insane Asylum has sent a Carrier Strike Group accompanied by seven missile ships to join the one missile ship already offshore the Russian base in Syria. Whether any of these sitting ducks survive or are permitted to launch a single missile or the carrier to launch a single fighter is entirely up to the Russians.

    The Russians know that they can, at will within a few minutes, sink the entire US fleet, destroy every US airplane and ship in the Middle East and within range of the Middle East, completely destroy all of Israel’s military capability and wipe out the military of the two-bit punk state of Saudi Arabia. All the sitting ducks have been set up for Russia by the arrogant and stupid Americans. Just a few minutes of Russian attack and all ability to conduct war would be stripped from the Middle East. This would be a good thing.,

    All Russia has to do to insure that the US has no choice but to accept instant defeat is to put Russian nuclear forces on red alert. Any resort by the idiots in Washington of a nuclear nature would mean the end of the United States and all of Western Europe along with the UK. It would mean the total end of the West for all time, an event the rest of the world would consider to be a good thing. Hopefully the US military, the last and constantly besieged source of honor in the US, understands this and would not comply with a suicidal order from an insane war cabinet.

    In my opinion the Russians will not go so far and will deny themselves a decisive victory, because they do not comprehend the total evil that is concentrated in Washington and Israel. There are enough naive Atlanticist Integrationists left in the Russian government to argue that Russia must give Washington and Europe one more chance to come to their senses. One more chance is what Russia and the world cannot afford.

    Now, are his thoughts about “sitting ducks” and “sink the entire US fleet” born out by facts? As to putting nuclear forces on red alert, that sounds like a Soviet tactic and Putin is (far too?) restrained.

    Thanks if you’re reading these still. I appreciate your thoughts. We all do.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
    Deployment of Kinzhal in Southern Military District (and I speculate--possible redeployment of Mig-31BMs which carry it to Crimea), the same as a possibility (how probable? I don't know) of SSGNs to carry 3M22 Zircon effectively annuls any NATO naval asset in Med. That is why desperate plea from Macron not to retaliate against French naval assets, as one of the examples of awareness of the consequences. The US bluff effectively has been called and it has everything to do with my earlier piece about 800-pound gorilla which effectively described such a scenario but without (at that time unknown) factor of Kinzhal and Zircon.

    http://www.unz.com/article/russia-the-800-pound-gorilla/

    So, PCR's comment has a technical merit. I do disagree, however, with his military-political conclusion about Russia "denying herself a decisive victory". What happened this morning testifies to the contrary.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Size does matter and so does range and speed whenever anyone talks about weapons. It seems that there is a great deal of confusion which perpetuates itself in regards to a relatively small Russian military contingent in Syria. The most popular indicator of this confusion is a never ending discussion of a possible American attack...
  • @unit472
    Sinking a 100,000 ton aircraft carrier has not yet been done. They are pretty resilient ships and unless you can catch them with their decks full of fueled and armed aircraft as happened to the Japanese at Midway or hole them with torpedoes they tend to stay afloat even after being hit with conventional explosives.

    The Forrestal survived multiple detonations and explosions on its flight deck back in 1967 though over 100 sailors died. Smaller US WW2 era carriers survived direct hits from Kamikazi attacks so it is one thing to knock them out of action but another to sink them.

    US Aircraft Carrier versus RF Zircon Hypersonic Missiles = Watery grave for 4000+ US Navy Sailors / Carrier.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
    Hopefully, this will not come to this.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • There is a popular point of view in some of Russia’s political circles, especially among those who profess monarchist views and cling to a famous meme of 1913 Tsarist Russia development statistics, that WW I was started by Germany to forestall Russia’s industrial development which would inevitably challenge Germany’s plans on domination of Europe. A...
  • @Anonymous
    Russia spent almost 5.4% of GDP on military spending. The US last year spent 3.3% and with Trump's proposed increase this number will increase by a few decimal points.

    Russia is a middle income country while the US is a rich country, in the top 10 of GDP per capita. If oil prices don't substantially improve and Russia continues to spend the way it does on the military it will simply go broke.

    Sources: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)_per_capita (Russia is between Mexico and Suriname)

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_military_expenditures

    Russia’s government finances are pretty much among the soundest in the world – its public debt-to-GDP ratio is just a tad above 12% (compared to nearly 110% for the US federal debt-GDP ratio). And Russia does this with a 13% flat tax, which is quite astonishing. In other words, despite spending a fairly large proportion of economic output on defense, the country is a paragon of fiscal discipline – and that was not different when oil prices were lower.
    You probably don’t know about the Russian government’s method of garnering oil income. If the oil price were to plunge by 50%, its direct oil revenues would actually remain unchanged; a rising oil price wouldn’t alter its direct oil-based revenues either. Its oil income is based on a fixed floor price way below the current market price (the oil companies get to keep the rest). The effect of lower oil prices is mainly an indirect one, as oil companies will reduce capex when oil prices fall too far. With the energy sector still accounting for around 15% of GDP, this will tend to affect economic activity more generally, and reduce tax revenues from other sectors of the economy.
    The ruble has rallied considerably since its early 2016 lows, but remains far below the levels of 2014 and earlier. Despite this, price inflation has recently declined to just 2%, as Russia’s central bank pursues a very tight monetary policy. Russia’s real interest rates were consistently in positive territory in recent years. This is in stark contrast to the policies of virtually all Western central banks, which have manipulated real interest rates well into negative territory for almost a decade running. The interest rate situation is worth mentioning because it strongly suggests that the Russian economy has suffered only a negligible extent of capital malinvestment and capital consumption, making it structurally sound and resilient and hence better able to deal with its probably still too high energy-dependence.
    The country has a very strong balance of payments as well, and its foreign exchange reserves have recovered smartly. The latter are still below their historical peak, but remain more than 100 times larger than in the year Yeltsin first appointed Putin to the post of prime minister. The recent unemployment rate of 5% is higher than the one reported in the US, but Russia’s labor force participation rate is much higher (around 70%) – in other words, there are nevertheless more employed Russians than employed Americans relative to the total population.
    There remains a lot of room for structural reform to improve economic conditions further, but keep in mind that the current situation was achieved amid far-reaching sanctions from Russia’s largest trading partners. I would say that based on recent trends alone, there is no reason to worry that the country will go bankrupt anytime soon due to its defense spending. And it isn’t running a globe-spanning empire either – if push were to come to shove for some reason, it could probably afford to cut back. From what one hears, the military is quite effective actually. Presumably, it isn’t plagued with the Pentagon’s “every year gobs of money disappear without a trace” problem to a remotely comparable extent either – just judging from the general propensity to run a tight fiscal ship, I would guess those defense rubles are spent with great care.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Size does matter and so does range and speed whenever anyone talks about weapons. It seems that there is a great deal of confusion which perpetuates itself in regards to a relatively small Russian military contingent in Syria. The most popular indicator of this confusion is a never ending discussion of a possible American attack...
  • @The Scalpel
    Here is where I see things are heading:

    The Syrian government will retake the Damascus area, the Qualamoun area, the Homs area pocket, and the desert on the south and west of the Euphrates. Then things will get sticky.

    At that point,the Syrian government will come up directly against Turkey, Israel, or the US . Ultimately that boils down to coming up against the US. If diplomacy fails, there can be no further territorial gains by Syria if US aircraft are allowed to intervene.

    Russia will attempt to counter this both diplomatically and by significantly boosting Syrian SAM numbers, quality, and training. At this point, diplomacy does not appear to be close to any sort of overall solution to the crisis. If diplomacy fails, then ultimately, it all boils down to this:

    Will Syria (with Russian help) be willing to shoot down US fighter aircraft who are attacking Syrian ground forces?

    If the answer is no – then Syria will certainly be partitioned.

    If the answer is yes – will the US escalate?

    – If no, then Syria will eventually regain all of it’s territory.

    – If the US does escalate, will Russian SAM’s (fired by Syrian armed forces) be able to neutralize US aircraft?

    – If that answer is yes, the global balance of power will have shifted, the world will have entered a new era of warfare, and Syria will regain all of it’s territory

    – If that answer is no, then Syria will remain partitioned and the global balance of power will remain relatively unchanged

    I wouldn’t put it in these terms–the game is much, and I underscore it–much larger than Syria.

    Votel said the best way to deter Russia, which backs Assad, was through political and diplomatic channels.

    “Certainly if there are other things that are considered, you know, we will do what we are told. … (But) I don’t recommend that at this particular point,” Votel said, in an apparent to reference to military options.

    Republican Senator Lindsey Graham asked whether it was too strong to say that with Russia and Iran’s help, Assad had “won” the civil war in Syria.

    “I do not think that is too strong of a statement,” Votel said.

    Graham also asked if the United States’ policy on Syria was still to seek the removal of Assad from power.

    “I don’t know that that’s our particular policy at this particular point. Our focus remains on the defeat of ISIS,” Votel said, using an acronym for Islamic State. ”

    http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2018/03/votel-mattis-and-dunford-must-be-on-the-same-page.html

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Andrei Martyanov

    Why is it important for a potentially mobile system to be fixed in this manner? Is it because it functions better when it is in a fixed position?
     
    Not quite. The first line of defense, speaking in a very general manner, is object or zone's (in our case bases in Khmeimim and Tartus) radar field, with all things, including the Overlap Coefficient, which also translates into crucial redundancy, being of prime importance. Any military system, including AD operates on the basis of Readiness--from Immediate (Nemedlennaya Gotovnoct'), to Number 1--ready to go on high and engage in whatever the time parameter is defined in Combat Tactical (launcher, battalion) to Operational (regiment, brigade, division etc.) Manuals to Readiness with lower numbers, like #2 (half-an-our), #3 (two hours) etc.

    The moment the salvo is detected and Combat Station is declared ALL means, technical, personnel etc. are in Immediate Readiness status, that is ready to use their weapon and other systems immediately. All of them are on their combat posts, positions etc. The way the battle which is described by the Salvo model (in actual Manuals, all of them in Russia are not even Top Secret but Osoboi Vazhnosti, which is rough equivalent of Code Word in US, that is very classified) do contain actual iterations of much augmented Salvo Model, with actual combat data, including math expectations and all other required actual data which shapes the profile of battle depending on actual circumstances, including interaction with non-kinetic means, such as EW.

    The way force (in Russian it is called Naryad Sil--literally Forces Dressed for battle) is configured and set up in Syria is obvious--it is to be engaged immediately against initial massive salvo or several of them (pulses) which will require all (or almost all) launchers and their missiles to be engaged. Such a configuration completely removes any possibility of going somewhere and "hiding". It is all about, speaking bluntly, facing the fight. This is not to mention an obvious fact of Syria's terrain being very barren with, in a best case scenario, some low and not very dense forests. It is obvious that US by now reconned not only Russian bases but all surroundings and any possible position any of S-300 or 400 for whatever militarily insane reason would decide to run to. One of the, yet another, proof that this whole talk of some S-30 or 400 running for cover is something out of the left field is the fact that Russia continues to build up her AD capability in Syria with two Mi-8 armed with Rychag AV EW system being deployed there yesterday.

    http://rusvesna.su/news/1521580065

    In general, Russia does here in AD-EW sense what classic military truism calls for--concentration (amassing) of forces--one doesn't run away from battle, one fights it. YurVKU also gave you good point, while Erebus somewhere earlier in this thread elaborated also well on the whole issue which explains why S-300, 400s etc. are not going anywhere. IIRC Erebus put one of his points quite well--I am not quoting but am sure in preserving a meaning: US (NATO) is left with a very simple option here, either go "big" or just "shut up". I hope this explanation will help to answer your question.

    Here is where I see things are heading:

    The Syrian government will retake the Damascus area, the Qualamoun area, the Homs area pocket, and the desert on the south and west of the Euphrates. Then things will get sticky.

    At that point,the Syrian government will come up directly against Turkey, Israel, or the US . Ultimately that boils down to coming up against the US. If diplomacy fails, there can be no further territorial gains by Syria if US aircraft are allowed to intervene.

    Russia will attempt to counter this both diplomatically and by significantly boosting Syrian SAM numbers, quality, and training. At this point, diplomacy does not appear to be close to any sort of overall solution to the crisis. If diplomacy fails, then ultimately, it all boils down to this:

    Will Syria (with Russian help) be willing to shoot down US fighter aircraft who are attacking Syrian ground forces?

    If the answer is no – then Syria will certainly be partitioned.

    If the answer is yes – will the US escalate?

    – If no, then Syria will eventually regain all of it’s territory.

    – If the US does escalate, will Russian SAM’s (fired by Syrian armed forces) be able to neutralize US aircraft?

    – If that answer is yes, the global balance of power will have shifted, the world will have entered a new era of warfare, and Syria will regain all of it’s territory

    – If that answer is no, then Syria will remain partitioned and the global balance of power will remain relatively unchanged

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
    I wouldn't put it in these terms--the game is much, and I underscore it--much larger than Syria.

    Votel said the best way to deter Russia, which backs Assad, was through political and diplomatic channels.

    "Certainly if there are other things that are considered, you know, we will do what we are told. ... (But) I don't recommend that at this particular point," Votel said, in an apparent to reference to military options.

    Republican Senator Lindsey Graham asked whether it was too strong to say that with Russia and Iran's help, Assad had "won" the civil war in Syria.

    "I do not think that is too strong of a statement," Votel said.

    Graham also asked if the United States' policy on Syria was still to seek the removal of Assad from power.

    "I don't know that that's our particular policy at this particular point. Our focus remains on the defeat of ISIS," Votel said, using an acronym for Islamic State. "
     
    http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2018/03/votel-mattis-and-dunford-must-be-on-the-same-page.html
    , @Kratoklastes
    You appear to hold the view that once you can provide air support to an area, you somehow win it forever.

    To paraphrase your position: "If Syria cannot prevent US fighters from providing air support, Syria will be partitioned."

    That is unrealistic.

    Let's look at another example where the US has absolutely untrammeled air-superiority... you will recognise the name once it's mentioned.

    AFGHANISTAN.

    After a decade and a half, the US and its satraps and Quislings control maybe 5 city blocks in central Kabul, on a good day.

    The US's long-held plan to destabilise Syria (and Iran) has been going badly for three decades now - but it's immensely profitable for the cronies of the people doing the planning, so the plan doesn't change.

    That's a hint for anyone who is not caught up in some infantile nationalist fervour: a hint as to the actual aim.

    The aim of isn't to do anything specific, anywhere, ever... the actual aim is simply to ensure that the rich river of MIC-procurement gravy continues flowing into the pockets of political cronies - the US's own IG Farbens.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @The Scalpel
    "once Combat Station is declared–if anyone, namely Nachalnik PVO (Superintendent of AD) of Khmeimim, let alone lower tier command, order removal of S-300 or S-400 from their fixed positions to “not get obliterated”(c)–they will be immediately arrested and placed in custody, to be tried by Court Martial as people who tried to sabotage defense of Air Base Khmeimim."


    Why is it important for a potentially mobile system to be fixed in this manner? Is it because it functions better when it is in a fixed position? To a non-expert, it would seem advantageous for the system to move at least somewhat to avoid easy targeting while staying in the general vicinity so that it can continue to defend the airbase

    Why is it important for a potentially mobile system to be fixed in this manner? Is it because it functions better when it is in a fixed position?

    Not quite. The first line of defense, speaking in a very general manner, is object or zone’s (in our case bases in Khmeimim and Tartus) radar field, with all things, including the Overlap Coefficient, which also translates into crucial redundancy, being of prime importance. Any military system, including AD operates on the basis of Readiness–from Immediate (Nemedlennaya Gotovnoct’), to Number 1–ready to go on high and engage in whatever the time parameter is defined in Combat Tactical (launcher, battalion) to Operational (regiment, brigade, division etc.) Manuals to Readiness with lower numbers, like #2 (half-an-our), #3 (two hours) etc.

    The moment the salvo is detected and Combat Station is declared ALL means, technical, personnel etc. are in Immediate Readiness status, that is ready to use their weapon and other systems immediately. All of them are on their combat posts, positions etc. The way the battle which is described by the Salvo model (in actual Manuals, all of them in Russia are not even Top Secret but Osoboi Vazhnosti, which is rough equivalent of Code Word in US, that is very classified) do contain actual iterations of much augmented Salvo Model, with actual combat data, including math expectations and all other required actual data which shapes the profile of battle depending on actual circumstances, including interaction with non-kinetic means, such as EW.

    The way force (in Russian it is called Naryad Sil–literally Forces Dressed for battle) is configured and set up in Syria is obvious–it is to be engaged immediately against initial massive salvo or several of them (pulses) which will require all (or almost all) launchers and their missiles to be engaged. Such a configuration completely removes any possibility of going somewhere and “hiding”. It is all about, speaking bluntly, facing the fight. This is not to mention an obvious fact of Syria’s terrain being very barren with, in a best case scenario, some low and not very dense forests. It is obvious that US by now reconned not only Russian bases but all surroundings and any possible position any of S-300 or 400 for whatever militarily insane reason would decide to run to. One of the, yet another, proof that this whole talk of some S-30 or 400 running for cover is something out of the left field is the fact that Russia continues to build up her AD capability in Syria with two Mi-8 armed with Rychag AV EW system being deployed there yesterday.

    http://rusvesna.su/news/1521580065

    In general, Russia does here in AD-EW sense what classic military truism calls for–concentration (amassing) of forces–one doesn’t run away from battle, one fights it. YurVKU also gave you good point, while Erebus somewhere earlier in this thread elaborated also well on the whole issue which explains why S-300, 400s etc. are not going anywhere. IIRC Erebus put one of his points quite well–I am not quoting but am sure in preserving a meaning: US (NATO) is left with a very simple option here, either go “big” or just “shut up”. I hope this explanation will help to answer your question.

    Read More
    • Replies: @The Scalpel
    Here is where I see things are heading:

    The Syrian government will retake the Damascus area, the Qualamoun area, the Homs area pocket, and the desert on the south and west of the Euphrates. Then things will get sticky.

    At that point,the Syrian government will come up directly against Turkey, Israel, or the US . Ultimately that boils down to coming up against the US. If diplomacy fails, there can be no further territorial gains by Syria if US aircraft are allowed to intervene.

    Russia will attempt to counter this both diplomatically and by significantly boosting Syrian SAM numbers, quality, and training. At this point, diplomacy does not appear to be close to any sort of overall solution to the crisis. If diplomacy fails, then ultimately, it all boils down to this:

    Will Syria (with Russian help) be willing to shoot down US fighter aircraft who are attacking Syrian ground forces?

    If the answer is no – then Syria will certainly be partitioned.

    If the answer is yes – will the US escalate?

    – If no, then Syria will eventually regain all of it’s territory.

    – If the US does escalate, will Russian SAM’s (fired by Syrian armed forces) be able to neutralize US aircraft?

    – If that answer is yes, the global balance of power will have shifted, the world will have entered a new era of warfare, and Syria will regain all of it’s territory

    – If that answer is no, then Syria will remain partitioned and the global balance of power will remain relatively unchanged
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @The Scalpel
    "once Combat Station is declared–if anyone, namely Nachalnik PVO (Superintendent of AD) of Khmeimim, let alone lower tier command, order removal of S-300 or S-400 from their fixed positions to “not get obliterated”(c)–they will be immediately arrested and placed in custody, to be tried by Court Martial as people who tried to sabotage defense of Air Base Khmeimim."


    Why is it important for a potentially mobile system to be fixed in this manner? Is it because it functions better when it is in a fixed position? To a non-expert, it would seem advantageous for the system to move at least somewhat to avoid easy targeting while staying in the general vicinity so that it can continue to defend the airbase

    Why is it important for a potentially mobile system to be fixed in this manner?

    Because while moving they are leaving the base defenceless. It’s time for moving + getting ready to fight. And their goal not to save their lives, but to save the base.

    But I can imagine the scheme (just theoretically) when X antiaircraft divisions have X+Y fixed positions. And those who already fired all their missiles move to new location for reloading and getting ready to repeat.

    Read More
    • Agree: Andrei Martyanov
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • FB says:

    And as far as defending the Russian airbase at Khmeimim is concerned…this is not nearly as important as defending the airspace over Syria…

    It is a simple equation…right now the Russians have control of the airspace…

    ‘…“A fly can’t buzz above Syria without Russian consent nowadays,” an Israeli defense official told the International Crisis Group think tank after the S-400 was installed…’

    ‘…Israel has effectively been operating in Syria by the grace of Moscow…’

    The US is certainly capable of destroying the Khmeimim airbase…but where will that get them…?

    The Russian planes there will not be caught on the ground but will be up in the air…there are lots of bases in Syria…they could even stay in the air over Syria by flying from southern Russia…

    On the other hand…if the US is able to knock out the Russian S300/400 air defenses…they can simply take control over Syrian airspace and then it’s game over…

    That’s the simple calculus…

    The details in this are that the only way to take out mobile and hidden air defenses is by means of a very risky SEAD operation involving jets that will try to jam radars [not very effective against the powerful modern radars...also mobile...that go with the SAMs...]

    …and also by specially equipped fighter jets designed to find and knock out those radars with special anti-radar missiles…

    Technically speaking…such an attacking aerial force would be at a distinct disadvantage…so it is difficult to imagine that the US could take over Syrian airspace…

    However…the US can still launch cruise missiles at fixed targets…such as the Khmeimim base and other targets…

    These would not be defended against a cruise missile salvo by S300/400s to begin with…

    the much smaller mobile Pantsir is designed for this job…

    ‘…For now, the most effective counter to the Tomahawk is the Pantsir (NATO reporting name: SS-22 Greyhound) anti-air gun/missile system. It has proved to be very effective against such threats in trials and on exercises…’

    Each of those big S300/400 missiles costs as much a Tomahawk…they are to be used against aircraft that may try to take over the airspace…

    The Pantsir fires small short range missiles [range up to ~20 km] that can easily hit cruise missiles…a T-hawk is subsonic and can be taken out easily by a fighter jet with an air to air missile also…

    The numerous Pantsirs in Syria would have literally hundreds of rounds of those small deadly [and cheap] missiles…

    They would protect point targets as well as accompany the prowling S300/400s to provide a line of defense and shoot down any anti-radar missile that might get through…

    Again…these anti-radar missiles can only be carried by USAF F16s at present…and they have a short range of about 50 to at most 150 km…

    they also fly at relatively slow speed…they are supersonic but fly about Mach 2…about the same top speed as a fighter jet can reach…

    So those F16 pilots and jamming aircraft coming in and trying to find and take out the S300/400 radars would have a heck of a tough job…

    They would have to come in very low…hugging the terrain to avoid being seen by the radars…but here again the problem is that the Russians have airborne early warning radar aircraft in the sky over Syria also…the A50U…

    There are now two of those in Syria…and more could be quickly on the way…flight time from southern Russia to Syria is only about two hours…

    So there is really no way for those F16 to hide by flying in low…

    Basically it’s a non-starter…

    They would have to try to overwhelm by numbers of aircraft…which would mean kamikaze missions…

    But the USN can still launch massive T-hawk salvos against anything in Syria…[except the mobile air defenses since their locations would not be known...]

    The USN could even launch from subs…there are four Ohio class subs that carry 154 T-hawks each…that’s 600 T-hawks right there…

    Also another 15 Virginia class nuclear subs that carry 28 T-hawks each…

    So that’s a lot of missiles…some of them are going to get through and do damage…if the USN surface ships join in the party…as well as air launched cruise missiles from the B52s…there could be quite a lot of firepower brought to bear…

    But it would be all for naught if they don’t take out the Russian S300/400s…because they still will not be able to fly over Syria…

    And that’s what counts…

    Russians can get more airplanes into the sky over Syria…they can use any number of Syrian airfields…etc…

    So the US can do a lot of damage but Russia still controls the airspace…which means the US can’t come in…

    They may have broken a lot of windows but they have not kicked in the door…

    As for the subs…the Russians have now sent special aircraft that can locate subs…the Tu214R…

    ‘…The main feature of the locators of Tu-214R lies in their ability to conduct the so-called “subsurface radiolocation.” In other words, the plane “sees” through the surface…’

    There is a lot more to this whole thing…but this is just a taste…

    Think of it as a heavyweight boxing match…both fighters have weapons and a strategy…they make a move and the opponent counters…

    Ie this is a technical matter if you will…so there is no insight to be gleaned from commentators who do not know these ‘technicalities’ in full…

    Just like you can’t hope to understand the technical subtleties of boxing in five minute primer…

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • FB says:

    ‘…Why is it important for a potentially mobile system to be fixed in this manner? Is it because it functions better when it is in a fixed position?

    To a non-expert, it would seem advantageous for the system to move at least somewhat to avoid easy targeting while staying in the general vicinity so that it can continue to defend the airbase…’

    Please do not put such impertinent questions to ‘Commandant Smoothie’…

    He surely knows the answer to this extremely logical question…it’s just that you cannot possibly understand it…

    Kapish…?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Andrei Martyanov

    So those S400s are going to stay right where they are and get obliterated…
     
    Since you are civilian hack let me explain to you what happens in Khmeimim the moment the salvo is detected--I deliberately will somewhat obfuscate the issue but this is how it will go (plus-minus):

    1. Salvo detected, ETA, course and other what is known initial elements of targets' movement are established and communicated;
    2. Combat Station (Boyevaya Trevoga) is declared:
    a) All aircraft get airborne;
    b) All AD such as S-400, S-300 go on "high" (vklychayut vysokoe);
    c) Pantsyrs go on high and depending on the chart of missile-threatening (raketoopasnye napravlenya) directions, additional may move to stop-gap.

    3. EW goes on "full". What is is, I may only speculate.
    4. Some things begin to happen in Russia too, but that is a separate topic altogether, my article is precisely about that.

    Here comes the most important part, once Combat Station is declared--if anyone, namely Nachalnik PVO (Superintendent of AD) of Khmeimim, let alone lower tier command, order removal of S-300 or S-400 from their fixed positions to "not get obliterated"(c)--they will be immediately arrested and placed in custody, to be tried by Court Martial as people who tried to sabotage defense of Air Base Khmeimim.

    This is just rough description. Obviously in your high school they don't teach basic military facts let alone how force (as in unit or formation) fights. Let me explain why you are an amateur and a "proud" product of internet "education".

    don’t try to bullshit about Serbia
     
    For now the only BS which comes out is from your corner:

    And what happens once those S300s and S400s are overwhelmed…ie destroyed…?
     
    Read the article above this discussion thread.

    And what happens after that salvo takes out all those fixed S300/400s defending those sites…?
     
    I see you do have issues with reading comprehension, again, read article attentively. Granted, you have to introduce now allowance for second S-400 in Masyaf, plus unknown number of confirmed Buk-M2s in Syria. Plus Garmon' etc. That changes salvo completely in Syria. But per in bold in your quote: I understand you have no understanding of tactical, operational and strategic levels and how they connected and interact, which is expected, but many "layman" people have no difficulty understanding basic scheme of things and some even tried, to no avail, explain it to you. But I will reiterate--do not write on things you have no clue about. I don't know, you already tried screenshots of Family Guy, Youtube, what's next--Ponhub? You are definitely a very young fellow who is desperate for attention but you, obviously, do not understand that internet is no substitution for actual serious military education and service experience. See the difference? People know my name, my background, soon my page comes up for a book on publisher's site, I can present here peer reviews, among those peers many US military people, senior officers. See the difference between me and anonymous you?

    Now about that "mobility" which you are so obsessed with and evidently cannot comprehend when and how it is used.

    Any combat task consists of elements--that is what course of combat training is, be it naval, AF, AD etc. In particular for AD troops serving with S-300, 400 etc. the issue of deployment to a position is a normal standard element of combat training, including the shooting from:

    a) prepared
    b) unprepared (moving to a new position)

    positions.

    Here is one of the Moscow units of S-400 trains in both a) and b)

    https://youtu.be/CUy4BnCwbb4

    In the end of this small video starting at 2:06 Commanding officer gives the Order of the day and formulates it quite well. In case of Khmeimim it is defense of the base in prepared fixed position. You ideas of a war-fighting is that of an amateur fanboy and it shows.

    “once Combat Station is declared–if anyone, namely Nachalnik PVO (Superintendent of AD) of Khmeimim, let alone lower tier command, order removal of S-300 or S-400 from their fixed positions to “not get obliterated”(c)–they will be immediately arrested and placed in custody, to be tried by Court Martial as people who tried to sabotage defense of Air Base Khmeimim.”

    Why is it important for a potentially mobile system to be fixed in this manner? Is it because it functions better when it is in a fixed position? To a non-expert, it would seem advantageous for the system to move at least somewhat to avoid easy targeting while staying in the general vicinity so that it can continue to defend the airbase

    Read More
    • Replies: @yurivku

    Why is it important for a potentially mobile system to be fixed in this manner?

     

    Because while moving they are leaving the base defenceless. It's time for moving + getting ready to fight. And their goal not to save their lives, but to save the base.

    But I can imagine the scheme (just theoretically) when X antiaircraft divisions have X+Y fixed positions. And those who already fired all their missiles move to new location for reloading and getting ready to repeat.
    , @Andrei Martyanov

    Why is it important for a potentially mobile system to be fixed in this manner? Is it because it functions better when it is in a fixed position?
     
    Not quite. The first line of defense, speaking in a very general manner, is object or zone's (in our case bases in Khmeimim and Tartus) radar field, with all things, including the Overlap Coefficient, which also translates into crucial redundancy, being of prime importance. Any military system, including AD operates on the basis of Readiness--from Immediate (Nemedlennaya Gotovnoct'), to Number 1--ready to go on high and engage in whatever the time parameter is defined in Combat Tactical (launcher, battalion) to Operational (regiment, brigade, division etc.) Manuals to Readiness with lower numbers, like #2 (half-an-our), #3 (two hours) etc.

    The moment the salvo is detected and Combat Station is declared ALL means, technical, personnel etc. are in Immediate Readiness status, that is ready to use their weapon and other systems immediately. All of them are on their combat posts, positions etc. The way the battle which is described by the Salvo model (in actual Manuals, all of them in Russia are not even Top Secret but Osoboi Vazhnosti, which is rough equivalent of Code Word in US, that is very classified) do contain actual iterations of much augmented Salvo Model, with actual combat data, including math expectations and all other required actual data which shapes the profile of battle depending on actual circumstances, including interaction with non-kinetic means, such as EW.

    The way force (in Russian it is called Naryad Sil--literally Forces Dressed for battle) is configured and set up in Syria is obvious--it is to be engaged immediately against initial massive salvo or several of them (pulses) which will require all (or almost all) launchers and their missiles to be engaged. Such a configuration completely removes any possibility of going somewhere and "hiding". It is all about, speaking bluntly, facing the fight. This is not to mention an obvious fact of Syria's terrain being very barren with, in a best case scenario, some low and not very dense forests. It is obvious that US by now reconned not only Russian bases but all surroundings and any possible position any of S-300 or 400 for whatever militarily insane reason would decide to run to. One of the, yet another, proof that this whole talk of some S-30 or 400 running for cover is something out of the left field is the fact that Russia continues to build up her AD capability in Syria with two Mi-8 armed with Rychag AV EW system being deployed there yesterday.

    http://rusvesna.su/news/1521580065

    In general, Russia does here in AD-EW sense what classic military truism calls for--concentration (amassing) of forces--one doesn't run away from battle, one fights it. YurVKU also gave you good point, while Erebus somewhere earlier in this thread elaborated also well on the whole issue which explains why S-300, 400s etc. are not going anywhere. IIRC Erebus put one of his points quite well--I am not quoting but am sure in preserving a meaning: US (NATO) is left with a very simple option here, either go "big" or just "shut up". I hope this explanation will help to answer your question.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Ron Unz
    In support of the strategic thesis advanced in this important article, I seem to recall that the original Russian military intervention in Syria was accompanied by a volley of ultra-long-range cruise missiles, whose capabilities greatly surprised American military analysts.

    At the time, such a high-tech attack on ISIS positions seemed rather cost-ineffective to me, but presumably a major purpose was to dissuade America (and Israel) from considering any future attack on what was a rather small and isolated Russian expeditionary force.

    Also, since Russia, Iran, and Iraq have become de facto allies in the Syria War, I'd think that the use of Iranian and Iraqi airspace as the launch point for the latest bombardment is also meant to raise much greater doubts in Trump's military advisors about the huge risks in any future attack against Iran or attempt to forcefully renegotiate the existing nuclear treaty.

    Range gives an unprecedented operational flexibility and yesterday’s launch from Russian Tu-95 Bears strategic bombers had a very serious message—not in terms of X-101′s range, even longer range cruise missiles are getting ready for procurement, with ranges in 10,000 kilometers vicinity. The message was in the fact that missiles were launched from Iranian and Iraqi aerospace.

    distance between Tehran and Washington, DC: 10,169 km

    Bye bye Philadelphia

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @yurivku

    A lot will depend on the structure of the salvo and how it will be repelled.
     
    Thing the main factor will be a decisiveness of commandment (Putin) which I'm not sure of.

    My feel, and I could be wrong, of course, is that Russia has means to shut down electronically, let’s say, a lot.
     
    There were a lot of speculations about this in inet, but most "experts" stated that Tomahawks can't be downed be EW for they will switch to inertial homing in case of EW attack. In Shairat case everything is unclear: how many missiles were downed (if any), how, where the pieces fell etc...


    About 10-15 seconds per missile per launcher, which DDG of Arleigh Burke-class have two, from what I heard. So two TLAMs per 10-15 seconds. TLAMs (as any TLAM) are subsonic.
     
    So for 2 ships it'll be 4*2=8 TLAM/min so to fire 2*56 TLAM they'll spend about 8 mins (where number 600 got from?)

    https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%AD%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B0%D0%B4%D1%80%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%BD%D1%8B%D0%B5_%D0%BC%D0%B8%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%BD%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%86%D1%8B_%D1%82%D0%B8%D0%BF%D0%B0_%C2%AB%D0%90%D1%80%D0%BB%D0%B8_%D0%91%D1%91%D1%80%D0%BA%C2%BB

    for speed 850 km/hour it'll take about 6 min to fly to Damascus/Khmeimim. So even for Kindjals it'll take too long to be in time, only retaliation strike will be possible.
    I'd like to hear something like Mig 31 got to Iran with Kindjals aboard ...

    But you didn't mention Bastions, I believe they have long enough hands to get these ships.With Onix (3M55) it's capable to hit ships in up to 400km range and it has M2.5 speed.
    https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9E%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%BA%D1%81_(%D0%BF%D1%80%D0%BE%D1%82%D0%B8%D0%B2%D0%BE%D0%BA%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%B1%D0%B5%D0%BB%D1%8C%D0%BD%D0%B0%D1%8F_%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%BA%D0%B5%D1%82%D0%B0)
    Please note - I'm in no case not an expert, just curious amateur .

    Thing the main factor will be a decisiveness of commandment (Putin) which I’m not sure of.

    The main thing will be situational awareness of the command structures, which will define the profile escalation or otherwise. Putin’ decisiveness here is important but secondary.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Andrei Martyanov

    Do Russians prepare (I hope we do) to that fight, are they moving warships and requred airplanes to south borders? We’ve heard about US ships moving to attack order, but nothing on Russian moves.
     
    Submarines, for once. Apart from SSKs in Tartus we don't know what SS(G)Ns are in the area. What could be assumed, though, with very high probability is that they are there.

    As for me, I’d like to understand the options on future conflict which seems almost inevitable.
     
    Well, that is the issue here--it is not preordained. Granted even the imbecility and desperation of D.C. war-hawks.

    US strikes with 600 tomahawks from about 5 ships and XXX jets. Will these ships be immediately attacked by Bastions, Onixes and, probably, Kindjals?
     
    A lot will depend on the structure of the salvo and how it will be repelled. If significant damage will be dealt to Russia's interests and assets in the area some "lesson" could, indeed, be taught, say sinking one of the ships. My feel, and I could be wrong, of course, is that Russia has means to shut down electronically, let's say, a lot.

    How many tomahawks per minute can US fire and how that corresponds with flying time of antiship missiles?
     
    About 10-15 seconds per missile per launcher, which DDG of Arleigh Burke-class have two, from what I heard. So two TLAMs per 10-15 seconds. TLAMs (as any TLAM) are subsonic. In a worst case scenario Russian subs can launch 3M54, which starts at subsonic or low supersonic speed and on terminal accelerates almost to M=3. It is faster than TLAM, also the "density" of salvo is astonishing, pr. 636 SSK can launch 6 of them in, well count and time it yourself, my time is 3 secs per missile:

    https://youtu.be/xTn94lhVulY

    What nukes are carrying? Who knows. Anything from P-700 Granit for pr. 949A to possible 3M54 for pr. 971. I can tell you only one thing for sure--possible battle will have a very complex profile.

    A lot will depend on the structure of the salvo and how it will be repelled.

    Thing the main factor will be a decisiveness of commandment (Putin) which I’m not sure of.

