Sirija

[iDemo]

ruski smisao za humor:

 

The Russian Air Force: Bооооm.

Vladimir: HA HA HA.

Obama: Vladimir do not bomb my terrorists.

ISIS: Allah Akbar, Allah Akbar.

David Cameron: I love fucking pig HA HA HA.

haiku™

[Prospero]

O protoku oružja u Idlibu:

 

 

Edited October 11, 2015 by Prospero

[Prospero]

Alastair Crooke

Fmr. MI-6 agent; Author, 'Resistance: The Essence of Islamic Revolution'[/size]

 

Russia's Aim in Syria Is to Strategically Defeat ISIS and Al Qaeda

 

Posted: 10/09/2015 6:15 pm EDT 

 

 

BEIRUT -- As soon as Russia launched the first stages of its military campaign in Syria, world media erupted with epic slights on President Vladimir Putin and the deprecation of Russia's strategic motives in Syria. Is this information operation simply a recrudescence of Cold War neuralgia, or is there something more profound at work here?

 

One can see, too, that the U.S. administration's response to Russia's initiative has oscillated uncertainly. Initially, Washington took a "business as usual approach," suggesting that it and its allies' air campaign would proceed unchanged. But the administration then seemed blindsided by the speed and extent of the Russian action. Last week, a Russian official arrived at the U.S. embassy in Baghdad to announce the immediate start to the Russian air operation in Syria, and to insist that the U.S. keep its aircraft (and personnel) out of Syrian airspace altogether that day. Since then, the Russian tempo of air attacks has been impressive, leaving little or no space to others.

 

Clearly, "business as usual" in these circumstance was impractical (if some calamitous air incident in the Syrian skies was to be avoided). And President Obama's opponents immediately pounced: Putin was wrong-footing America (again). Secretary of State John Kerry hotly demanded military coordination that would at least keep the U.S. coalition flying -- and in the game.

 

The second approach has been to try wrest at least the political initiative back into American hands -- by conceding to Russia its military role -- whilst trying to set parameters (essentially President Bashar al-Assad's removal), that would require a major reworking of the Syrian leadership, in which America would have a major say. (Britain and France similarly lifted a leg, to mark their territory of having a claim in any final outcome, too.)

 

During all these maneuvers and rhetorical skirmishing, however, the U.S. has also been quietly re-positioning itself towards the political settlement which it now sees as coming somewhat into focus. In London and Berlin, Secretary Kerry modified the U.S.'s initial absolute objection to President Assad remaining in office: Now, he said, Assad might remain for a transitional phase, however long that might be, "or whatever," adding that ultimately this was for the Syrian people to determine (see our last Weekly Comment). On Wednesday, Kerry went further, and said something equally significant: Exiting his discussions with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, Kerry said that Syria must remain "united ... [and] be secular." This represents a huge (if barely remarked) shift: It cuts the ground from under the Muslim Brotherhood as well as the jihadists -- in fact, from all Islamists who cannot accept a secular state, which, to be clear, effectively removes pretty well all the Gulf protégés from having any significant slice of the cake.

 

No doubt, Lavrov had made it plain to Kerry that Assad has told the Russians that he is open to political change and to reform (and that Russia believes him). But perhaps Lavrov also explained why the particular historical circumstances of Syria voided any prospect of a Brotherhood insertion into government being a workable prospect. In any event, Kerry changed tune.

 

The third U.S. tactic seems to be "containment" -- that old standby: a massive information war is underway to suggest that the Russians committed themselves only to attack ISIS, and nobody else (when Russia never made any such undertaking). Lavrov is explicit: Russia is targeting ISIS and "other terrorist groups," as they had always "said they would do." Nonetheless, the info war campaign continues in order to put pressure on Russia, and to contain its military campaign. American officials have been on record saying that "moderates" turned out to be as rare as mythical unicorns amongst the Syrian armed opposition, and that only "four or five" were in the field now -- and yet suddenly it seems that there are all these "moderate CIA trainees" under attack now. In fact, there are no "moderate jihadists." The term is an oxymoron: there are only jihadists who are more -- or less -- close to ISIS or al Qaeda. It is a parsing of definitions that simply does not interest Russia.

 

Tom Friedman puts a somewhat different gloss on events from his well-briefed perspective: Let Putin and his allies have a go at defeating ISIS (and good luck to them). But when they fail, and find the Sunni world has turned against them, then they (the Russians) will need a ladder out of the tree, which only Washington will be able to lend, to help Putin recover from his strategic mistake. This is too reductive. Putin well understands the difference between traditional Sunni Islam in the Levant and the very recent blow-in of militant Gulf Wahhabism, which is at odds with this traditional Sunni Islam of Syria and Iraq. He knows, too, that many Sunnis still hold to the notion of citizenship within a secular, or non-sectarian state; and that Syria and Iraq are both inheritors to venerable, old civilizations (Greater Syria and Mesopotamia); each with their own political cultures and visions. The fight against contemporary orientations of Wahhabism has never been the reductive struggle between a Shia minority (the Alawites) and a Sunni majority; it is as much a struggle to preserve the Levantine tradition against a foreign (Gulf) culture, Wahhabism, floated into the region on a tide of petrodollars.

 

Why should President Putin understand this cultural war better than Western leaders? It is because Orthodox Christianity (of Russia) never entertained the Western binary opposition between the Roman Christianity and Islam. Orthodox Christianity and traditional Sunni Islam share many attributes together, and have a history of close relations.

 

So what are the Russians doing? Firstly, they are running through a "bank" of "terrorist" targets assembled by Syrian, Russian, Iranian and Hezbollah intelligence services. It is unlikely that this phase will last long -- and then, the mode will smartly change. With the primary targets destroyed, the ground offensive will begin, led by the Syrian army (with direct support from Hezbollah, and with advice from Russian and Iranian officers). What will be different now, however, is that the ground forces will have the benefit of all-weather and nighttime air support, plus real-time imagery. Whilst Russian soldiers will not be directly involved in boots-on-the-ground operations in support of the Syrian army, Russian forces will be directly involved in securing a safe area around their air base near Latakia. To the extent that this keeps Latakia secure, it will as a byproduct, free up the Syrian army from the need to station troops there, thus making them available for other tasks.

 

For now, the Russians seem (as evidenced by their airstrikes) to be intent firstly on eliminating any hostile threats adjacent to their forces in the area of Latakia (the Russian air base is located some 20 miles south of Latakia). This is standard military modus operandi. Their secondary and tertiary objectives seem to be to secure the M4 highway between Latakia and Aleppo (targeting pockets of insurgent forces adjacent to the highway), and in striking insurgent-held areas along the M5 highway.

 

There is nothing political behind such strikes -- in the sense of strengthening one insurgent group in opposition to any other. It seems, rather, very clear that the Russians are preparing for the subsequent ground sweep by the Syrian army: the Russian air force is securing lines of logistic support to the Syrian army, and concomitantly denying those same lines to the jihadists. It is, in short, all rather military -- and in line with what Russia says are its objectives.

 

So, why this flood tide of snide commentary, disinformation and claims of a covert, "underhand" Russian strategy? What is it that so irks the West? Well, of course, one part of it is that Putin has put Washington on the spot, and made the West's claims to have been fighting ISIS for the last year to appear hollow. But there may be more to it than this.

 

For the past few decades, NATO effectively made all the decisions about war and peace. It faced no opposition and no rival. Matters of war were effectively a solely internal debate within NATO -- about whether to proceed or not, and in what way. That was it. It didn't matter much about what others thought or did. Those on the receiving end simply had to endure it. But whilst its destructive powers were evident, its strategic benefits have been far from evident -- especially across the Middle East.

 

What probably irks the West most is that Russia has unfolded -- and begun -- a sophisticated military campaign in the flash of an eye. NATO bumbles along much more slowly with its complicated structures. Iraqis have long complained that in military terms, assistance promised by the NATO powers takes (literally) years to materialize, whereas requests to Russia and Iran are expeditiously met. So Tom Friedman's condescension towards the Russian military intervention does have more than a whiff of orientalism to it.

 

But all the hoo-ha probably stems also from the sense that this Russian initiative could mark the coming into birth of something more serious -- of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization as a putative military alliance. Admittedly, the "4+1 alliance" -- Russia, Iran, Syria and Iraq, plus Hezbollah -- is not branded as SCO (and the coalition partners do not overlap with SCO membership), but the 4+1 allianceventure might well yet prove to be a "pilot" in non-Western, successful coalition-operating. Furthermore, its objective is precisely to preempt NATO-style regime change projects -- a prime SCO concern. This prospect certainly would irk the Western security establishment -- and would potentially change many an existing NATO calculus.

 

Not surprisingly, then, it might be seen in some Western quarters as hugely important to set a narrative of failure for the 4+1 alliance, and to denigrate any sense that its military example might have strategic importance for the non-Western world.

 

[Marcus Wulffings]

opet neki novi momenti

 

 

 

RAF Tornados armed and dangerous: Tensions between Russia and UK escalate

RAF fighter jets will be armed with air-to-air missiles and have been given the green light to shoot down hostile Russian planes.

British and Nato pilots have been told to take the drastic action if they are fired on by Vladimir Putin’s air force during missions over Iraq.

The move comes after British ministers warned Russia had made the situation in the Middle East “much more dangerous”.

Senior defence sources say it is just a matter of time before our fighters are involved in a deadly confrontation with Russian jets.

One source said: “We need to protect our pilots but at the same time we’re taking a step closer to war. It will only take one plane to be shot down in an air-to-air battle and the whole landscape will change.”

Edited October 11, 2015 by Marcus Wulffings

[Prospero]

Drugim rečima, ako neko puca na tebe pucaćeš i ti na njega. Kakav novitet u vojnoj logici! 

 

Kliknuo si na vest, zadatak ispunjen.  :P

[Muwan]

Mogli bi da dodaju i senzacionalnu vest da je britanska strateška komanda dobila zeleno svetlo da uzvrati napadom ukoliko bi nuklearni projektili Vladimira Putina bili ispaljeni na mete u UK.

 

Zašto ne dati i obalskoj odbrani pravo da otvori vatru ukoliko se invaziona flota Vladimira Putina sa tri miliona marinaca pojavi na obali Suffolka. Ono, nije da nismo igrali C&C Red Alert, treba uvek biti spreman.

[steins]

opet neki novi momenti

 

na stranu šaljenje™, mislim da je ovaj deo interesantan

 

Piloti su dobili odobrenje da napadaju neprijateljski raspoložene ruske avione", tvrdi autor članka. 

 

 

pri čemu je "neprijateljski raspoloženi ruski avioni" vrlo širok pojam. Šta znači to? 

 

Po toj logici su recimo turci mogli ladno da poobaraju ruske avione onomad. 

 

Vrlo nezgrapno i zajebano. :(

[Marcus Wulffings]

mislim da sve strane oštre zube, reže i škrguću, to je oduvek tako bilo;

 

a teško da će doći do obaranja bilo kog aviona, niti će se rusi staviti u takvu poziciju

[Marcus Wulffings]

i opet su danas bombardovali ISIS položaje oko idliba i hame, tako bar tvrde, sve sam neposredan komšiluk

 

iskreno mi je žao svih onih maslinjaka

 

[Geo]

Jel se promenila malo mapa od prvog dana kada su uleteli Rusi ? 

[Prospero]

Malo, SAA uzima nešto tetritorije severno i severozapadno od Hame, neka sela uglavnom, ništa veliko, i delić između Alepa i opkoljene baze Kuveitra istočno odatle.

[Geo]

zahvaljujem, predpostavio sam da nema mnogo menjanja boja ... Ova dole stara par dana valjda.

 

[Lord Protector]

 

 

Russian Air Assault Hits Rebels, Helps Assad Regain Lost Ground "The Russians are using scorched earth policy," said one insurgent leader.

By Peter Graff

Posted: 10/11/2015

ASSOCIATED PRESS

SOCHI, Russia/AMMAN, Oct 11 (Reuters) - Russian war planes pounded Syrian rebels unaffiliated with Islamic State on Sunday, insurgents said, helping Moscow's ally Bashar al-Assad reclaim territory and dealing a fresh setback to the strategy of Washington and its allies.

The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, a group that monitors the 4-year-old conflict, said the Syrian military and its Lebanese Hezbollah militia allies had taken control of Tal Skik, a highland area in Idlib province, after fierce Russian bombing.

That brings Syrian government forces closer to insurgent-held positions along the main highway that links Syria's principal cities. The area is held by a rebel alliance that excludes Islamic State fighters.

"The coming battles are going to be ferocious, the Russians are using scorched earth policy and they are hitting the targets very accurately but this is a battle of destiny," said Abu Hamed, the head of the military bureau of Jabhat Sham, an insurgent group that operates mainly in Hama province.

"We are fighting for our very existence and so this is why our fighters are exhibiting heroism and fighting for our beliefs against the Russian occupiers," he said.

The Syrian army had made advances from the towns of Mourek and Atshan in Hama province using tanks, heavy artillery and new surface-to-surface missiles, he said.

Russia's Defence Ministry said on Sunday its planes had flown 64 sorties, striking 63 targets and destroying 53 fortified positions in the last 24 hours. As in the past, it described all targets as belonging to Islamic State, although most of the areas it said it struck are not held by that group.

Syrian state television also reported the capture of Tal Skik after an "extensive military operation" backed by Russian air strikes against "terrorist organizations" in the area.

However, the advance came at a cost, with the Observatory and a Lebanese television station reporting that a senior Hezbollah commander was killed in the battle while fighting on the Syrian government's behalf.

In recent days, Russia has dramatically intensified its 10-day-old bombing campaign. Moscow says it is targeting the Islamic State militant group, but most of its strikes have hit other rebel factions fighting against Assad, some of which have the support of Arab powers, Turkey or the United States.

The Russian bombing has been accompanied by a major advance led by Syrian government forces, backed by thousands of Lebanese Hezbollah militiamen and hundreds of Iranian troops, shifting the balance of power in the civil war.

Edited October 11, 2015 by slow

[barrcode]

OPA!

 

New coalition has been formed in Syria. Called the “Syrian Democratic Force”. Made up of #YPG, #FSA, and #MSF

The force has around 30,000 fighters including Arabs, Kurds and Christians and will be supplied by the United States

Sources say that US has already air-dropped 110 pallets of weapons & ammo to the new coalition last night

 

 

jedine simpatije u Siriji imam za YPG i za ove hrišćanske milicije, pa ovoj koaliciji želim sve najbolje!

[Marcus Wulffings]

 

 

SAUDI ARABIA DELIVERS 500 TOW ANTITANK MISSILES TO OBAMA BACKED FSA

 

 

By Jeremy Bender | Business Insider

A Saudi Arabian official has reportedly disclosed that the Sunni kingdom sent Syrian rebels a new batch of one of the most effective weapons for battling against the Assad regime this week.

BBC correspondent Frank Gardner tweeted that a Saudi official confirmed the delivery of 500 TOW antitank missiles to the Free Syrian Army (FSA).

The FSA is currently being squeezed from all directions by the Syrian military, Russian airstrikes, and competition from jihadist fighters, including ISIS.