Syria

Syria are getting billed, at some point, for all the tanks Russia dragged out of their reserve to supply them. The T90 seem to have cast turrets, so are from the initial batch before Russia ran out of money and the ability to do large castings. Confusingly, the Russians are using Syria as a giant arms advert with systems used only by Russian personnel also showing up; SU-57 anyone?
Syria may be getting some new Gucci systems field tested but the bulk of their kit is shot. They must be getting all their hardware and munitions on tick. They are skint.
The Iranians have lent them billions with no prospect of getting any of it back, and the Russians are carpet bagging the Syrians with offers of reconstruction work, but the combination of War and sanctions means that there is no finance in place for it.
A big, shiny multi-million missile system would be an enormous purchase. So the Russians would have to give it away.
 
Syria may be getting some new Gucci systems field tested but the bulk of their kit is shot. They must be getting all their hardware and munitions on tick. They are skint.
The Iranians have lent them billions with no prospect of getting any of it back, and the Russians are carpet bagging the Syrians with offers of reconstruction work, but the combination of War and sanctions means that there is no finance in place for it.
A big, shiny multi-million missile system would be an enormous purchase. So the Russians would have to give it away.
Not disagreeing, just don't see it happening. Cost of S400 is 2 $Billion, that is what Saudi are paying for it.
 
Not disagreeing, just don't see it happening. Cost of S400 is 2 $Billion, that is what Saudi are paying for it.
Saudi can afford it.(sort of). And they have a very big country to defend, and people chucking ballistic missiles at them on a regular basis. No one seriously thinks a bunch of hillbillies in Yemen are making missiles, so it is clearly Iranian proxy warfare.

Syria can't pay, so in effect that would be Russia deliberately giving a very destabilising weapon system away to a client.In effect, it would be giving Iran a theatre air defence system.
The Israelis for one wouldn't tolerate it.
 
Saudi can afford it.(sort of). And they have a very big country to defend, and people chucking ballistic missiles at them on a regular basis. No one seriously thinks a bunch of hillbillies in Yemen are making missiles, so it is clearly Iranian proxy warfare.

Syria can't pay, so in effect that would be Russia deliberately giving a very destabilising weapon system away to a client.In effect, it would be giving Iran a theatre air defence system.
The Israelis for one wouldn't tolerate it.
Amazing. So SA pay for it to defend from Iran et al. Syria get it for free to defend themselves and their proxies (Iran).
 
The title is misleading. Russian general alleged that Britain could take part in organization of the provocation - staged, false 'chemical attack'.
How dare you say say Britain isn't capable of fake chemical attacks when and how it wants! We are the 6th biggest economy in the world and 2nd biggest spender in NATO.
 
The title is misleading. Russian general alleged that Britain could take part in organization of the provocation - staged, false 'chemical attack'.
Would that be the attack that other Russian liars said didn't take place at all?
Why Britain? Why not Martians or Orcs who 'could' have organised a 'hypothetical' attack 'that didn't happen'
Answer- Because it's a lie.
And you are liars.
All of you.
 
The title is misleading. Russian general alleged that Britain could take part in organization of the provocation - staged, false 'chemical attack'.
Would this be the attack that you Russian propaganda whores said didn’t happen? Why can’t you liars get your stories straight. You are insulting our intelligence with your stupidity.
 
Why Britain? Why not Martians or Orcs who 'could' have organised a 'hypothetical' attack 'that didn't happen'
It could be Captain Pugwash. Captain Pugwash has been keeping a low profile of late.

At first I thought the Russian disinformation / chaff / fake news might have us on the back foot. Now I find it hilarious. It will play to the badly dressed 'voters' back home. But for the rest of the world? Hilarious.
 
Would this be the attack that you Russian propaganda whores said didn’t happen? (...)
Er, that's the point they are trying to make. They say that the chemical attack never happened and say that the UK was behind a staged propaganda effort to make people believe that it did happen.

What will be interesting is how the situation evolves once the OPCW is on the ground (if they aren't delayed by Friday night's events) and what they have to say about what they found on site. Something to look for at that stage I suspect will be arguments over where the actual location to be investigated is.
 

Russian MoD briefing: starting at 1.00.48,Russian MoD says considering sale of S-300 and S-400 systems to Syria. Sale previously denied at request of Western states.
To be more specific, he said that Russia will "consider" supplying S-300 and S-400 missiles to Syria, and to other countries as well. I take the former to be a threat which may or may not materialise but is part of their diplomatic response to the recent events. The latter I assume means that they may go ahead with the sale of more advanced S-400 systems to Iran over the objections of the US.
 
Would this be the attack that you Russian propaganda whores said didn’t happen? (...)
Er, that's the point they are trying to make. They say that the chemical attack never happened and say that the UK was behind a staged propaganda effort to make people believe that it did happen.

What will be interesting is how the situation evolves once the OPCW is on the ground (if they aren't delayed by Friday night's events) and what they have to say about what they found on site. Something to look for at that stage I suspect will be arguments over where the actual location to be investigated is.
Of course the people on the ground who are now saying it was staged are in Russian/Assad custody and most likely under extreme duress to make anti Western pronouncements
 
Of course the people on the ground who are now saying it was staged are in Russian/Assad custody and most likely under extreme duress to make anti Western pronouncements
They are, but prior to that they were under rebel custody and equally under duress to make pro-rebel pronouncements. I suspect the OPCW investigation (assuming it still goes ahead) will focus on the physical evidence.

Since the Russian position is that there was no chemical weapons attack, whether or not there are any physical traces of a chemical agent either in the original location or determined via examination of the people who were supposedly affected will be an important thing to pay attention to.