    My feel, and I could be wrong, of course, is that Russia has means to shut down electronically, let’s say, a lot.

    There were a lot of speculations about this in inet, but most “experts” stated that Tomahawks can’t be downed be EW for they will switch to inertial homing in case of EW attack. In Shairat case everything is unclear: how many missiles were downed (if any), how, where the pieces fell etc…

    About 10-15 seconds per missile per launcher, which DDG of Arleigh Burke-class have two, from what I heard. So two TLAMs per 10-15 seconds. TLAMs (as any TLAM) are subsonic.

    So for 2 ships it’ll be 4*2=8 TLAM/min so to fire 2*56 TLAM they’ll spend about 8 mins (where number 600 got from?)

    https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%AD%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B0%D0%B4%D1%80%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%BD%D1%8B%D0%B5_%D0%BC%D0%B8%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%BD%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%86%D1%8B_%D1%82%D0%B8%D0%BF%D0%B0_%C2%AB%D0%90%D1%80%D0%BB%D0%B8_%D0%91%D1%91%D1%80%D0%BA%C2%BB

    for speed 850 km/hour it’ll take about 6 min to fly to Damascus/Khmeimim. So even for Kindjals it’ll take too long to be in time, only retaliation strike will be possible.
    I’d like to hear something like Mig 31 got to Iran with Kindjals aboard …

    But you didn’t mention Bastions, I believe they have long enough hands to get these ships.With Onix (3M55) it’s capable to hit ships in up to 400km range and it has M2.5 speed.

    https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9E%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%BA%D1%81_(%D0%BF%D1%80%D0%BE%D1%82%D0%B8%D0%B2%D0%BE%D0%BA%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%B1%D0%B5%D0%BB%D1%8C%D0%BD%D0%B0%D1%8F_%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%BA%D0%B5%D1%82%D0%B0)

    Please note – I’m in no case not an expert, just curious amateur .

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov

    Thing the main factor will be a decisiveness of commandment (Putin) which I’m not sure of.
     
    The main thing will be situational awareness of the command structures, which will define the profile escalation or otherwise. Putin' decisiveness here is important but secondary.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @yurivku
    It's a pity to see what this thread turned out to. The stream of insults without really important things being discussed. Childish accusations with stupid pictures. I won't name those who are doing this BS, but will ask them just to stop - it's not adding anything to discussion, but is adding alot to those writers' image.

    As for me, I'd like to understand the options on future conflict which seems almost inevitable. US strikes with 600 tomahawks from about 5 ships and XXX jets. Will these ships be immediately attacked by Bastions, Onixes and, probably, Kindjals? How many tomahawks per minute can US fire and how that corresponds with flying time of antiship missiles?
    As for jets I'm sure they will be attacked, but not sure about ships (but I'd like to see cople of those be sinked).
    Do Russians prepare (I hope we do) to that fight, are they moving warships and requred airplanes to south borders? We've heard about US ships moving to attack order, but nothing on Russian moves.

    So possible scenarios is what seems to be interesting to speak about. May be have not too much time to talk untils stone age comes. I think it was a joke.

    Do Russians prepare (I hope we do) to that fight, are they moving warships and requred airplanes to south borders? We’ve heard about US ships moving to attack order, but nothing on Russian moves.

    Submarines, for once. Apart from SSKs in Tartus we don’t know what SS(G)Ns are in the area. What could be assumed, though, with very high probability is that they are there.

    As for me, I’d like to understand the options on future conflict which seems almost inevitable.

    Well, that is the issue here–it is not preordained. Granted even the imbecility and desperation of D.C. war-hawks.

    US strikes with 600 tomahawks from about 5 ships and XXX jets. Will these ships be immediately attacked by Bastions, Onixes and, probably, Kindjals?

    A lot will depend on the structure of the salvo and how it will be repelled. If significant damage will be dealt to Russia’s interests and assets in the area some “lesson” could, indeed, be taught, say sinking one of the ships. My feel, and I could be wrong, of course, is that Russia has means to shut down electronically, let’s say, a lot.

    How many tomahawks per minute can US fire and how that corresponds with flying time of antiship missiles?

    About 10-15 seconds per missile per launcher, which DDG of Arleigh Burke-class have two, from what I heard. So two TLAMs per 10-15 seconds. TLAMs (as any TLAM) are subsonic. In a worst case scenario Russian subs can launch 3M54, which starts at subsonic or low supersonic speed and on terminal accelerates almost to M=3. It is faster than TLAM, also the “density” of salvo is astonishing, pr. 636 SSK can launch 6 of them in, well count and time it yourself, my time is 3 secs per missile:

    What nukes are carrying? Who knows. Anything from P-700 Granit for pr. 949A to possible 3M54 for pr. 971. I can tell you only one thing for sure–possible battle will have a very complex profile.

    Read More
    • Replies: @yurivku

    A lot will depend on the structure of the salvo and how it will be repelled.
     
    Thing the main factor will be a decisiveness of commandment (Putin) which I'm not sure of.

    My feel, and I could be wrong, of course, is that Russia has means to shut down electronically, let’s say, a lot.
     
    There were a lot of speculations about this in inet, but most "experts" stated that Tomahawks can't be downed be EW for they will switch to inertial homing in case of EW attack. In Shairat case everything is unclear: how many missiles were downed (if any), how, where the pieces fell etc...


    About 10-15 seconds per missile per launcher, which DDG of Arleigh Burke-class have two, from what I heard. So two TLAMs per 10-15 seconds. TLAMs (as any TLAM) are subsonic.
     
    So for 2 ships it'll be 4*2=8 TLAM/min so to fire 2*56 TLAM they'll spend about 8 mins (where number 600 got from?)

    https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%AD%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B0%D0%B4%D1%80%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%BD%D1%8B%D0%B5_%D0%BC%D0%B8%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%BD%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%86%D1%8B_%D1%82%D0%B8%D0%BF%D0%B0_%C2%AB%D0%90%D1%80%D0%BB%D0%B8_%D0%91%D1%91%D1%80%D0%BA%C2%BB

    for speed 850 km/hour it'll take about 6 min to fly to Damascus/Khmeimim. So even for Kindjals it'll take too long to be in time, only retaliation strike will be possible.
    I'd like to hear something like Mig 31 got to Iran with Kindjals aboard ...

    But you didn't mention Bastions, I believe they have long enough hands to get these ships.With Onix (3M55) it's capable to hit ships in up to 400km range and it has M2.5 speed.
    https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9E%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%BA%D1%81_(%D0%BF%D1%80%D0%BE%D1%82%D0%B8%D0%B2%D0%BE%D0%BA%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%B1%D0%B5%D0%BB%D1%8C%D0%BD%D0%B0%D1%8F_%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%BA%D0%B5%D1%82%D0%B0)
    Please note - I'm in no case not an expert, just curious amateur .
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • It’s a pity to see what this thread turned out to. The stream of insults without really important things being discussed. Childish accusations with stupid pictures. I won’t name those who are doing this BS, but will ask them just to stop – it’s not adding anything to discussion, but is adding alot to those writers’ image.

    As for me, I’d like to understand the options on future conflict which seems almost inevitable. US strikes with 600 tomahawks from about 5 ships and XXX jets. Will these ships be immediately attacked by Bastions, Onixes and, probably, Kindjals? How many tomahawks per minute can US fire and how that corresponds with flying time of antiship missiles?
    As for jets I’m sure they will be attacked, but not sure about ships (but I’d like to see cople of those be sinked).
    Do Russians prepare (I hope we do) to that fight, are they moving warships and requred airplanes to south borders? We’ve heard about US ships moving to attack order, but nothing on Russian moves.

    So possible scenarios is what seems to be interesting to speak about. May be have not too much time to talk untils stone age comes. I think it was a joke.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov

    Do Russians prepare (I hope we do) to that fight, are they moving warships and requred airplanes to south borders? We’ve heard about US ships moving to attack order, but nothing on Russian moves.
     
    Submarines, for once. Apart from SSKs in Tartus we don't know what SS(G)Ns are in the area. What could be assumed, though, with very high probability is that they are there.

    As for me, I’d like to understand the options on future conflict which seems almost inevitable.
     
    Well, that is the issue here--it is not preordained. Granted even the imbecility and desperation of D.C. war-hawks.

    US strikes with 600 tomahawks from about 5 ships and XXX jets. Will these ships be immediately attacked by Bastions, Onixes and, probably, Kindjals?
     
    A lot will depend on the structure of the salvo and how it will be repelled. If significant damage will be dealt to Russia's interests and assets in the area some "lesson" could, indeed, be taught, say sinking one of the ships. My feel, and I could be wrong, of course, is that Russia has means to shut down electronically, let's say, a lot.

    How many tomahawks per minute can US fire and how that corresponds with flying time of antiship missiles?
     
    About 10-15 seconds per missile per launcher, which DDG of Arleigh Burke-class have two, from what I heard. So two TLAMs per 10-15 seconds. TLAMs (as any TLAM) are subsonic. In a worst case scenario Russian subs can launch 3M54, which starts at subsonic or low supersonic speed and on terminal accelerates almost to M=3. It is faster than TLAM, also the "density" of salvo is astonishing, pr. 636 SSK can launch 6 of them in, well count and time it yourself, my time is 3 secs per missile:

    https://youtu.be/xTn94lhVulY

    What nukes are carrying? Who knows. Anything from P-700 Granit for pr. 949A to possible 3M54 for pr. 971. I can tell you only one thing for sure--possible battle will have a very complex profile.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • There is a popular point of view in some of Russia’s political circles, especially among those who profess monarchist views and cling to a famous meme of 1913 Tsarist Russia development statistics, that WW I was started by Germany to forestall Russia’s industrial development which would inevitably challenge Germany’s plans on domination of Europe. A...
  • “Russian Navy spent two times less per unit …”

    What does this mean? They spent half per unit? A quarter per unit?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Size does matter and so does range and speed whenever anyone talks about weapons. It seems that there is a great deal of confusion which perpetuates itself in regards to a relatively small Russian military contingent in Syria. The most popular indicator of this confusion is a never ending discussion of a possible American attack...
  • @FB
    Did you actually graduate from kindergarten...?

    I find that hard to believe...considering my quite detailed discussion of the actual availability of aircraft...taking into account airworthiness...logistics...basing...and many other factors...

    Which seemed to fly right over your head...?

    I'm just wondering because a normal kindergarten graduate would have caught the drift by now...

    Please contact me when you graduate...[sorry...IF you graduate...]


    http://myexceltemplates.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/Kindergarten-Diploma-Template.jpg

    Why do you continue to make personal attacks which add nothing to the discussion? It is bad form to insult the author of the article and would result in banning at most sites. As for me I can take it and am just here to learn from reasonable discussions.

    I suppose that we will continue to disagree on the effectiveness of swarm attacks and how the Syrian missile defense system defeated NATO.

    The readers will decide for themselves what they believe, regardless of what the other commentators claim.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • I’ve read a lot of the comments and I’ll say I’m not in any way a military strategist or understand the full scope and potential ramifications of any conflict but what I observe from Putins is that his interest in a fight with NATO is nonexistent.
    One thing that we have witnessed is that he is patient and is a far superior strategist. Always his goal has been to achieve a peaceful resolution. (I won’t go into details because if you’re following Russia the last while you know) small displays of force and more importantly to display as a deterrent advanced weaponry.
    Russia will not be the aggressor and history has proven this. If attacked he will do exactly has he said and will repel and strike the launch sites. His next move is really the topic of the board and as I see it it will be discreet and will be face saving for the west to allow them an exit. Something very simple that likely will never make the news because it would shame and embarrass. Perhaps a sub launched strike on a target of little importance maybe in another theatre with zero causalities. The message will be clear. We are capable where you least anticipate it.
    One thing Russia understands is war and they will not have any part in it unless the motherland is attacked. They have promised to protect it with everything and will never allow the tragedies of the past again. They are honourable and will not seek to humiliate a nation to prove a point publicly as it could foil any chance for diplomacy.
    If the motherland is attacked then the same tactic yet a lot louder with very little to no casualties. Shots across the bow so to speak and if that won’t deter I would expect distant attacks on military bases to show nowhere is untouchable.
    Always diplomacy first, this is the way of humans not savages

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • … were showed the zugzwang:

    should read … were shown Duh!

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @FB



    '...I must have missed wherever it was you said
     
    … that the US with a massive standoff salvo [almost certainly ship launched T-hawks] could obliterate fixed targets…
     
    and a quick review didn’t reveal it. Perhaps you can point me to it. In any case, in making my comments, I understood you to be specifically arguing that they couldn’t.
     
    Like I said...not paying attention...here it is just a couple comments above at my #320...

    '...Yes they could wipe out the Russian airfield at Hmeimim and the naval port at Tartus…but those ships which launched such attacks would be at the bottom of the sea minutes later…'
     
    As to this...from you...

    '...A few hundred S2/3/400s roaming about against the 2-3x their number of aircraft USM/NATO could put in the air over Syria doesn’t cut it...'
     
    Krollchem mentioned 'thousands' of airplanes...

    Where are even 'hundreds of airplanes going to come from...?

    Nato...with 19 members participating put 1,050 airplanes into the air over Serbia...and as Martin noted in his professional analysis...a lot of those aircraft were suffering 'virtual attrition' due to the high sortie rate etc...

    '...The number of sorties generated by the NATO forces, particularly the United States Air Force, left them short of spare parts and munitions, required increased maintenance, and a force reduced in effective size due to the decreased fatigue life of many aircraft.

    This virtual attrition, with little relative destruction of the opposing forces, has shown that the Serbian military strategy was successful..'
     
    ---Andrew Martin, RAAF [Retired]...

    And this is from 2016...

    '...The United States Marine Corps boasts 276 F/A-18 fighter jets in its inventory, but fewer than 100 of them are flight-worthy, according to the Marines...'
     
    That's two thirds that are no airworthy...

    One F15 crew chief remarked online recently...

    '...Not having served in the navy i can’t speak to that matter specifically I think it’s fair to say that over 50 percent of the total inventory of the DOD’s airpower couldn’t be mobilized simultaneously in a hurry if it was needed without some serious changes in both parts availability and manpower to keep them fully operational...'
     
    Go look up the total inventory of fighter aircraft in all the US branches...and then those that are SEAD capable...ie those that will go up against the Russian IADS...

    Putting 1,000 airplanes into the air over Syria is a fantasy...

    I prefer to operate in a reality-based universe...your mileage may vary...

    Like I said…not paying attention…

    My bad. In searching further up the thread, I missed what was close by.
    The heart of the matter is this:

    ‘…Yes they could wipe out the Russian airfield at Hmeimim and the naval port at Tartus…but those ships which launched such attacks would be at the bottom of the sea minutes later…’

    I’m not sure about how many “minutes later”, but you’ve summarized the hypothesis’ basic posit.
    The USM/NATO didn’t abandon their Empire because they feared the wheels under the Pantsir/S3-400/etc, but because they were showed the zugzwang: “Any attempt to affect our operations and you will lose both assets and Empire. Your move.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • FB says:
    @Krollchem
    Did you even read the comments of peterAUS at #233 and #236 #243?

    He did indeed hit the nail on the head with his comment on who lost the war despite all the Serbian air defense strategies by their generals. In addition, your response about UNSC 1244 is legally correct but just as irrelevant as UN rulings on the Israeli occupation of the Golan Heights. The FRY refused the Rambouillet agreement due to the demand that NATO forces freely travel through the FRY – which happened after the surrender of Kosovo. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rambouillet_Agreement

    flightglobal info is only one of a few dozen references. You seem also not to be aware of the US Marine Corps air assets.

    You can do much better. Think.

    Did you actually graduate from kindergarten…?

    I find that hard to believe…considering my quite detailed discussion of the actual availability of aircraft…taking into account airworthiness…logistics…basing…and many other factors…

    Which seemed to fly right over your head…?

    I’m just wondering because a normal kindergarten graduate would have caught the drift by now…

    Please contact me when you graduate…[sorry...IF you graduate...]

    Read More
    • Replies: @Krollchem
    Why do you continue to make personal attacks which add nothing to the discussion? It is bad form to insult the author of the article and would result in banning at most sites. As for me I can take it and am just here to learn from reasonable discussions.

    I suppose that we will continue to disagree on the effectiveness of swarm attacks and how the Syrian missile defense system defeated NATO.

    The readers will decide for themselves what they believe, regardless of what the other commentators claim.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @FB

    '...peterAUS at #233 and #236 #243 hit the nail on the head...'
     
    I rest my case...


    http://www.cartoonistgroup.com/properties/bizarro/art_images/cg510b138762d9b.jpg


    Oh and btw...my linkk to the flightglobal info is not behind a paywall...it is merely necessary to complete a free registration in order to access certain info...

    Yet again confirming my earlier assessment of you mental abilities...

    Did you even read the comments of peterAUS at #233 and #236 #243?

    He did indeed hit the nail on the head with his comment on who lost the war despite all the Serbian air defense strategies by their generals. In addition, your response about UNSC 1244 is legally correct but just as irrelevant as UN rulings on the Israeli occupation of the Golan Heights. The FRY refused the Rambouillet agreement due to the demand that NATO forces freely travel through the FRY – which happened after the surrender of Kosovo. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rambouillet_Agreement

    flightglobal info is only one of a few dozen references. You seem also not to be aware of the US Marine Corps air assets.

    You can do much better. Think.

    Read More
    • Replies: @FB
    Did you actually graduate from kindergarten...?

    I find that hard to believe...considering my quite detailed discussion of the actual availability of aircraft...taking into account airworthiness...logistics...basing...and many other factors...

    Which seemed to fly right over your head...?

    I'm just wondering because a normal kindergarten graduate would have caught the drift by now...

    Please contact me when you graduate...[sorry...IF you graduate...]


    http://myexceltemplates.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/Kindergarten-Diploma-Template.jpg
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • FB says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    So those S400s are going to stay right where they are and get obliterated…
     
    Since you are civilian hack let me explain to you what happens in Khmeimim the moment the salvo is detected--I deliberately will somewhat obfuscate the issue but this is how it will go (plus-minus):

    1. Salvo detected, ETA, course and other what is known initial elements of targets' movement are established and communicated;
    2. Combat Station (Boyevaya Trevoga) is declared:
    a) All aircraft get airborne;
    b) All AD such as S-400, S-300 go on "high" (vklychayut vysokoe);
    c) Pantsyrs go on high and depending on the chart of missile-threatening (raketoopasnye napravlenya) directions, additional may move to stop-gap.

    3. EW goes on "full". What is is, I may only speculate.
    4. Some things begin to happen in Russia too, but that is a separate topic altogether, my article is precisely about that.

    Here comes the most important part, once Combat Station is declared--if anyone, namely Nachalnik PVO (Superintendent of AD) of Khmeimim, let alone lower tier command, order removal of S-300 or S-400 from their fixed positions to "not get obliterated"(c)--they will be immediately arrested and placed in custody, to be tried by Court Martial as people who tried to sabotage defense of Air Base Khmeimim.

    This is just rough description. Obviously in your high school they don't teach basic military facts let alone how force (as in unit or formation) fights. Let me explain why you are an amateur and a "proud" product of internet "education".

    don’t try to bullshit about Serbia
     
    For now the only BS which comes out is from your corner:

    And what happens once those S300s and S400s are overwhelmed…ie destroyed…?
     
    Read the article above this discussion thread.

    And what happens after that salvo takes out all those fixed S300/400s defending those sites…?
     
    I see you do have issues with reading comprehension, again, read article attentively. Granted, you have to introduce now allowance for second S-400 in Masyaf, plus unknown number of confirmed Buk-M2s in Syria. Plus Garmon' etc. That changes salvo completely in Syria. But per in bold in your quote: I understand you have no understanding of tactical, operational and strategic levels and how they connected and interact, which is expected, but many "layman" people have no difficulty understanding basic scheme of things and some even tried, to no avail, explain it to you. But I will reiterate--do not write on things you have no clue about. I don't know, you already tried screenshots of Family Guy, Youtube, what's next--Ponhub? You are definitely a very young fellow who is desperate for attention but you, obviously, do not understand that internet is no substitution for actual serious military education and service experience. See the difference? People know my name, my background, soon my page comes up for a book on publisher's site, I can present here peer reviews, among those peers many US military people, senior officers. See the difference between me and anonymous you?

    Now about that "mobility" which you are so obsessed with and evidently cannot comprehend when and how it is used.

    Any combat task consists of elements--that is what course of combat training is, be it naval, AF, AD etc. In particular for AD troops serving with S-300, 400 etc. the issue of deployment to a position is a normal standard element of combat training, including the shooting from:

    a) prepared
    b) unprepared (moving to a new position)

    positions.

    Here is one of the Moscow units of S-400 trains in both a) and b)

    https://youtu.be/CUy4BnCwbb4

    In the end of this small video starting at 2:06 Commanding officer gives the Order of the day and formulates it quite well. In case of Khmeimim it is defense of the base in prepared fixed position. You ideas of a war-fighting is that of an amateur fanboy and it shows.

    Well Smoothie…I wouldn’t have thought it possible…

    …but it appears you are even dumber than ‘Trollchem’…perhaps even dumber than Anatoly Karlin…

    No wonder Russia is on such a roll lately…having shed the mentally feeble who have long since left the country…

    First about he youtube video…what’s going on here…?

    Those TELARs are can’t be moving…?

    Using those wheels that you claim are there only for show…

    I assume that those men moving the S400s have therefore been duly arrested and ‘court-martialed…?’

    ‘…Now about that “mobility” which you are so obsessed with and evidently cannot comprehend when and how it is used…’

    I guess the Russian Strategic Missile forces missed the ‘Smoothie Doctrine’ update of sitting in one place and never moving…

    ‘…A Russian military commander has said the army will expand mobile missile patrols in European regions of the country in 2017…’

    Sheesh…those poor devils…if only they knew how wrong they are…

    Perhaps your ‘Smoothie Doctrine’ also applies to nuclear ICBM subs…?

    Surely the same principle of ‘immobility’ being superior to mobility would translate well to the ballistic sub fleet, no…?

    Think of all the money they could save if they simply stayed in port…?

    And now to consider the scenario you present here…

    ‘…1. Salvo detected, ETA, course and other what is known initial elements of targets’ movement are established and communicated…’

    I see…

    So the very first order of business is to sit and wait for ‘salvo’ toi be ‘detected’…?

    That makes sense…

    Why would you waste time and fuel flying those nice Tu214 ISR aircraft…[ie intelligence, surveillance reconnaissance...]

    ‘…This is the second such machine, which arrived at the Khmeimim air base…’

    Surely it is not necessary to detect movements of enemy warships…until they launch their surprise salvo…?


    Also the Beriev A50U AEW aircraft [airborne early warning] that are patrolling the skies of Syria…

    Again…this is not necessary…I see the wisdom of your strategy of waiting for the salvo…so it can be properly ‘detected’…

    Maybe you can include this in your upcoming book…?

    I’m sure the Russian Aerospace Forces…the Strategic Missile Forces and the Russian boomer commanders will be very glad to learn that their strategy of mobility and hiding their locations is no longer valid…

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • ‘…peterAUS at #233 and #236 #243 hit the nail on the head…’

    I rest my case…

    Oh and btw…my linkk to the flightglobal info is not behind a paywall…it is merely necessary to complete a free registration in order to access certain info…

    Yet again confirming my earlier assessment of you mental abilities…

    Read More
    • Replies: @Krollchem
    Did you even read the comments of peterAUS at #233 and #236 #243?

    He did indeed hit the nail on the head with his comment on who lost the war despite all the Serbian air defense strategies by their generals. In addition, your response about UNSC 1244 is legally correct but just as irrelevant as UN rulings on the Israeli occupation of the Golan Heights. The FRY refused the Rambouillet agreement due to the demand that NATO forces freely travel through the FRY – which happened after the surrender of Kosovo. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rambouillet_Agreement

    flightglobal info is only one of a few dozen references. You seem also not to be aware of the US Marine Corps air assets.

    You can do much better. Think.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • Just a few corrections and comments:
    (1) I did not confuse the Buk missile defense systems with the Tor (Gauntlet) systems. I just thought you had confused the two systems in your earlier comment. I just do not think that the Buk M2E is as effective as the TorM2. See appended capabilities of Russian missile defense systems.

    (2) The US Tomahawk attack on the Syrian airbase was an internal US political statement with the Russians/Syrian given advanced warning of the attack.

    (3) If you read my comment on the number of fighter/bomber attack planes you will realize that I linked to the Wikipedia site of which your link (behind paywall) is only one of many references. Remember your earlier statement “incidentally, it is always a good idea to look up the wiki references…”

    (4) Please consider that fighter aircraft primarily missile platforms meant of attack both air and ground targets. Note that this is how Israel has been operating their fighter jets of take out Syrian forces at standoff distances.

    Yes, the “AGM-88 HARM or high-speed anti-radiation missile, is an air-to-surface tactical missile designed to seek and destroy enemy radar-equipped air defense systems.” Used by the F16c and have a range of 48 plus kilometers.

    http://www.af.mil/About-Us/Fact-Sheets/Display/Article/104574/agm-88-harm/

    Your comment “In any case…the range of those Harm missiles is less than half of those defending SAMs” is meaningless as only the S-400 and S-300 missiles have ranges longer than the AGM-88 HARM (see appended summary of Russian systems in Syria). The S-300 and S-400 missiles would be used on carriers (planes) and ships but not missiles.

    However, destruction of such radar-equipped air defense systems are not the only target to be engaged and the defending system must expend their missiles on other missiles designed to destroy fixed targets. This leaves the AGM-88 HARM missiles an opportunity to take out the missile defense systems while their radar systems are on. Here is a link to the US air to surface missiles: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_active_missiles_of_the_United_States_military

    (5) The NATO strategy was not to take out the FRY anti-aircraft missiles but destroy the FRY willingness to continue the fight by destroying the economy so that Serbia could be bought up at pennies on the dollar and opened up for Western manufactured products.

    (6) FRY anti-aircraft missiles that you mention were generally fired on a line of sight mode without radar. The F-117 shoot down was just a lucky shot using such tactics. The US were flying the F-117s (very quietly) in formation over Eastern Washington as early a 1994 and any observer would have noted that they were setting ducks against a missile exploded in proximity to the F-117s.

    (7) When I mentioned the commander who was killed in the Kosovo war I meant Colonel General Ljubisa Velickovic, not a low level tactical officer such as Col. Zoltan Dani.

    (8) You asked for references on swarm attack strategy which I provided. A US Navy Captain also wrote a similar analysis of Chinese DF-21D swarm strategy which you should have seen.

    (9) peterAUS at #233 and #236 #243 hit the nail on the head with his comment on who lost the war despite all the Serbian air defense strategies by their generals. In addition, your response about UNSC 1244 is legally correct but just as irrelevant as UN rulings on the Israeli occupation of the Golan Heights. The FRY refused the Rambouillet agreement due to the demand that NATO forces freely travel through the FRY – which happened after the surrender of Kosovo. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rambouillet_Agreement

    Meanwhile, FRY (Serbian) leaders were banned from travel to EU countries (Col Zoltan Dani didn’t make the list): https://freeserb.home.xs4all.nl/facts/1999/e-spisak300.html

    (10) Why are you still living in your mom’s basement?


    Range of Russian missile systems in Syria:
    S-400 (four missiles) :
    40N6 missile range = 400 km
    48N6DM (48N6E3) missile range = 250 km
    9M96 missile range = 120 km

    S-300 (four missiles):
    48N6E2 missile range = 195 km

    Buk M2E (four missiles):
    9M317 missile range = 45 km (four missiles with reloading taking 12 minutes)

    Pantsir-S1 missile range = 20 km (12 missiles and can fire on the move)

    TorM2 Russian Tor M2U which can fire on the move at 25 km/hr:

    https://www.rt.com/news/327140-tor-missile-move-launch/

    9M9331 missile range = 16 km (8 missiles)
    9M338 missile range = 16 km (16 missiles)

    In the hypothetical swarm attack over Syria the Buk and most other missile defense systems would not have the time the shoot and scoot. If you wish to talk about mobile missiles defense systems then consider the fire on the move Russian Tor M2U which can fire on the move at 25 km/hr:

    https://www.rt.com/news/327140-tor-missile-move-launch/

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • FB says:
    @Krollchem
    I will not stoop to insults. Such behavior discredits the points one makes as well as the person making them.

    Rather, I have tried to show that swarm attacks can theoretically breech the Russian/Syrian missile defense in Syria but would not be a reasonable approach compared to ground attacks by terrorist proxy armies.

    All this discussion masks the current Western plan which is focused on cutting off the transportation corridor between Iran and Syria/Lebanon . Likewise, capture of South East Syria and the T4 pumping station would allow the West/Israel to restart a oil pipeline to Israel from the US controlled Syrian oil fields.
    https://southfront.org/us-led-coalition-its-proxies-to-launch-attack-against-syrian-army-in-eastern-syria-reports/
    https://sputniknews.com/middleeast/201803191062696904-us-syria-army-attack-iraq/

    As for the hypothetical air attack on Syria:

    First , fighter jets serve as airborne missile platforms with lots of missiles!

    Second, the US has 2567 fighters (excluding F-35s) not the 1594 you mention.

    Third, close allies have another 1886 fighters (excluding the smaller EU countries and Canada/Australia/New Zealand) for a total of about 4453 fighters.

    Fourth, Russia (and China) have demonstrated conventional warfare parity with the US and its allies via advanced missile systems. This prevents direct non-nuclear war.

    Fifth, nuclear war in game theory is also a lose-lose situation due to Nuclear Winter even if the only one party launches their nuclear weapons.

    Here are the facts on fighter aircraft in the US arsenal and among the COWs. The list of active US military active military aircraft can be found here:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_active_United_States_military_aircraft#Navy

    Air force

    F-15 Eagle 236
    F-15E Strike Eagle 220
    F-16 Fighting Falcon 951
    F-22A Raptor 195

    Navy

    F/A-18E/F Super Hornet 507
    F/A-18 Hornet 314

    Marine Corps
    F/A-18A Hornet 36
    F/A-18C Hornet 60
    F/A-18D Hornet 48

    For a total of 2567 fighters (excluding F-35s).

    This total does not include the various bombers, UAVs and electronic warfare planes.

    Add in:
    Israel with 315 fighters
    F-15 Eagle 58
    F-15E Strike Eagle 25
    F-16 Fighting Falcon 223
    F-35 Lightning II 9

    Saudi Arabia with 274 fighters
    F-15 Eagle 96
    Eurofighter Typhoon 48
    Panavia Tornado 88
    F-15E Strike Eagle 186

    UAE with 104 fighters
    Mirage 2000 49
    F-16 Fighting Falcon 55

    UK with 275 fighters
    Eurofighter Typhoon 137
    Panavia Tornado GR4 138

    Germany with 181 fighters
    Panavia Tornado 87
    Eurofighter Typhoon 94

    Italy with 137 fighters
    Eurofighter Typhoon 75
    Panavia Tornado 62

    France (some needing repair) with 306 fighters
    Dassault Mirage 2000 185
    Dassault Mirage F1 65
    Dassault Rafale 56

    You will note that Australia and several other EU countries have also been bombing in Syria. Then there is Turkey with 294 fighters:
    F-4 Phantom II 49
    F-16 Fighting Falcon 245

    ‘…I will not stoop to insults…’

    It’s sometimes necessary for public safety reasons…

    Where did you pull those figures…out of your arse…?

    Don’t bother me anymore…I don’t have time to waste on your stupidity…I already told you to go to FlightGlobal…

    USAF…

    F16C…795

    F15C/E…431

    F22…178…

    US Navy…

    FA18A/C…177

    FA18E/F…368

    EA18G…113…[the only one that really counts here...the jammer Hornet...]

    Just to set the record straight…

    But just like the retarded three year old that you are…you have ignored those real world scenarios I mentioned…ie actual combat availability…[which might be no higher than 50 percent]…

    The ability to get into theater…ie logistics…which means realistically only carrier aircraft…

    Maybe your incredibly thick and stupid skull doesn’t get this…but people here are interested in reality…not kindergarten level bullshit…

    Reality means what can the US actually muster for a SEAD mission in Syria…

    Talk about what other countries have is useless…who will fight against Russia…?

    Most would probably not even give permission to use their airbases…nor even overfly their countries…

    You have chosen to ignore that and proceed baby-like to pull numbers out of your arse about total aircraft…[the vast majority of which have no means of even getting to Syria...]

    Notice the SEAD highlighted…that means suppression of enemy air defenses…

    The US can throw 1,000 ordinary fighters at Syria and the Russian SAM crews will be happy to knock them all out of the air…they have more than enough surface to air missiles to do that…missiles are a lot smaller and cheaper than aircraft…

    The only thing that has a snowball’s chance is to knock out the air defenses…that takes jamming aircraft and Harm aircraft…

    Btw…the F16C is the only aircraft that can be equipped with the AGM88 HARM…

    I asked you reasonably already to stop with the childish nonsense…but you persist…you are a complete moron…

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @FB
    Ok Smoothie...

    I'll bite...just to grind your nonsense into the dust once and for all...


    '...I repeat again: S-400 and S-300 are not going anywhere precisely because they are there to defend Russian military installations against variety of air threats...'
     
    So those S400s are going to stay right where they are and get obliterated...

    Having decided to give up the advantage of mobility and hiding in unknown locations...

    [and we note here that their hidden locations would not decrease their ability to defend Khmeimim and Tartus in the least...since they have a range of hundreds of kilometers...and can defend those positions from quite far away...]

    But let's play along with your scenario...where they simply stay put parked right next to the airfield in Khmeimim...

    So US doesn't even need to bother sending airborne jamming aircraft [FA18 Growlers] nor HARM carrying aircraft to try [suicidally] to find those hidden big SAMs and radars and take them out...

    They just need to fire a bunch of Tomahawk cruise missiles at them...

    How convenient is that...?

    I agree...your plan sounds spectacular...in the way a nutcase on the street makes a spectacle of himself...

    And what happens after that salvo takes out all those fixed S300/400s defending those sites...?

    You yourself admitted they would get wiped out eventually...based on naval 'salvo theory' if I recall...

    What then...?

    USN destroys fixed Russian air defenses without even putting a single aircraft into the air...

    Well that has to be the plan of the century...

    And what happens once those S300s and S400s are overwhelmed...ie destroyed...?

    Who stops the US from taking control of the airspace and flying fighter patrols over Syria 24/7...supported by AWACS...ELINT...ISR etc...

    ...not to mention being now able to bomb any ground target at will...since the air defenses have been wiped out...?

    PS...don't try to bullshit about Serbia...if you have something of substance to say then say it...


    '...You also fail completely to grasp a gigantic difference in technology and operational concepts between Serbia 1999 and Khmeimim (and Tartus) 2018...'
     
    Ok Smoothie...once again I will bite...

    Pease take all the time you need to explain this 'gigantic difference'...

    I knew I was dealing with a complete know-nothing...but I never expected I would be going here...

    So those S400s are going to stay right where they are and get obliterated…

    Since you are civilian hack let me explain to you what happens in Khmeimim the moment the salvo is detected–I deliberately will somewhat obfuscate the issue but this is how it will go (plus-minus):

    1. Salvo detected, ETA, course and other what is known initial elements of targets’ movement are established and communicated;
    2. Combat Station (Boyevaya Trevoga) is declared:
    a) All aircraft get airborne;
    b) All AD such as S-400, S-300 go on “high” (vklychayut vysokoe);
    c) Pantsyrs go on high and depending on the chart of missile-threatening (raketoopasnye napravlenya) directions, additional may move to stop-gap.

    3. EW goes on “full”. What is is, I may only speculate.
    4. Some things begin to happen in Russia too, but that is a separate topic altogether, my article is precisely about that.

    Here comes the most important part, once Combat Station is declared–if anyone, namely Nachalnik PVO (Superintendent of AD) of Khmeimim, let alone lower tier command, order removal of S-300 or S-400 from their fixed positions to “not get obliterated”(c)–they will be immediately arrested and placed in custody, to be tried by Court Martial as people who tried to sabotage defense of Air Base Khmeimim.

    This is just rough description. Obviously in your high school they don’t teach basic military facts let alone how force (as in unit or formation) fights. Let me explain why you are an amateur and a “proud” product of internet “education”.

    don’t try to bullshit about Serbia

    For now the only BS which comes out is from your corner:

    And what happens once those S300s and S400s are overwhelmed…ie destroyed…?

    Read the article above this discussion thread.

    And what happens after that salvo takes out all those fixed S300/400s defending those sites…?

    I see you do have issues with reading comprehension, again, read article attentively. Granted, you have to introduce now allowance for second S-400 in Masyaf, plus unknown number of confirmed Buk-M2s in Syria. Plus Garmon’ etc. That changes salvo completely in Syria. But per in bold in your quote: I understand you have no understanding of tactical, operational and strategic levels and how they connected and interact, which is expected, but many “layman” people have no difficulty understanding basic scheme of things and some even tried, to no avail, explain it to you. But I will reiterate–do not write on things you have no clue about. I don’t know, you already tried screenshots of Family Guy, Youtube, what’s next–Ponhub? You are definitely a very young fellow who is desperate for attention but you, obviously, do not understand that internet is no substitution for actual serious military education and service experience. See the difference? People know my name, my background, soon my page comes up for a book on publisher’s site, I can present here peer reviews, among those peers many US military people, senior officers. See the difference between me and anonymous you?

    Now about that “mobility” which you are so obsessed with and evidently cannot comprehend when and how it is used.

    Any combat task consists of elements–that is what course of combat training is, be it naval, AF, AD etc. In particular for AD troops serving with S-300, 400 etc. the issue of deployment to a position is a normal standard element of combat training, including the shooting from:

    a) prepared
    b) unprepared (moving to a new position)

    positions.

    Here is one of the Moscow units of S-400 trains in both a) and b)

    In the end of this small video starting at 2:06 Commanding officer gives the Order of the day and formulates it quite well. In case of Khmeimim it is defense of the base in prepared fixed position. You ideas of a war-fighting is that of an amateur fanboy and it shows.

    Read More
    • Replies: @FB
    Well Smoothie...I wouldn't have thought it possible...

    ...but it appears you are even dumber than 'Trollchem'...perhaps even dumber than Anatoly Karlin...

    No wonder Russia is on such a roll lately...having shed the mentally feeble who have long since left the country...

    First about he youtube video...what's going on here...?

    Those TELARs are can't be moving...?

    Using those wheels that you claim are there only for show...

    I assume that those men moving the S400s have therefore been duly arrested and 'court-martialed...?'


    '...Now about that “mobility” which you are so obsessed with and evidently cannot comprehend when and how it is used...'
     
    I guess the Russian Strategic Missile forces missed the 'Smoothie Doctrine' update of sitting in one place and never moving...

    '...A Russian military commander has said the army will expand mobile missile patrols in European regions of the country in 2017...'
     
    Sheesh...those poor devils...if only they knew how wrong they are...

    Perhaps your 'Smoothie Doctrine' also applies to nuclear ICBM subs...?

    Surely the same principle of 'immobility' being superior to mobility would translate well to the ballistic sub fleet, no...?

    Think of all the money they could save if they simply stayed in port...?

    And now to consider the scenario you present here...


    '...1. Salvo detected, ETA, course and other what is known initial elements of targets’ movement are established and communicated...'
     
    I see...

    So the very first order of business is to sit and wait for 'salvo' toi be 'detected'...?

    That makes sense...

    Why would you waste time and fuel flying those nice Tu214 ISR aircraft...[ie intelligence, surveillance reconnaissance...]


    '...This is the second such machine, which arrived at the Khmeimim air base...'
     
    Surely it is not necessary to detect movements of enemy warships...until they launch their surprise salvo...?


    https://theaviationist.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Tupolev_Tu-214R_inflight.jpg

    Also the Beriev A50U AEW aircraft [airborne early warning] that are patrolling the skies of Syria...

    Again...this is not necessary...I see the wisdom of your strategy of waiting for the salvo...so it can be properly 'detected'...

    Maybe you can include this in your upcoming book...?

    I'm sure the Russian Aerospace Forces...the Strategic Missile Forces and the Russian boomer commanders will be very glad to learn that their strategy of mobility and hiding their locations is no longer valid...

    , @The Scalpel
    "once Combat Station is declared–if anyone, namely Nachalnik PVO (Superintendent of AD) of Khmeimim, let alone lower tier command, order removal of S-300 or S-400 from their fixed positions to “not get obliterated”(c)–they will be immediately arrested and placed in custody, to be tried by Court Martial as people who tried to sabotage defense of Air Base Khmeimim."


    Why is it important for a potentially mobile system to be fixed in this manner? Is it because it functions better when it is in a fixed position? To a non-expert, it would seem advantageous for the system to move at least somewhat to avoid easy targeting while staying in the general vicinity so that it can continue to defend the airbase
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @FB
    Let's get one thing straight from the top...

    You are a complete moron
     
    I have to say this forcefully because of your persistence in arguing with someone who is actually qualified to discuss the subject matter...

    You have shown your nonexistent level of knowledge of the subject matter by confusing a Buk with a Tor...that is just amateur hour...and then gone on with more utterly ridiculous bullshit...

    This is a technical matter that requires some knowledge of the subject...do you not realize that...do you think you can go and argue about nuclear physics if you have a grade three education...?

    Yet you persist anyway...throwing up ever more bullshit which I then have to factually correct...for the sake of the readers here...[which you don't even consider by throwing up massive amount of spam...]

    This is how mentally challenged people behave...they are incapable of processing even basic information and knowledge that they are presented with...

    They simply persist with the exact same thing they have stuck in their feeble mind...over and over and over...

    That's you...

    Please realize your limitations...please actually read the many technical and authoritative references I have provided...

    And most of all...please stop throwing up complete non-factual claims which I have to disprove...

    '...You will recall that the Western forces weaponized drones and thousands of cruise missiles which would deplete the stocks of defensive missiles which would then be overwhelmed by a couple thousand fighter/bombers with standoff air to surface missiles backed up with electronic warfare planes such as Growlers and Prowlers...'
     
    The US doesn't have a 'couple thousand' fighter bombers in total...I already told Erebus to go to Flightglobal and get the statistics...

    USAF as of 2017 has 795 F16s and 431 F15s...

    The US navy has 368 FA18s...do the math stupido...

    Obviously not all those aircraft are even airworthy...The FA18 carrier aircraft have already gone beyond their 6,000 service life...

    That was as of 2012...

    This airframe service life is based on metal fatigue...which is the limiting factor in aluminum...having no replacement airplanes in the pipeline...they have supposedly conducted engineering 'studies' and extended the service life to 8,000 hours...and even 10,000 hours in some cases...

    However I know for a fact that those pilots are going to be careful about aggressive maneuvering in those aircraft...

    Also simply due to regular maintenance and servicing airplanes are not available like your family car...they need many more hours of maintenance for each hour of flight...availability rates are at an all time low due to the aging fleet...

    But complete retards like yourself pull out of your arsehole that the US would throw a couple of thousand airplanes in the air...

    What a complete and utter retard...

    There is also the question of logistics...in the runup to the gulf war of 1991...it took many weeks for the US to get those air assets into position...those airplanes need maintenance crews, fuel, supplies for both men and machines etc...

    You talk as if throwing a couple of thousand [nonexistent] airplanes in the air is like a Sunday walk in the park...

    This illustrates the depth of your ignorance...

    Then there is the question of which countries in the region will give the US access to use its airfields...or even to overfly its territory...

    In the Iraq invasion of 2003 Turkey refused to allow the US to operate from its bases there...or even to overfly Turkish territory...as did other countries...

    Any country in the region that does allow the US to launch attacks against Russia in Syria would face instant retaliation...Russian Kalibr cruise missiles launched from ships and subs even in Russian territorial waters in the Caspian and Black seas could reach anywhere in the Middle East...

    They are ready to obliterate any airfield in the area from which hostile action is taken...perhaps even pre-emptively if they see that a buildup is under way...

    Certainly they would obliterate those bases right after the first strike...so where would those aircraftg operate from then...?

    Maybe bases in Russia...?

    Then we have your second big pile of retarded bullshit...

    '...Under a hypothetical situation, any mass swarm attack is just simple math where the defender cannot reload fast enough to defend the infrastructure and the missile defense batteries” Dr. Yoshihara in “Chinese Aerospace Power” notes:..'
     
    That scenario has nothing to do with SEAD...suppression fo enemy air defenses and trying to eliminate an A2/AD zone...

    It has specifically to do with a swarm attack on a ship...which is a target whose location is known...and which must expend ammunition...ie rockets and air defense in order to defend itself from being sunk...

    do you even realize that this is not the same as an A2/AD zone...?

    Obviously you don't...even though I have pointed in you in the direction of plenty of authoritative material...ie Lambeth...Martin etc...that is a good primer on understanding the basic concepts of SEAD...

    This tells me you are a useless slug...who has no interest in actually expanding his knowledge...which is sorely lacking...but like the three year old child who has not yet learned logical behavior...continues unperturbed with the same nonsense...

    You are quite obviously a severely mentally handicapped person...

    Those mobile Russian air defenses cannot be targeted by drones or by cruise missiles or by conventionalk fighter/bombers...as I have already stated on many occasions...

    In a war footing...they disperse and their locations are unknown...the weapons mentioned only work against known targets that are fixed and remain where they are...

    The only weapon that can target these mobile SAMs are missiles that home in on radar signals...ie high speed anti-radiation missiles...or HARMs...

    The US has a limited number of fighter aircraft that can deliver these weapons...as well as a limited number of jamming aircraft that would need to accompany them...

    In any case...the range of those Harm missiles is less than half of those defending SAMs...and the small jammers on board those small aircraft are ineffective against the big and powerful truck-mounted radars of those SAMs...

    Listen to USAF General Phillip Breedlove...

    '...The United States has the right tools to take on Russian anti-access/area denial (A2/AD) zones in the European theatre, but it does not have enough capacity to take on Moscow’s new bastions head-on.

    Moreover, the U.S. military is overly reliant on air power to defeat those emerging threats.

    “We have the tools, but we do not have nearly enough of them—and the speed that we would need to eliminate these A2/AD bubbles—to be able to deploy our forces is going to be controlled by the depth of the bench of how we can attack those A2/AD forces,” retired U.S Air Force Gen. Philip Breedlove, former commander of U.S. European Command told an audience at the Center for Strategic and International Studies on June 29.

    “Right now, we’re almost completely dependent on air forces and aviation assets in order to attack the A2/AD problem.”..'
     
    So...retard...go an argue with Generaal Breedlove okay...you have stretched my patience to the breaking point...

    Also consider the other readers of this thread who do not deserve to be spammed by your bullshit...they are looking for inforative insight and clarity...not retarded drivel...

    Do not bother me anymore...

    Digest what I have presented and go over my previous posts in this thread where I counter Martyanov's non-factual errors...and if an actuall intelligent thought or question penetrates that massive bonehead of yours...

    ...then and only then address me...

    Kapish...?

    I will not stoop to insults. Such behavior discredits the points one makes as well as the person making them.

    Rather, I have tried to show that swarm attacks can theoretically breech the Russian/Syrian missile defense in Syria but would not be a reasonable approach compared to ground attacks by terrorist proxy armies.

    All this discussion masks the current Western plan which is focused on cutting off the transportation corridor between Iran and Syria/Lebanon . Likewise, capture of South East Syria and the T4 pumping station would allow the West/Israel to restart a oil pipeline to Israel from the US controlled Syrian oil fields.

    https://southfront.org/us-led-coalition-its-proxies-to-launch-attack-against-syrian-army-in-eastern-syria-reports/

    https://sputniknews.com/middleeast/201803191062696904-us-syria-army-attack-iraq/

    As for the hypothetical air attack on Syria:

    First , fighter jets serve as airborne missile platforms with lots of missiles!

    Second, the US has 2567 fighters (excluding F-35s) not the 1594 you mention.

    Third, close allies have another 1886 fighters (excluding the smaller EU countries and Canada/Australia/New Zealand) for a total of about 4453 fighters.

    Fourth, Russia (and China) have demonstrated conventional warfare parity with the US and its allies via advanced missile systems. This prevents direct non-nuclear war.

    Fifth, nuclear war in game theory is also a lose-lose situation due to Nuclear Winter even if the only one party launches their nuclear weapons.

    Here are the facts on fighter aircraft in the US arsenal and among the COWs. The list of active US military active military aircraft can be found here:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_active_United_States_military_aircraft#Navy

    Air force

    F-15 Eagle 236
    F-15E Strike Eagle 220
    F-16 Fighting Falcon 951
    F-22A Raptor 195

    Navy

    F/A-18E/F Super Hornet 507
    F/A-18 Hornet 314

    Marine Corps
    F/A-18A Hornet 36
    F/A-18C Hornet 60
    F/A-18D Hornet 48

    For a total of 2567 fighters (excluding F-35s).

    This total does not include the various bombers, UAVs and electronic warfare planes.

    Add in:
    Israel with 315 fighters
    F-15 Eagle 58
    F-15E Strike Eagle 25
    F-16 Fighting Falcon 223
    F-35 Lightning II 9

    Saudi Arabia with 274 fighters
    F-15 Eagle 96
    Eurofighter Typhoon 48
    Panavia Tornado 88
    F-15E Strike Eagle 186

    UAE with 104 fighters
    Mirage 2000 49
    F-16 Fighting Falcon 55

    UK with 275 fighters
    Eurofighter Typhoon 137
    Panavia Tornado GR4 138

    Germany with 181 fighters
    Panavia Tornado 87
    Eurofighter Typhoon 94

    Italy with 137 fighters
    Eurofighter Typhoon 75
    Panavia Tornado 62

    France (some needing repair) with 306 fighters
    Dassault Mirage 2000 185
    Dassault Mirage F1 65
    Dassault Rafale 56

    You will note that Australia and several other EU countries have also been bombing in Syria. Then there is Turkey with 294 fighters:
    F-4 Phantom II 49
    F-16 Fighting Falcon 245

    Read More
    • Replies: @FB

    '...I will not stoop to insults...'
     
    It's sometimes necessary for public safety reasons...


    http://rlv.zcache.co.uk/caution_nutbar_triangle_sticker-r96d0528e418342e389531fb98de63557_v9w05_8byvr_512.jpg


    Where did you pull those figures...out of your arse...?

    Don't bother me anymore...I don't have time to waste on your stupidity...I already told you to go to FlightGlobal...

    USAF...

    F16C...795

    F15C/E...431

    F22...178...

    US Navy...

    FA18A/C...177

    FA18E/F...368

    EA18G...113...[the only one that really counts here...the jammer Hornet...]

    Just to set the record straight...

    But just like the retarded three year old that you are...you have ignored those real world scenarios I mentioned...ie actual combat availability...[which might be no higher than 50 percent]...

    The ability to get into theater...ie logistics...which means realistically only carrier aircraft...

    Maybe your incredibly thick and stupid skull doesn't get this...but people here are interested in reality...not kindergarten level bullshit...

    Reality means what can the US actually muster for a SEAD mission in Syria...

    Talk about what other countries have is useless...who will fight against Russia...?

    Most would probably not even give permission to use their airbases...nor even overfly their countries...

    You have chosen to ignore that and proceed baby-like to pull numbers out of your arse about total aircraft...[the vast majority of which have no means of even getting to Syria...]

    Notice the SEAD highlighted...that means suppression of enemy air defenses...

    The US can throw 1,000 ordinary fighters at Syria and the Russian SAM crews will be happy to knock them all out of the air...they have more than enough surface to air missiles to do that...missiles are a lot smaller and cheaper than aircraft...

    The only thing that has a snowball's chance is to knock out the air defenses...that takes jamming aircraft and Harm aircraft...

    Btw...the F16C is the only aircraft that can be equipped with the AGM88 HARM...

    I asked you reasonably already to stop with the childish nonsense...but you persist...you are a complete moron...

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • FB says:

    Ok Smoothie

    I’ll bite…just to grind your nonsense into the dust once and for all…

    ‘…I repeat again: S-400 and S-300 are not going anywhere precisely because they are there to defend Russian military installations against variety of air threats…’

    So those S400s are going to stay right where they are and get obliterated…

    Having decided to give up the advantage of mobility and hiding in unknown locations…

    [and we note here that their hidden locations would not decrease their ability to defend Khmeimim and Tartus in the least...since they have a range of hundreds of kilometers...and can defend those positions from quite far away...]

    But let’s play along with your scenario…where they simply stay put parked right next to the airfield in Khmeimim…

    So US doesn’t even need to bother sending airborne jamming aircraft [FA18 Growlers] nor HARM carrying aircraft to try [suicidally] to find those hidden big SAMs and radars and take them out…

    They just need to fire a bunch of Tomahawk cruise missiles at them…

    How convenient is that…?

    I agree…your plan sounds spectacular…in the way a nutcase on the street makes a spectacle of himself…

    And what happens after that salvo takes out all those fixed S300/400s defending those sites…?

    You yourself admitted they would get wiped out eventually…based on naval ‘salvo theory’ if I recall…

    What then…?

    USN destroys fixed Russian air defenses without even putting a single aircraft into the air…

    Well that has to be the plan of the century…

    And what happens once those S300s and S400s are overwhelmed…ie destroyed…?

    Who stops the US from taking control of the airspace and flying fighter patrols over Syria 24/7…supported by AWACS…ELINT…ISR etc…

    …not to mention being now able to bomb any ground target at will…since the air defenses have been wiped out…?

    PS…don’t try to bullshit about Serbia…if you have something of substance to say then say it…

    ‘…You also fail completely to grasp a gigantic difference in technology and operational concepts between Serbia 1999 and Khmeimim (and Tartus) 2018…’

    Ok Smoothie…once again I will bite…

    Pease take all the time you need to explain this ‘gigantic difference’…

    I knew I was dealing with a complete know-nothing…but I never expected I would be going here…

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov

    So those S400s are going to stay right where they are and get obliterated…
     
    Since you are civilian hack let me explain to you what happens in Khmeimim the moment the salvo is detected--I deliberately will somewhat obfuscate the issue but this is how it will go (plus-minus):

    1. Salvo detected, ETA, course and other what is known initial elements of targets' movement are established and communicated;
    2. Combat Station (Boyevaya Trevoga) is declared:
    a) All aircraft get airborne;
    b) All AD such as S-400, S-300 go on "high" (vklychayut vysokoe);
    c) Pantsyrs go on high and depending on the chart of missile-threatening (raketoopasnye napravlenya) directions, additional may move to stop-gap.

    3. EW goes on "full". What is is, I may only speculate.
    4. Some things begin to happen in Russia too, but that is a separate topic altogether, my article is precisely about that.

    Here comes the most important part, once Combat Station is declared--if anyone, namely Nachalnik PVO (Superintendent of AD) of Khmeimim, let alone lower tier command, order removal of S-300 or S-400 from their fixed positions to "not get obliterated"(c)--they will be immediately arrested and placed in custody, to be tried by Court Martial as people who tried to sabotage defense of Air Base Khmeimim.

    This is just rough description. Obviously in your high school they don't teach basic military facts let alone how force (as in unit or formation) fights. Let me explain why you are an amateur and a "proud" product of internet "education".

    don’t try to bullshit about Serbia
     
    For now the only BS which comes out is from your corner:

    And what happens once those S300s and S400s are overwhelmed…ie destroyed…?
     
    Read the article above this discussion thread.

    And what happens after that salvo takes out all those fixed S300/400s defending those sites…?
     
    I see you do have issues with reading comprehension, again, read article attentively. Granted, you have to introduce now allowance for second S-400 in Masyaf, plus unknown number of confirmed Buk-M2s in Syria. Plus Garmon' etc. That changes salvo completely in Syria. But per in bold in your quote: I understand you have no understanding of tactical, operational and strategic levels and how they connected and interact, which is expected, but many "layman" people have no difficulty understanding basic scheme of things and some even tried, to no avail, explain it to you. But I will reiterate--do not write on things you have no clue about. I don't know, you already tried screenshots of Family Guy, Youtube, what's next--Ponhub? You are definitely a very young fellow who is desperate for attention but you, obviously, do not understand that internet is no substitution for actual serious military education and service experience. See the difference? People know my name, my background, soon my page comes up for a book on publisher's site, I can present here peer reviews, among those peers many US military people, senior officers. See the difference between me and anonymous you?

    Now about that "mobility" which you are so obsessed with and evidently cannot comprehend when and how it is used.

    Any combat task consists of elements--that is what course of combat training is, be it naval, AF, AD etc. In particular for AD troops serving with S-300, 400 etc. the issue of deployment to a position is a normal standard element of combat training, including the shooting from:

    a) prepared
    b) unprepared (moving to a new position)

    positions.

    Here is one of the Moscow units of S-400 trains in both a) and b)

    https://youtu.be/CUy4BnCwbb4

    In the end of this small video starting at 2:06 Commanding officer gives the Order of the day and formulates it quite well. In case of Khmeimim it is defense of the base in prepared fixed position. You ideas of a war-fighting is that of an amateur fanboy and it shows.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @FB
    Look I have no interest in debating your nonsense claims about how AD is supposed to stay fixed in place...

    This is patently absurd...

    And if you don't know this or are prepared to acknowledge this then you place yourself in the category which I have defined for you...

    This proven fact is evidenced by the progression from fixed to mobility in modern SAMs and radars...

    And also proven by the fact that actual authorities [Lambeth...Martin] I have cited take this as a given...

    This is a starting point for any discussion of air defense...

    Even the idea of having to argue this is absurd...but since there may be non-technical people here who care to know the facts...here are just a few...

    Col Zoltan Dani trained his men of the 250'th Air Defense Missile Brigade to dismantle and transport the fixed S125 in 90 minutes...in the Nato air war against Serbia in 1999...

    '...Based on experiences of the 1982 Lebanon War, constant relocation of all assets was key to survival of Dani's unit, the 3rd missile detachment of the 250th Serbian Air Defense Battalion...

    Although the SA-3 / "S-125M Neva" system is not a mobile SAM complex per design, its solid fueled missiles are transportable in near combat ready condition (in fact the Polish Armed Forces and Cuban Revolutionary Armed Forces each created mobile versions of the SA-3 on T-72 tank and T-55 tank chassis respectively in the 1990s).

    Therefore, Lt. Col. Dani trained his SA-3 unit to achieve a 90-minute equipment break-down time with minimal lighting provided for better camouflage, one hour better than the standard time.

    Further set-up and break-down time reductions were achieved by reducing the SA-3 unit's number of active 5P73 launchers and V-601M missiles to just 2x2 from the original 4x4 configuration.

    This reduction in missile capability was justified, because of the expected strictly limited time slots and occasions where a Serbian SAM battery could open fire in face of a tremendous NATO Wild Weasel capability, with any hope of self-preservation...'
     
    Wild Weasel being the HARM equipped aircraft targeting air defense radars...

    Col. Dani's unit...due to its mobility tactics...scored all three kills of US aircraft of the war...

    From Martin we have this...

    '...Fixed Air Defenses Crippled But Mobile Air Defences Survived...

    Two of Serbia’s three static S-75 Dvina / SA-2 Guideline SAM battalions and 70 percent of their static S-125 Neva / SA-3 Goa SAM sites were destroyed...

    ...as compared with only three of their 22 mobile 9M9 Kvadrat / SA-6 Gainful SAM systems...'
     
    So mobile proved over 90 percent survival as compared to 30 percent for non-mobile SAMs...

    Which would explain all of the above...not to mention the Iranians turning their fixed S200s into mobile...

    '...Esmayeeli was quoted by Fars News Agency as saying that a mobile launcher had been developed for the system, in addition to a sharp reduction in its detection-firing-tracing time.

    ”We have given mobility to the S-200 missile system, and the same plan to give mobility to all artillery and missile systems is on the agenda of the Air Defense Force," he said...'
     
    And not to mention the huge amounts of effort and expenditure the Russians have invested in reducing shoot and scoot time from 15 minutes on the early S300s to 5 minutes today...

    Proving of course Hans Guderian's remark that 'the engine of the tank is just as much a weapon as the cannon'...

    But of course we have no need of engines...nor even the wheel...in the bizarro world of Andrei [aka Smoothie X12] Martyanov...

    Too bad Guderian, Dani, the Russian SAM designers...the Iranians, Polish and Cubans [as well as the American with their mobile Patriot] had not consulted 'Smoothie' first...

    They would have been quickly set straight in their 'amateur delusions' about mobile SAMs...

    PS...your nonsense about those homemade drones has what to do with anything...?

    it's supposed to prove that drones can be used against SAMs...?

    Really now...?

    Because those toys were aimed at the airfield...not at the SAMs...

    Stop right now with your patent bullshit here...

    As a writer reaching out to a layman audience...you are supposed to bring facts and clarity not disinformation...

    This is patently absurd…

    Exactly–you are not understanding a basic fact of Khmeimim and Tartus being fixed bases totally dependent on AD structure which is erected around them. You also fail completely to grasp a gigantic difference in technology and operational concepts between Serbia 1999 and Khmeimim (and Tartus) 2018. Yet, you continue to come up with amateur crap non-stop. Serbia’s realities are not applicable to Russian Forces in Syria for a huge host of reasons.

    So mobile proved over 90 percent survival as compared to 30 percent for non-mobile SAMs…

    I repeat again: S-400 and S-300 are not going anywhere precisely because they are there to defend Russian military installations against variety of air threats.

    Really now…?

    Because those toys were aimed at the airfield…not at the SAMs…

    Stop right now with your patent bullshit here…

    Or? So, you were the guy who entered the targeting information into them, right? Here is another one, two days ago–again Pantsir at work:

    http://rusvesna.su/news/1521308526

    As a writer reaching out to a layman audience…you are supposed to bring facts and clarity not disinformation…

    Yes, as a writer reaching to a layman audiences, with my background, this is precisely what I am doing–I inform layman audiences how you misinform them. Because you obviously have no idea on the subject matter and continue to propagate your amateur “vision” of mobility of zonal air defense without any consideration of tactical and operational factors in Syria. This BS which you peddle here derives from your complete ignorance on basic military issues as well as on the technological principles realized in both S-300 or S-400 which are called complexes for a reason. It is expected from you, considering your other preposterous statements such as S-400 being “designed around sensor fusion” (or whatever BS you posted–don’t remember exactly–but am sure about meaning) . So, I am just calling your BS. Simple as that. Do not want to get called? Do not write a BS–very simple. In the end, did you see me writing something on gastroenterology or the history of India? No, I don’t write on things I don’t know. You, evidently, do and being called out experience a complex of emotions most of which are negative.

    Read More
    • LOL: FB
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • FB says:
    @Andrei Martyanov

    Your so-called ‘CV’…whatever it may be is quite meaningless…
     
    Sure. I am positive, however, that you illustrating your points with screenshots from Family Guy is a testament to your professionalism and maturity.

    Your gibberish writings on various blogs are what counts…
     
    I don't know, look up this thread and read the name of the author of this article.

    Proving definitively that you are a minor league dolt…
     
    I guess you don't like to be pointed towards basic tactical and operational concepts of Air Defense not to mention such more specific issues of any operation (ground, air, naval) as reconnaissance and, in Russian also dorazvedka tselei, which is an additional reconnaissance of targets, which is in the foundation of any suppression of AD. You, obviously, stating your BS somehow missed the fact that not only drones can target anything but they already did so thus triggering Kkmeimim's response both by EW and Pantsir.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/08/world/middleeast/syria-russia-drones.html

    What is more important is the fact that nobody got S-400 and S-300 "moving out" but instead AD worked as planned and now Pantsirs are receiving Gvozd (Nail) missile specifically designed to repel drones' attacks and defend high value long range AD systems such as S-400 or S-300. But here we have to get to the issue of targeting and how it is realized technically but this is a whole other story here.

    That is well known in expert circles
     
    Allow me to assume that you have no access to any real expert circles. In fact, I know so.

    many of which participants are at this minute squirting their morning coffee out their nostrils at your crackerjack humor…
     
    Sure, those are probably your kind of "experts".

    Look I have no interest in debating your nonsense claims about how AD is supposed to stay fixed in place…

    This is patently absurd…

    And if you don’t know this or are prepared to acknowledge this then you place yourself in the category which I have defined for you…

    This proven fact is evidenced by the progression from fixed to mobility in modern SAMs and radars…

    And also proven by the fact that actual authorities [Lambeth...Martin] I have cited take this as a given…

    This is a starting point for any discussion of air defense…

    Even the idea of having to argue this is absurd…but since there may be non-technical people here who care to know the facts…here are just a few…

    Col Zoltan Dani trained his men of the 250′th Air Defense Missile Brigade to dismantle and transport the fixed S125 in 90 minutes…in the Nato air war against Serbia in 1999…

    ‘…Based on experiences of the 1982 Lebanon War, constant relocation of all assets was key to survival of Dani’s unit, the 3rd missile detachment of the 250th Serbian Air Defense Battalion…

    Although the SA-3 / “S-125M Neva” system is not a mobile SAM complex per design, its solid fueled missiles are transportable in near combat ready condition (in fact the Polish Armed Forces and Cuban Revolutionary Armed Forces each created mobile versions of the SA-3 on T-72 tank and T-55 tank chassis respectively in the 1990s).

    Therefore, Lt. Col. Dani trained his SA-3 unit to achieve a 90-minute equipment break-down time with minimal lighting provided for better camouflage, one hour better than the standard time.

    Further set-up and break-down time reductions were achieved by reducing the SA-3 unit’s number of active 5P73 launchers and V-601M missiles to just 2×2 from the original 4×4 configuration.

    This reduction in missile capability was justified, because of the expected strictly limited time slots and occasions where a Serbian SAM battery could open fire in face of a tremendous NATO Wild Weasel capability, with any hope of self-preservation…’

    Wild Weasel being the HARM equipped aircraft targeting air defense radars…

    Col. Dani’s unit…due to its mobility tactics…scored all three kills of US aircraft of the war…

    From Martin we have this…

    ‘…Fixed Air Defenses Crippled But Mobile Air Defences Survived…

    Two of Serbia’s three static S-75 Dvina / SA-2 Guideline SAM battalions and 70 percent of their static S-125 Neva / SA-3 Goa SAM sites were destroyed…

    …as compared with only three of their 22 mobile 9M9 Kvadrat / SA-6 Gainful SAM systems…’

    So mobile proved over 90 percent survival as compared to 30 percent for non-mobile SAMs…

    Which would explain all of the above…not to mention the Iranians turning their fixed S200s into mobile…

    ‘…Esmayeeli was quoted by Fars News Agency as saying that a mobile launcher had been developed for the system, in addition to a sharp reduction in its detection-firing-tracing time.

    ”We have given mobility to the S-200 missile system, and the same plan to give mobility to all artillery and missile systems is on the agenda of the Air Defense Force,” he said…’

    And not to mention the huge amounts of effort and expenditure the Russians have invested in reducing shoot and scoot time from 15 minutes on the early S300s to 5 minutes today…

    Proving of course Hans Guderian’s remark that ‘the engine of the tank is just as much a weapon as the cannon’…

    But of course we have no need of engines…nor even the wheel…in the bizarro world of Andrei [aka Smoothie X12] Martyanov…

    Too bad Guderian, Dani, the Russian SAM designers…the Iranians, Polish and Cubans [as well as the American with their mobile Patriot] had not consulted ‘Smoothie’ first…

    They would have been quickly set straight in their ‘amateur delusions’ about mobile SAMs…

    PS…your nonsense about those homemade drones has what to do with anything…?

    it’s supposed to prove that drones can be used against SAMs…?

    Really now…?

    Because those toys were aimed at the airfield…not at the SAMs…

    Stop right now with your patent bullshit here…

    As a writer reaching out to a layman audience…you are supposed to bring facts and clarity not disinformation…

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov

    This is patently absurd…
     
    Exactly--you are not understanding a basic fact of Khmeimim and Tartus being fixed bases totally dependent on AD structure which is erected around them. You also fail completely to grasp a gigantic difference in technology and operational concepts between Serbia 1999 and Khmeimim (and Tartus) 2018. Yet, you continue to come up with amateur crap non-stop. Serbia's realities are not applicable to Russian Forces in Syria for a huge host of reasons.

    So mobile proved over 90 percent survival as compared to 30 percent for non-mobile SAMs…
     
    I repeat again: S-400 and S-300 are not going anywhere precisely because they are there to defend Russian military installations against variety of air threats.

    Really now…?

    Because those toys were aimed at the airfield…not at the SAMs…

    Stop right now with your patent bullshit here…
     
    Or? So, you were the guy who entered the targeting information into them, right? Here is another one, two days ago--again Pantsir at work:

    http://rusvesna.su/news/1521308526


    As a writer reaching out to a layman audience…you are supposed to bring facts and clarity not disinformation…
     
    Yes, as a writer reaching to a layman audiences, with my background, this is precisely what I am doing--I inform layman audiences how you misinform them. Because you obviously have no idea on the subject matter and continue to propagate your amateur "vision" of mobility of zonal air defense without any consideration of tactical and operational factors in Syria. This BS which you peddle here derives from your complete ignorance on basic military issues as well as on the technological principles realized in both S-300 or S-400 which are called complexes for a reason. It is expected from you, considering your other preposterous statements such as S-400 being "designed around sensor fusion" (or whatever BS you posted--don't remember exactly--but am sure about meaning) . So, I am just calling your BS. Simple as that. Do not want to get called? Do not write a BS--very simple. In the end, did you see me writing something on gastroenterology or the history of India? No, I don't write on things I don't know. You, evidently, do and being called out experience a complex of emotions most of which are negative.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @FB
    Your so-called 'CV'...whatever it may be is quite meaningless...

    Your gibberish writings on various blogs are what counts...

    Proving definitively that you are a minor league dolt...

    '...specifically S-300 and S-400 are in fixed positions...

    Read my lips–Air Defense complexes at Khmeimim are in fixed positions and they are NOT going anywhere during salvo...

    As such they ARE targeted by any kind stand off munition in US arsenal...'
     
    That is airtight proof of your amateur standing...

    I'm not going to rehash the concept of the 'invention of the wheel' nor the importance of mobility in air defense...

    That is well known in expert circles...many of which participants are at this minute squirting their morning coffee out their nostrils at your crackerjack humor...

    http://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/images/nostril_shot1.jpg

    Your so-called ‘CV’…whatever it may be is quite meaningless…

    Sure. I am positive, however, that you illustrating your points with screenshots from Family Guy is a testament to your professionalism and maturity.

    Your gibberish writings on various blogs are what counts…

    I don’t know, look up this thread and read the name of the author of this article.

    Proving definitively that you are a minor league dolt…

    I guess you don’t like to be pointed towards basic tactical and operational concepts of Air Defense not to mention such more specific issues of any operation (ground, air, naval) as reconnaissance and, in Russian also dorazvedka tselei, which is an additional reconnaissance of targets, which is in the foundation of any suppression of AD. You, obviously, stating your BS somehow missed the fact that not only drones can target anything but they already did so thus triggering Kkmeimim’s response both by EW and Pantsir.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/08/world/middleeast/syria-russia-drones.html

    What is more important is the fact that nobody got S-400 and S-300 “moving out” but instead AD worked as planned and now Pantsirs are receiving Gvozd (Nail) missile specifically designed to repel drones’ attacks and defend high value long range AD systems such as S-400 or S-300. But here we have to get to the issue of targeting and how it is realized technically but this is a whole other story here.

    That is well known in expert circles

    Allow me to assume that you have no access to any real expert circles. In fact, I know so.

    many of which participants are at this minute squirting their morning coffee out their nostrils at your crackerjack humor…

    Sure, those are probably your kind of “experts”.

    Read More
    • Replies: @FB
    Look I have no interest in debating your nonsense claims about how AD is supposed to stay fixed in place...

    This is patently absurd...

    And if you don't know this or are prepared to acknowledge this then you place yourself in the category which I have defined for you...

    This proven fact is evidenced by the progression from fixed to mobility in modern SAMs and radars...

    And also proven by the fact that actual authorities [Lambeth...Martin] I have cited take this as a given...

    This is a starting point for any discussion of air defense...

    Even the idea of having to argue this is absurd...but since there may be non-technical people here who care to know the facts...here are just a few...

    Col Zoltan Dani trained his men of the 250'th Air Defense Missile Brigade to dismantle and transport the fixed S125 in 90 minutes...in the Nato air war against Serbia in 1999...

    '...Based on experiences of the 1982 Lebanon War, constant relocation of all assets was key to survival of Dani's unit, the 3rd missile detachment of the 250th Serbian Air Defense Battalion...

    Although the SA-3 / "S-125M Neva" system is not a mobile SAM complex per design, its solid fueled missiles are transportable in near combat ready condition (in fact the Polish Armed Forces and Cuban Revolutionary Armed Forces each created mobile versions of the SA-3 on T-72 tank and T-55 tank chassis respectively in the 1990s).

    Therefore, Lt. Col. Dani trained his SA-3 unit to achieve a 90-minute equipment break-down time with minimal lighting provided for better camouflage, one hour better than the standard time.

    Further set-up and break-down time reductions were achieved by reducing the SA-3 unit's number of active 5P73 launchers and V-601M missiles to just 2x2 from the original 4x4 configuration.

    This reduction in missile capability was justified, because of the expected strictly limited time slots and occasions where a Serbian SAM battery could open fire in face of a tremendous NATO Wild Weasel capability, with any hope of self-preservation...'
     
    Wild Weasel being the HARM equipped aircraft targeting air defense radars...

    Col. Dani's unit...due to its mobility tactics...scored all three kills of US aircraft of the war...

    From Martin we have this...

    '...Fixed Air Defenses Crippled But Mobile Air Defences Survived...

    Two of Serbia’s three static S-75 Dvina / SA-2 Guideline SAM battalions and 70 percent of their static S-125 Neva / SA-3 Goa SAM sites were destroyed...

    ...as compared with only three of their 22 mobile 9M9 Kvadrat / SA-6 Gainful SAM systems...'
     
    So mobile proved over 90 percent survival as compared to 30 percent for non-mobile SAMs...

    Which would explain all of the above...not to mention the Iranians turning their fixed S200s into mobile...

    '...Esmayeeli was quoted by Fars News Agency as saying that a mobile launcher had been developed for the system, in addition to a sharp reduction in its detection-firing-tracing time.

    ”We have given mobility to the S-200 missile system, and the same plan to give mobility to all artillery and missile systems is on the agenda of the Air Defense Force," he said...'
     
    And not to mention the huge amounts of effort and expenditure the Russians have invested in reducing shoot and scoot time from 15 minutes on the early S300s to 5 minutes today...

    Proving of course Hans Guderian's remark that 'the engine of the tank is just as much a weapon as the cannon'...

    But of course we have no need of engines...nor even the wheel...in the bizarro world of Andrei [aka Smoothie X12] Martyanov...

    Too bad Guderian, Dani, the Russian SAM designers...the Iranians, Polish and Cubans [as well as the American with their mobile Patriot] had not consulted 'Smoothie' first...

    They would have been quickly set straight in their 'amateur delusions' about mobile SAMs...

    PS...your nonsense about those homemade drones has what to do with anything...?

    it's supposed to prove that drones can be used against SAMs...?

    Really now...?

    Because those toys were aimed at the airfield...not at the SAMs...

    Stop right now with your patent bullshit here...

    As a writer reaching out to a layman audience...you are supposed to bring facts and clarity not disinformation...
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • FB says:

    Your so-called ‘CV’…whatever it may be is quite meaningless…

    Your gibberish writings on various blogs are what counts…

    Proving definitively that you are a minor league dolt…

    ‘…specifically S-300 and S-400 are in fixed positions…

    Read my lips–Air Defense complexes at Khmeimim are in fixed positions and they are NOT going anywhere during salvo…

    As such they ARE targeted by any kind stand off munition in US arsenal…’

    That is airtight proof of your amateur standing…

    I’m not going to rehash the concept of the ‘invention of the wheel’ nor the importance of mobility in air defense…

    That is well known in expert circles…many of which participants are at this minute squirting their morning coffee out their nostrils at your crackerjack humor…

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov

    Your so-called ‘CV’…whatever it may be is quite meaningless…
     
    Sure. I am positive, however, that you illustrating your points with screenshots from Family Guy is a testament to your professionalism and maturity.

    Your gibberish writings on various blogs are what counts…
     
    I don't know, look up this thread and read the name of the author of this article.

    Proving definitively that you are a minor league dolt…
     
    I guess you don't like to be pointed towards basic tactical and operational concepts of Air Defense not to mention such more specific issues of any operation (ground, air, naval) as reconnaissance and, in Russian also dorazvedka tselei, which is an additional reconnaissance of targets, which is in the foundation of any suppression of AD. You, obviously, stating your BS somehow missed the fact that not only drones can target anything but they already did so thus triggering Kkmeimim's response both by EW and Pantsir.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/08/world/middleeast/syria-russia-drones.html

    What is more important is the fact that nobody got S-400 and S-300 "moving out" but instead AD worked as planned and now Pantsirs are receiving Gvozd (Nail) missile specifically designed to repel drones' attacks and defend high value long range AD systems such as S-400 or S-300. But here we have to get to the issue of targeting and how it is realized technically but this is a whole other story here.

    That is well known in expert circles
     
    Allow me to assume that you have no access to any real expert circles. In fact, I know so.

    many of which participants are at this minute squirting their morning coffee out their nostrils at your crackerjack humor…
     
    Sure, those are probably your kind of "experts".
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @FB

    Shut up amateur blogger...

     


    You have no business writing about anything technical

     

    As I already stated, I can present my CV to anyone who would require. Then we may compare who is amateur and who is not. But you certainly showed me. ;-)

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Andrei Martyanov

    Those mobile Russian air defenses cannot be targeted by drones or by cruise missiles or by conventionalk fighter/bombers…as I have already stated on many occasions…
     
    You continue to insist on your delirious amateurish BS that AD complexes are not targets, when they are and specifically S-300 and S-400 are in fixed positions. Yet, you continue to parade this sheer idiocy, you obviously being a civilian hack, non-stop. Read my lips--Air Defense complexes at Khmeimim are in fixed positions and they are NOT going anywhere during salvo. As such they ARE targeted by any kind stand off munition in US arsenal. What you "stated" is crap which could come only from some fanboy who never served a day in uniform and has no clue about any serious AD.

    Shut up amateur blogger…

    You have no business writing about anything technical

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov
    As I already stated, I can present my CV to anyone who would require. Then we may compare who is amateur and who is not. But you certainly showed me. ;-)
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @FB
    Let's get one thing straight from the top...

    You are a complete moron
     
    I have to say this forcefully because of your persistence in arguing with someone who is actually qualified to discuss the subject matter...

    You have shown your nonexistent level of knowledge of the subject matter by confusing a Buk with a Tor...that is just amateur hour...and then gone on with more utterly ridiculous bullshit...

    This is a technical matter that requires some knowledge of the subject...do you not realize that...do you think you can go and argue about nuclear physics if you have a grade three education...?

    Yet you persist anyway...throwing up ever more bullshit which I then have to factually correct...for the sake of the readers here...[which you don't even consider by throwing up massive amount of spam...]

    This is how mentally challenged people behave...they are incapable of processing even basic information and knowledge that they are presented with...

    They simply persist with the exact same thing they have stuck in their feeble mind...over and over and over...

    That's you...

    Please realize your limitations...please actually read the many technical and authoritative references I have provided...

    And most of all...please stop throwing up complete non-factual claims which I have to disprove...

    '...You will recall that the Western forces weaponized drones and thousands of cruise missiles which would deplete the stocks of defensive missiles which would then be overwhelmed by a couple thousand fighter/bombers with standoff air to surface missiles backed up with electronic warfare planes such as Growlers and Prowlers...'
     
    The US doesn't have a 'couple thousand' fighter bombers in total...I already told Erebus to go to Flightglobal and get the statistics...

    USAF as of 2017 has 795 F16s and 431 F15s...

    The US navy has 368 FA18s...do the math stupido...

    Obviously not all those aircraft are even airworthy...The FA18 carrier aircraft have already gone beyond their 6,000 service life...

    That was as of 2012...

    This airframe service life is based on metal fatigue...which is the limiting factor in aluminum...having no replacement airplanes in the pipeline...they have supposedly conducted engineering 'studies' and extended the service life to 8,000 hours...and even 10,000 hours in some cases...

    However I know for a fact that those pilots are going to be careful about aggressive maneuvering in those aircraft...

    Also simply due to regular maintenance and servicing airplanes are not available like your family car...they need many more hours of maintenance for each hour of flight...availability rates are at an all time low due to the aging fleet...

    But complete retards like yourself pull out of your arsehole that the US would throw a couple of thousand airplanes in the air...

    What a complete and utter retard...

    There is also the question of logistics...in the runup to the gulf war of 1991...it took many weeks for the US to get those air assets into position...those airplanes need maintenance crews, fuel, supplies for both men and machines etc...

    You talk as if throwing a couple of thousand [nonexistent] airplanes in the air is like a Sunday walk in the park...

    This illustrates the depth of your ignorance...

    Then there is the question of which countries in the region will give the US access to use its airfields...or even to overfly its territory...

    In the Iraq invasion of 2003 Turkey refused to allow the US to operate from its bases there...or even to overfly Turkish territory...as did other countries...

    Any country in the region that does allow the US to launch attacks against Russia in Syria would face instant retaliation...Russian Kalibr cruise missiles launched from ships and subs even in Russian territorial waters in the Caspian and Black seas could reach anywhere in the Middle East...

    They are ready to obliterate any airfield in the area from which hostile action is taken...perhaps even pre-emptively if they see that a buildup is under way...

    Certainly they would obliterate those bases right after the first strike...so where would those aircraftg operate from then...?

    Maybe bases in Russia...?

    Then we have your second big pile of retarded bullshit...

    '...Under a hypothetical situation, any mass swarm attack is just simple math where the defender cannot reload fast enough to defend the infrastructure and the missile defense batteries” Dr. Yoshihara in “Chinese Aerospace Power” notes:..'
     
    That scenario has nothing to do with SEAD...suppression fo enemy air defenses and trying to eliminate an A2/AD zone...

    It has specifically to do with a swarm attack on a ship...which is a target whose location is known...and which must expend ammunition...ie rockets and air defense in order to defend itself from being sunk...

    do you even realize that this is not the same as an A2/AD zone...?

    Obviously you don't...even though I have pointed in you in the direction of plenty of authoritative material...ie Lambeth...Martin etc...that is a good primer on understanding the basic concepts of SEAD...

    This tells me you are a useless slug...who has no interest in actually expanding his knowledge...which is sorely lacking...but like the three year old child who has not yet learned logical behavior...continues unperturbed with the same nonsense...

    You are quite obviously a severely mentally handicapped person...

    Those mobile Russian air defenses cannot be targeted by drones or by cruise missiles or by conventionalk fighter/bombers...as I have already stated on many occasions...

    In a war footing...they disperse and their locations are unknown...the weapons mentioned only work against known targets that are fixed and remain where they are...

    The only weapon that can target these mobile SAMs are missiles that home in on radar signals...ie high speed anti-radiation missiles...or HARMs...

    The US has a limited number of fighter aircraft that can deliver these weapons...as well as a limited number of jamming aircraft that would need to accompany them...

    In any case...the range of those Harm missiles is less than half of those defending SAMs...and the small jammers on board those small aircraft are ineffective against the big and powerful truck-mounted radars of those SAMs...

    Listen to USAF General Phillip Breedlove...

    '...The United States has the right tools to take on Russian anti-access/area denial (A2/AD) zones in the European theatre, but it does not have enough capacity to take on Moscow’s new bastions head-on.

    Moreover, the U.S. military is overly reliant on air power to defeat those emerging threats.

    “We have the tools, but we do not have nearly enough of them—and the speed that we would need to eliminate these A2/AD bubbles—to be able to deploy our forces is going to be controlled by the depth of the bench of how we can attack those A2/AD forces,” retired U.S Air Force Gen. Philip Breedlove, former commander of U.S. European Command told an audience at the Center for Strategic and International Studies on June 29.

    “Right now, we’re almost completely dependent on air forces and aviation assets in order to attack the A2/AD problem.”..'
     
    So...retard...go an argue with Generaal Breedlove okay...you have stretched my patience to the breaking point...

    Also consider the other readers of this thread who do not deserve to be spammed by your bullshit...they are looking for inforative insight and clarity...not retarded drivel...

    Do not bother me anymore...

    Digest what I have presented and go over my previous posts in this thread where I counter Martyanov's non-factual errors...and if an actuall intelligent thought or question penetrates that massive bonehead of yours...

    ...then and only then address me...

    Kapish...?

    Those mobile Russian air defenses cannot be targeted by drones or by cruise missiles or by conventionalk fighter/bombers…as I have already stated on many occasions…

    You continue to insist on your delirious amateurish BS that AD complexes are not targets, when they are and specifically S-300 and S-400 are in fixed positions. Yet, you continue to parade this sheer idiocy, you obviously being a civilian hack, non-stop. Read my lips–Air Defense complexes at Khmeimim are in fixed positions and they are NOT going anywhere during salvo. As such they ARE targeted by any kind stand off munition in US arsenal. What you “stated” is crap which could come only from some fanboy who never served a day in uniform and has no clue about any serious AD.

    Read More
    • Replies: @FB

    Shut up amateur blogger...

     


    You have no business writing about anything technical

     
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • FB says:
    @Krollchem
    Under a hypothetical situation, any mass swarm attack is just simple math where the defender cannot reload fast enough to defend the infrastructure and the missile defense batteries” Dr. Yoshihara in “Chinese Aerospace Power” notes:

    "ASBMs (anti-ship ballistic missiles) may not need to produce mission kills against the surface fleet to complicate U.S. plans. They only need to reach the fleet's defensive envelope for the Aegis to engage the incoming threats, thus forcing the defender to expend valuable ammunition that cannot be easily resupplied at sea under combat conditions. Even inaccurate ASBMs, then, could compel the Aegis to exhaust its weapons inventory, leaving it defenseless against further PLA actions. Used in conjunction with conventional ballistic missile strikes against U.S. bases and other land targets across Asia — strikes that would elicit more intercept attempts — ASBM raids could deprive the United States and its allies of their staying power in a sea fight."
    https://www.amazon.com/Chinese-Aerospace-Power-Evolving-Maritime/dp/1591142415

    You will recall that the Western forces weaponized drones and thousands of cruise missiles which would deplete the stocks of defensive missiles which would then be overwhelmed by a couple thousand fighter/bombers with standoff air to surface missiles backed up with electronic warfare planes such as Growlers and Prowlers.

    A good Chinese example of potential swarm attacks, such as the DF-21D, can be found at: https://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/chinas-missile-swarms-vs-americas-lasers-drones-railguns-who-16303

    Russian Zircon missile strategy also involves sea skimming swarming with one high to attract antimissile fire.

    See also:
    “winning the salvo competition rebalancing america’s air and missile defenses”
    http://csbaonline.org/uploads/documents/CSBA6173-PGM2_Report_WEB_2.pdf

    In regards to drones, we are talking about weaponized drones which launch one or more missiles that must also be destroyed. We are not talking about primitive drones such as “Russia uses missiles and cyber warfare to fight off 'swarm of drones' attacking military bases in Syria”
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/01/09/russia-fought-swarm-drones-attacking-military-bases-syria/

    A good example of a weaponized drone is the “Wing Loong (Pterodactyl) The weaponry options include AKD-10 air-to-surface anti-tank missile, BRMI 90mm guided rockets and FT-7/130 130kg bombs.”
    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5786954/these-eight-chilling-weapons-could-hold-the-key-to-chinas-1-trillion-bid-to-become-worlds-most-feared-nation-by-2050/


    The DoD is working on massive drone swarm technologies “The drone-firing weapon is outlined in a solicitation for design proposals from the Department of Defense. Unlike radio-controlled consumer drones, the quadcopters would guide themselves as part of a coordinated swarm. Each would carry an explosively formed projectile (EFP) warhead, firing a high-velocity slug of metal capable of destroying armoured vehicles”
    .https://www.newscientist.com/article/2118412-us-army-wants-to-fire-swarm-of-weaponised-drones-from-a-missile/

    Let’s get one thing straight from the top…

    You are a complete moron

    I have to say this forcefully because of your persistence in arguing with someone who is actually qualified to discuss the subject matter…

    You have shown your nonexistent level of knowledge of the subject matter by confusing a Buk with a Tor…that is just amateur hour…and then gone on with more utterly ridiculous bullshit…

    This is a technical matter that requires some knowledge of the subject…do you not realize that…do you think you can go and argue about nuclear physics if you have a grade three education…?

    Yet you persist anyway…throwing up ever more bullshit which I then have to factually correct…for the sake of the readers here…[which you don't even consider by throwing up massive amount of spam...]

    This is how mentally challenged people behave…they are incapable of processing even basic information and knowledge that they are presented with…

    They simply persist with the exact same thing they have stuck in their feeble mind…over and over and over…

    That’s you…

    Please realize your limitations…please actually read the many technical and authoritative references I have provided…

    And most of all…please stop throwing up complete non-factual claims which I have to disprove…

    ‘…You will recall that the Western forces weaponized drones and thousands of cruise missiles which would deplete the stocks of defensive missiles which would then be overwhelmed by a couple thousand fighter/bombers with standoff air to surface missiles backed up with electronic warfare planes such as Growlers and Prowlers…’

    The US doesn’t have a ‘couple thousand’ fighter bombers in total…I already told Erebus to go to Flightglobal and get the statistics…

    USAF as of 2017 has 795 F16s and 431 F15s…

    The US navy has 368 FA18s…do the math stupido…

    Obviously not all those aircraft are even airworthy…The FA18 carrier aircraft have already gone beyond their 6,000 service life…

    That was as of 2012…

    This airframe service life is based on metal fatigue…which is the limiting factor in aluminum…having no replacement airplanes in the pipeline…they have supposedly conducted engineering ‘studies’ and extended the service life to 8,000 hours…and even 10,000 hours in some cases…

    However I know for a fact that those pilots are going to be careful about aggressive maneuvering in those aircraft…

    Also simply due to regular maintenance and servicing airplanes are not available like your family car…they need many more hours of maintenance for each hour of flight…availability rates are at an all time low due to the aging fleet…

    But complete retards like yourself pull out of your arsehole that the US would throw a couple of thousand airplanes in the air…

    What a complete and utter retard…

    There is also the question of logistics…in the runup to the gulf war of 1991…it took many weeks for the US to get those air assets into position…those airplanes need maintenance crews, fuel, supplies for both men and machines etc…

    You talk as if throwing a couple of thousand [nonexistent] airplanes in the air is like a Sunday walk in the park…

    This illustrates the depth of your ignorance…

    Then there is the question of which countries in the region will give the US access to use its airfields…or even to overfly its territory…

    In the Iraq invasion of 2003 Turkey refused to allow the US to operate from its bases there…or even to overfly Turkish territory…as did other countries…

    Any country in the region that does allow the US to launch attacks against Russia in Syria would face instant retaliation…Russian Kalibr cruise missiles launched from ships and subs even in Russian territorial waters in the Caspian and Black seas could reach anywhere in the Middle East…

    They are ready to obliterate any airfield in the area from which hostile action is taken…perhaps even pre-emptively if they see that a buildup is under way…

    Certainly they would obliterate those bases right after the first strike…so where would those aircraftg operate from then…?

    Maybe bases in Russia…?

    Then we have your second big pile of retarded bullshit…

    ‘…Under a hypothetical situation, any mass swarm attack is just simple math where the defender cannot reload fast enough to defend the infrastructure and the missile defense batteries” Dr. Yoshihara in “Chinese Aerospace Power” notes:..’

    That scenario has nothing to do with SEAD…suppression fo enemy air defenses and trying to eliminate an A2/AD zone…

    It has specifically to do with a swarm attack on a ship…which is a target whose location is known…and which must expend ammunition…ie rockets and air defense in order to defend itself from being sunk…

    do you even realize that this is not the same as an A2/AD zone…?

    Obviously you don’t…even though I have pointed in you in the direction of plenty of authoritative material…ie Lambeth…Martin etc…that is a good primer on understanding the basic concepts of SEAD…

    This tells me you are a useless slug…who has no interest in actually expanding his knowledge…which is sorely lacking…but like the three year old child who has not yet learned logical behavior…continues unperturbed with the same nonsense…

    You are quite obviously a severely mentally handicapped person…

    Those mobile Russian air defenses cannot be targeted by drones or by cruise missiles or by conventionalk fighter/bombers…as I have already stated on many occasions…

    In a war footing…they disperse and their locations are unknown…the weapons mentioned only work against known targets that are fixed and remain where they are…

    The only weapon that can target these mobile SAMs are missiles that home in on radar signals…ie high speed anti-radiation missiles…or HARMs…

    The US has a limited number of fighter aircraft that can deliver these weapons…as well as a limited number of jamming aircraft that would need to accompany them…

    In any case…the range of those Harm missiles is less than half of those defending SAMs…and the small jammers on board those small aircraft are ineffective against the big and powerful truck-mounted radars of those SAMs…

    Listen to USAF General Phillip Breedlove…

    ‘…The United States has the right tools to take on Russian anti-access/area denial (A2/AD) zones in the European theatre, but it does not have enough capacity to take on Moscow’s new bastions head-on.

    Moreover, the U.S. military is overly reliant on air power to defeat those emerging threats.

    “We have the tools, but we do not have nearly enough of them—and the speed that we would need to eliminate these A2/AD bubbles—to be able to deploy our forces is going to be controlled by the depth of the bench of how we can attack those A2/AD forces,” retired U.S Air Force Gen. Philip Breedlove, former commander of U.S. European Command told an audience at the Center for Strategic and International Studies on June 29.

    “Right now, we’re almost completely dependent on air forces and aviation assets in order to attack the A2/AD problem.”..’

    So…retard…go an argue with Generaal Breedlove okay…you have stretched my patience to the breaking point…

    Also consider the other readers of this thread who do not deserve to be spammed by your bullshit…they are looking for inforative insight and clarity…not retarded drivel…

    Do not bother me anymore…

    Digest what I have presented and go over my previous posts in this thread where I counter Martyanov’s non-factual errors…and if an actuall intelligent thought or question penetrates that massive bonehead of yours…

    …then and only then address me…

    Kapish…?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Andrei Martyanov

    Those mobile Russian air defenses cannot be targeted by drones or by cruise missiles or by conventionalk fighter/bombers…as I have already stated on many occasions…
     
    You continue to insist on your delirious amateurish BS that AD complexes are not targets, when they are and specifically S-300 and S-400 are in fixed positions. Yet, you continue to parade this sheer idiocy, you obviously being a civilian hack, non-stop. Read my lips--Air Defense complexes at Khmeimim are in fixed positions and they are NOT going anywhere during salvo. As such they ARE targeted by any kind stand off munition in US arsenal. What you "stated" is crap which could come only from some fanboy who never served a day in uniform and has no clue about any serious AD.
    , @Krollchem
    I will not stoop to insults. Such behavior discredits the points one makes as well as the person making them.

    Rather, I have tried to show that swarm attacks can theoretically breech the Russian/Syrian missile defense in Syria but would not be a reasonable approach compared to ground attacks by terrorist proxy armies.

    All this discussion masks the current Western plan which is focused on cutting off the transportation corridor between Iran and Syria/Lebanon . Likewise, capture of South East Syria and the T4 pumping station would allow the West/Israel to restart a oil pipeline to Israel from the US controlled Syrian oil fields.
    https://southfront.org/us-led-coalition-its-proxies-to-launch-attack-against-syrian-army-in-eastern-syria-reports/
    https://sputniknews.com/middleeast/201803191062696904-us-syria-army-attack-iraq/

    As for the hypothetical air attack on Syria:

    First , fighter jets serve as airborne missile platforms with lots of missiles!

    Second, the US has 2567 fighters (excluding F-35s) not the 1594 you mention.

    Third, close allies have another 1886 fighters (excluding the smaller EU countries and Canada/Australia/New Zealand) for a total of about 4453 fighters.

    Fourth, Russia (and China) have demonstrated conventional warfare parity with the US and its allies via advanced missile systems. This prevents direct non-nuclear war.

    Fifth, nuclear war in game theory is also a lose-lose situation due to Nuclear Winter even if the only one party launches their nuclear weapons.

    Here are the facts on fighter aircraft in the US arsenal and among the COWs. The list of active US military active military aircraft can be found here:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_active_United_States_military_aircraft#Navy

    Air force

    F-15 Eagle 236
    F-15E Strike Eagle 220
    F-16 Fighting Falcon 951
    F-22A Raptor 195

    Navy

    F/A-18E/F Super Hornet 507
    F/A-18 Hornet 314

    Marine Corps
    F/A-18A Hornet 36
    F/A-18C Hornet 60
    F/A-18D Hornet 48

    For a total of 2567 fighters (excluding F-35s).

    This total does not include the various bombers, UAVs and electronic warfare planes.

    Add in:
    Israel with 315 fighters
    F-15 Eagle 58
    F-15E Strike Eagle 25
    F-16 Fighting Falcon 223
    F-35 Lightning II 9

    Saudi Arabia with 274 fighters
    F-15 Eagle 96
    Eurofighter Typhoon 48
    Panavia Tornado 88
    F-15E Strike Eagle 186

    UAE with 104 fighters
    Mirage 2000 49
    F-16 Fighting Falcon 55

    UK with 275 fighters
    Eurofighter Typhoon 137
    Panavia Tornado GR4 138

    Germany with 181 fighters
    Panavia Tornado 87
    Eurofighter Typhoon 94

    Italy with 137 fighters
    Eurofighter Typhoon 75
    Panavia Tornado 62

    France (some needing repair) with 306 fighters
    Dassault Mirage 2000 185
    Dassault Mirage F1 65
    Dassault Rafale 56

    You will note that Australia and several other EU countries have also been bombing in Syria. Then there is Turkey with 294 fighters:
    F-4 Phantom II 49
    F-16 Fighting Falcon 245
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Erebus

    Fortunately, “FP” is correct about the US planes leaving Turkey (A-10s, F16s and F15s).
     
    There's a plausible take on that is less "fortunate". Namely, that the Turks have informed the USM/NATO that they can't use the base for Syrian operations, and so they've transferred their assets to bases without that restriction.

    Qatar isn't the only M.E. US ally shopping for S3/400s. Saudi Arabia and Turkey are also in detailed negotiations, with the latter having made their deposit, or so we're told. If the US makes good its threat of sanctions, they will be cutting off their nose...

    Unfortunately, Turkey will likely keep the areas they captured, the US will expand the 20 airbases in Eastern Syria and Israel will keep the Golan and add a buffer zone into Syria.
     
    I'm not so sure about Turkey, but 1 thing I've read is that Kurd fighters are leaving the US' coalition and heading off to battle the Turks. Without the Kurds, the coalition's ability to hold E. Syria goes limp. It's not unlikely that that's part of the calculus that allowed the Turks in in the first place.

    Good points about the possible purchase of S-400s by Saudi Arabia and the Kurds displeasure about US lack of support. The US continues to make a mess of things in the ME.

    Somehow, the US COWs need to conquer some country to keep the financial Ponzi scheme going a little longer. Any thoughts on how the new Iran haters in the Trump administration will try to get at Iran?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Uncle Sam
    There is no way in hell that America is going launch a massive air strike against Syria with the presence of Russian personnel in the areas to be attacked. Because of the possibility of a nuclear exchange, the Americans would consider Syria as a game not worth the candle.

    Besides, the vessels or bases that would launch such an attack would be destroyed by a Russian retaliatory attack killing hundreds if not thousands of American servicemen.

    It just ain't gonna happen.

    My understanding is that the Tomahawk missile strike launched against Syria last year resulted in only 23 of the 59 missiles hitting their targets. The Russians obviously were able to interfere with the electronic guidance systems of these missiles causing them to go off course and damage nothing. Remember what happened to the destroyer Donald Cook which lost all its electronics. If the Americans were dumb enough to use satellite guidance, that could also easily explain such a high loss. All the Russians had to do was use hand held GPS jammers.

    A somewhat comparable situation arose in the war against Serbia in 1999. The Serbs used GPS jammers to cause many Tomahawks to go off course apart from the fact that many other Tomahawks were shot down by antiaircraft fire. But the biggest disaster (for America) was the accidental bombing of the Chinese embassy. The satellite guided JDAMS had their electronic links blocked by the GPS jammers causing the JDAMS to go off course and hit the Chinese embassy. They were supposed to hit a Serb government building a hundred or so yards away from the Chinese embassy.

    So as you can see, the American electronics technology can be defeated, if the Americans tangle with a competent military opponent.

    My comment #328 stated that the Western proxy army will attack from the south and clear out a oil transport corridor and take the T4 pumping station. Apparently, Southfront has picked up part of my theory reports that an attack may be imminent:

    https://southfront.org/us-led-coalition-its-proxies-to-launch-attack-against-syrian-army-in-eastern-syria-reports/

    My comments thus far have tried to show that any air war over Syria would not happen due to the nuclear weapons stalemate. However, the West has hundreds of thousands of Saudi led proxy fighters who will continue the fight on the ground. The terrorist leaders were trained in Saudi Arabia over many years at a high expense to spread their perverse ideology which most Muslims do not recognize as Islam.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Uncle Sam
    There is no way in hell that America is going launch a massive air strike against Syria with the presence of Russian personnel in the areas to be attacked. Because of the possibility of a nuclear exchange, the Americans would consider Syria as a game not worth the candle.

    Besides, the vessels or bases that would launch such an attack would be destroyed by a Russian retaliatory attack killing hundreds if not thousands of American servicemen.

    It just ain't gonna happen.

    My understanding is that the Tomahawk missile strike launched against Syria last year resulted in only 23 of the 59 missiles hitting their targets. The Russians obviously were able to interfere with the electronic guidance systems of these missiles causing them to go off course and damage nothing. Remember what happened to the destroyer Donald Cook which lost all its electronics. If the Americans were dumb enough to use satellite guidance, that could also easily explain such a high loss. All the Russians had to do was use hand held GPS jammers.

    A somewhat comparable situation arose in the war against Serbia in 1999. The Serbs used GPS jammers to cause many Tomahawks to go off course apart from the fact that many other Tomahawks were shot down by antiaircraft fire. But the biggest disaster (for America) was the accidental bombing of the Chinese embassy. The satellite guided JDAMS had their electronic links blocked by the GPS jammers causing the JDAMS to go off course and hit the Chinese embassy. They were supposed to hit a Serb government building a hundred or so yards away from the Chinese embassy.

    So as you can see, the American electronics technology can be defeated, if the Americans tangle with a competent military opponent.

    It just ain’t gonna happen.

    Of course not, but not because “it would go nuclear”. It wouldn’t because the USM/NATO would lose their pre-eminence in the M.E. and with that their dreams of Global Hegemony whether or not it went nuclear.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Krollchem
    Thanks for emphasizing swarm high intensity attack warfare in order to show that the NATO/FRY war is not directly applicable to any Western mass attack on Syria. The NATO war against FRY involved some 800-1000 aerial attacks per 24 hours. Any hypothetical war in Syria would involve many times that number in less than three hours with drone swarms that would proceed any attack to soak up Russian and Syrian missiles. Having said this, the Russian and Chinese strategic doctrine also uses swarm attacks with, for example Zircon and D21D missiles, respectively.

    I personally think that any Western attack on Syria to be insane. Unfortunately, most Western leaders appear to be insane and this could lead to the situation getting out of hand. Fortunately, "FP" is correct about the US planes leaving Turkey (A-10s, F16s and F15s). Given that Trump has threatened to sanction any country that buys the Russian S-400, it would appear that Qatar is also in the cross hairs leading to the massive US air base there being under new management (Russian?).

    It option of the proxy terrorist army being funded by Trump is REAL. It may take another year for Syria and Russian forces to clean out Iblib from the terrorists. Meanwhile the terrorists being trained in Southern Syria may attack and try to take the Southern region of Syria around Al Bukamal and the T4 pumping station to create an oil export corridor from the Eastern Syrian oil fields to Israel. Interesting that the US Pave Hawk chopper went down in this area..

    With the loss of Afrin the Kurds should be disenchanted with the US, but can be easily squashed have been used like toilet paper. Potentially, the Western powers may only have Israel, Saudi Arabia and UAE as allies in the ME. Unfortunately, Turkey will likely keep the areas they captured, the US will expand the 20 airbases in Eastern Syria and Israel will keep the Golan and add a buffer zone into Syria.

    Given the high cost of the US , NATO and Israeli war machines the internal economic damage will eventually cause the societies to collapse. Hopefully such a fall will be slow enough so that the world will not be taken down too.

    You may be interested in the US nuclear policy review for US plans and misconceptions about the world:
    https://fas.org/wp-content/uploads/media/2018-Nuclear-Posture-Review-Version-2.pdf

    Fortunately, “FP” is correct about the US planes leaving Turkey (A-10s, F16s and F15s).

    There’s a plausible take on that is less “fortunate”. Namely, that the Turks have informed the USM/NATO that they can’t use the base for Syrian operations, and so they’ve transferred their assets to bases without that restriction.

    Qatar isn’t the only M.E. US ally shopping for S3/400s. Saudi Arabia and Turkey are also in detailed negotiations, with the latter having made their deposit, or so we’re told. If the US makes good its threat of sanctions, they will be cutting off their nose…

    Unfortunately, Turkey will likely keep the areas they captured, the US will expand the 20 airbases in Eastern Syria and Israel will keep the Golan and add a buffer zone into Syria.

    I’m not so sure about Turkey, but 1 thing I’ve read is that Kurd fighters are leaving the US’ coalition and heading off to battle the Turks. Without the Kurds, the coalition’s ability to hold E. Syria goes limp. It’s not unlikely that that’s part of the calculus that allowed the Turks in in the first place.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Krollchem
    Good points about the possible purchase of S-400s by Saudi Arabia and the Kurds displeasure about US lack of support. The US continues to make a mess of things in the ME.

    Somehow, the US COWs need to conquer some country to keep the financial Ponzi scheme going a little longer. Any thoughts on how the new Iran haters in the Trump administration will try to get at Iran?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Krollchem
    You are correct in stating that "My understanding is that the Tomahawk missile strike launched against Syria last year resulted in only 23 of the 59 missiles hitting their targets." despite US propaganda.

    Are you sure that "The Russians obviously were able to interfere with the electronic guidance systems of these missiles causing them to go off course and damage nothing."? Any evidence that the remainder were not shot down by the coordinated missile defense in Syria? Parts of one Tomahawk missile was found in a garden but did not seem to be intact. The Syrians were also warned about the attack and their flight worthy jets just relocated during the attack.

    You probably also noted the nerve agent canisters near one of the bunkers which the US claimed was evidence of a continuing chemical weapons program. It reality the Syrians used an alkali neutralization method to destroy the agents in the canisters.

    I too have seen reports that the Su-24 the overflew the Donald Cook had a electronic warfare pod but have not seen any confirmation from the US Navy or any other Navies. Do you have any further information on whether or not the destroyer Donald Cook lost its electronics?

    As I stated in an earlier thread, the US was considering closing down the Whidbey Island Naval Station in Washington state but instead started a major electronic warfare program there using Prowlers and Growler aircraft. Perhaps the Donald Cook had its electronic damaged, I just don't know.

    The US claimed that the map they used was old as the reason why the Chinese Embassy was hit. In War the first casualty is truth and this applies to both sides in the NATO/FRY war. Do you have any links.

    Thanks for the help.

    FYI here is an interesting article on the Donald Cook….

    http://www.voltairenet.org/article185860.html

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
  • @Uncle Sam
    There is no way in hell that America is going launch a massive air strike against Syria with the presence of Russian personnel in the areas to be attacked. Because of the possibility of a nuclear exchange, the Americans would consider Syria as a game not worth the candle.

    Besides, the vessels or bases that would launch such an attack would be destroyed by a Russian retaliatory attack killing hundreds if not thousands of American servicemen.

    It just ain't gonna happen.

    My understanding is that the Tomahawk missile strike launched against Syria last year resulted in only 23 of the 59 missiles hitting their targets. The Russians obviously were able to interfere with the electronic guidance systems of these missiles causing them to go off course and damage nothing. Remember what happened to the destroyer Donald Cook which lost all its electronics. If the Americans were dumb enough to use satellite guidance, that could also easily explain such a high loss. All the Russians had to do was use hand held GPS jammers.

    A somewhat comparable situation arose in the war against Serbia in 1999. The Serbs used GPS jammers to cause many Tomahawks to go off course apart from the fact that many other Tomahawks were shot down by antiaircraft fire. But the biggest disaster (for America) was the accidental bombing of the Chinese embassy. The satellite guided JDAMS had their electronic links blocked by the GPS jammers causing the JDAMS to go off course and hit the Chinese embassy. They were supposed to hit a Serb government building a hundred or so yards away from the Chinese embassy.

    So as you can see, the American electronics technology can be defeated, if the Americans tangle with a competent military opponent.

    You are correct in stating that “My understanding is that the Tomahawk missile strike launched against Syria last year resulted in only 23 of the 59 missiles hitting their targets.” despite US propaganda.

    Are you sure that “The Russians obviously were able to interfere with the electronic guidance systems of these missiles causing them to go off course and damage nothing.”? Any evidence that the remainder were not shot down by the coordinated missile defense in Syria? Parts of one Tomahawk missile was found in a garden but did not seem to be intact. The Syrians were also warned about the attack and their flight worthy jets just relocated during the attack.

    You probably also noted the nerve agent canisters near one of the bunkers which the US claimed was evidence of a continuing chemical weapons program. It reality the Syrians used an alkali neutralization method to destroy the agents in the canisters.

    I too have seen reports that the Su-24 the overflew the Donald Cook had a electronic warfare pod but have not seen any confirmation from the US Navy or any other Navies. Do you have any further information on whether or not the destroyer Donald Cook lost its electronics?

    As I stated in an earlier thread, the US was considering closing down the Whidbey Island Naval Station in Washington state but instead started a major electronic warfare program there using Prowlers and Growler aircraft. Perhaps the Donald Cook had its electronic damaged, I just don’t know.

    The US claimed that the map they used was old as the reason why the Chinese Embassy was hit. In War the first casualty is truth and this applies to both sides in the NATO/FRY war. Do you have any links.

    Thanks for the help.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Tom Gregg
    FYI here is an interesting article on the Donald Cook....
    http://www.voltairenet.org/article185860.html
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.