The major points of argument may revolve around what was the location the attack supposedly took place in, the degree to which the site has or has not been cleaned up (although washing down and sanitising a large site would not be a trivial task), and who may or may not have been present there at the time in question.
 
The following is the press release from the Russian defence ministry giving their view on the events of Friday night. I will attempt to summarise their main points.
Chief of the Main Operational Directorate of the Russian General Staff Colonel General Sergei Rudskoy holds briefing for mass media : Ministry of Defence of the Russian Federation

The US and UK conducted missile strikes by air and naval forces on Syria on the 14th of April between 3:42 am to 5:10 am, Moscow time.
The US alongside its allies conducted a missile strike by its air and naval carriers targeting military and civil facilities of the Syrian Arab Republic on April 14 in the period from 3.42 am till 5.10 am (MSK).
The planes involved included B-1B, F-15, F-16, and Tornado.
It is reported that the B-1B, F-15 and F-16 aircraft of the USAF as well as the Tornado airplanes of the UK RAF over the Mediterranean Sea, and the USS Laboon and USS Monterey located in the Red Sea were used during the operation.

The B-1B strategic bombers approached the facilities over the Syrian territory near al-Tanf illegally seized by the USA.
According to preliminary reports, there were no civilian or Syrian Army casualties.
As preliminary reported, there are no civilian casualties and losses among the Syrian Arab Army (SAA). Information will be further specified and made public.
A total of 103 cruise missiles were launched, including Tomahawk, and GBU-38 guided bombs were used as well. The RAF launched 8 Scalp EG missiles. It is not clear from the report whether the Scalp (or perhaps Storm Shadow) missiles were included in the 103 total or are being counted separately.
As evident by the available data, 103 cruise missiles have been launched, including Tomahawk naval-based missiles as well as GBU-38 guided air bombs fired from the B-1B; the F-15 and F-16 aircraft launched air-to-surface missiles.

The Tornado airplanes of the UK RAF launched eight Scalp EG missiles.
A total of 71 cruise missiles were intercepted.
In total, 71 cruise missiles have been intercepted.
S-125, S-200, Buk, Kvadrat, and Osa Syrian AD systems were used in opposing the attack.
The S-125, S-200, Buk, Kvadrat, and Osa Syrian AD systems were involved in repelling the attack.
The Syrian air defence system has been brought up to scratch again over the past 18 months.
Over the last eighteen months, Russia has completely recovered the Syrian air defence systems, and continues its development.
Due to opposition by Western countries, Russia had refrained from supplying S-300 systems to Syria. Russia may now reconsider this decision with regards to not only Syria, but other countries as well.
It is to be stressed that several years ago given the strong request by our western partners, Russia opted out of supplying the S-300 AD systems to Syria. Taking into account the recent incident, Russia believes it possible to reconsider this issue not only regarding Syria but other countries as well.
Here's the list of targets and the effects on them:
  • Damascus airport - 12 missiles, all shot down.
  • Blai airport - 18 missiles - all shot down.
  • Shayrat air base - 12 missiles - all shot down. The airbase was not affected.
  • The unused Mazzeh airdrome - 5 out of 9 missiles shot down.
  • Homs airdrome - 13 out of 16 missiles shot down. Damage was not serious.
  • Facilities near Barzah and Jaramana - 7 out of 30 missiles shot down. These were the old chemical weapons facilities, but have not been used in some time so there were no people or equipment there.
Four missiles targeted the Damascus International Airport; 12 missiles – the Al-Dumayr airdrome, all the missiles have been shot down.

18 missiles targeted the Blai airdrome, all the missiles shot down.

12 missiles targeted the Shayrat air base, all the missiles shot down. Air bases were not affected by the strike.

Five out of nine missiles were shot down targeting the unoccupied Mazzeh airdrome.

Thirteen out of sixteen missiles were shot down targeting the Homs airdrome. There are no heavy destructions.

In total 30 missiles targeted facilities near Barzah and Jaramana. Seven of them have been shot down. These facilities allegedly relating to the so-called “Damascus military chemical programme” were partially destructed. However, the objects have not been used for a long time, so there were no people and equipment there.
That accounts for 97 out of the reported 103 missiles used (assuming the 8 UK missiles are part of the total). There was no information about the remaining half dozen. It also accounts for 67 out of the reported 71 missiles intercepted, again with no information about the balance. There was no information on the results the "GBU-38 guided air bombs" may or may not have achieved.

No cruise missiles entered the Russian air defence area in Syria. Russian air defences were not "applied".
There were no cruise missiles entering the Russian AD responsibility area. The Russian air defence systems were not applied.
The report continues on with the Russian defence ministry stating that they believe the air strikes were in response to Syrian success against the rebels rather than a response to a supposedly non-existent chemical weapons attack.
Russia considers the strike to be a response to the success of the Syrian Armed Forces in fighting international terrorism and liberating its territory, rather than a response to the alleged chemical attack.

Besides, the attack took place on a day when the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) special mission was to start working on investigating incident in the city of Douma where chemical attack allegedly occurred.

It is to be stressed that there are no facilities on producing chemical weapons in Syria, and this has been documented by the OPCW.
 
Here's the US official press statement on Friday's air strikes. Joined by Allies, President Trump Takes Action to End Syria’s Chemical Weapons Attacks

I won't bother summarising it because it is completely lacking in useful content.

Edit to add: The US defence ministry press release. This is also lacking in content.
Statement by Secretary James N. Mattis on Syria > U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE > News Release View

Neither is probably worth reading. Hopefully they will publish something of interest next week.
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads