• This is a stand-to for an incoming competition, one of our most expensive yet.
    Later this week we're going to be offering the opportunity to Win £270 Rab Neutrino Pro military down jacket
    Visit the thread at that link above and Watch it to be notified as soon as the competition goes live

Syria

And they have a very big country to defend
90% of KSA pop live in the main cities with the other 10% inhabiting the reamining 2 million square km.
They only need to defend against what's coming in against the big cities.
If KSA hadn't decided tried, in 2015, to push the 'civil war' in favour of their Sunni mate rather that the Shia OPFOR and drop western (US/CAN/UK/frog/AUS) kit on the heads of civilian women/children/babies (sounds familiar?) creating the worst cholera outbreak in world hstory- there wouldn't be any OPFOR for them to need to defend against in the 1st place.
But as the situation has already been created Iran may be helping out their ally.
Exactly the same scenario is present in Syria with different/same players.
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.

I'm still waiting to hear the int source that confirmed to Mattis that Syrian forces used CW in Douma 2 days before the OPCW had even started their investigation.
The US/UK/Fr are now back-pedalling on what they initially used to justify the crime of hitting a foreign country based on flimsy int and false pretences.
Breaking: US Defense Secretary says US doesn't have proof chlorine, sarin used in Syria
Pentagon admits NO evidence of chemical attack in Syria, relying on ‘social media’
The Pentagon's 'large body' of evidence that steered Trump to Syria strikes

May has said the action was 'right and legal'.
You couldn't make this stuff up.



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.
War porn/ keeeerching?
Former head of Britain's special forces says Assad 'doesn't need to use gas' | Daily Mail Online
 
And they have a very big country to defend
90% of KSA pop live in the main cities with the other 10% inhabiting the reamining 2 million square km.
They only need to defend against what's coming in against the big cities.
If KSA hadn't decided tried, in 2015, to push the 'civil war' in favour of their Sunni mate rather that the Shia OPFOR and drop western (US/CAN/UK/frog/AUS) kit on the heads of civilian women/children/babies (sounds familiar?) creating the worst cholera outbreak in world hstory- there wouldn't be any OPFOR for them to need to defend against in the 1st place.
But as the situation has already been created Iran may be helping out their ally.
Exactly the same scenario is present in Syria with different/same players.
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.

I'm still waiting to hear the int source that confirmed to Mattis that Syrian forces used CW in Douma 2 days before the OPCW had even started their investigation.
The US/UK/Fr are now back-pedalling on what they initially used to justify the crime of hitting a foreign country based on flimsy int and false pretences.
Breaking: US Defense Secretary says US doesn't have proof chlorine, sarin used in Syria
Pentagon admits NO evidence of chemical attack in Syria, relying on ‘social media’
The Pentagon's 'large body' of evidence that steered Trump to Syria strikes

May has said the action was 'right and legal'.
You couldn't make this stuff up.



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.
War porn/ keeeerching?
Former head of Britain's special forces says Assad 'doesn't need to use gas' | Daily Mail Online
There’s a difference between not needing to in a tactical sense and doing it anyway for the hell of it because you’re the head of a mafia crime family who has a desire to terrorise the population. How naive are you?
 
The CBC has a video of a US press conference which gives more details on the recent attack on Syria. I haven't seen a text version of the press conference so I will post a quick summary of the main points that were made while leaving out the PR waffle which made up much of it.
'Completely accomplished': U.S. vice-president touts success of Syria strikes | CBC News

The strike strike was directed against 3 syrian chemical weapons facilities targets.
  • Barza research centre (Damascus) - 76 missiles. 57 were tomahawk. 19 were joint air to surface standoff missiles.
  • Chemical weapons storage faciility near Homs - 22 weapons - 9 US TLAMS, 8 Storm Shadow, 3 naval cruise missiles, 2 SCALP missiles.
  • Chemical weapons bunker facility near Homs - 7 SCALP missiles.
Naval ships involved.
  • US Cruiser Monta Ray (not sure how to spell this) - 30 Tomahawk missiles (from Red Sea)
  • US Destroyer Laboon - 7 Tomahawk missiles (from Red Sea)
  • US Destroyer Higgins - 32 Tomahawk missiles (from north Arabian Gulf)
  • French destroyer Languedoc - 3 SCALP missiles (from Mediterranean)
  • US submarine Warner - 6 Tomahawk missiles (from Mediterranean)

Aircraft involved (not counting support)
  • 2 B1 bomber - 19 Joint Standoff missiles
  • Combination of Tornado and Typhoon - 8 Storm Shadow missiles
  • Combination of Rafale and Mirage - 9 SCALP missiles

Results were:
  • No missiles or aircraft were engaged by Syrian air defences.
  • No indication that Russian air defence systems were employed.
  • All missiles reached their targets.
  • All aircraft returned to their bases.

Syrian air defences:
  • Syria launched more than 40 surface to air missiles
  • Most launches occurred after last impact of attacking missiles
There is a very large variance between the American list of targets and that supplied by the Russians. The Russians claimed that a number of air bases or air ports were also targeted.

Also the Russians claimed that a number of the missiles were shot down, while the Americans claim that none were.

All chemical weapons facilities were supposedly decommissioned after a previous chemical weapons use incident. I have not seen anything in the press which stated that any of these had been brought back into use for any purposes, so it is difficult to understand whether Friday's air strikes had any significant effects other than to add to the already long list of damaged buildings in Syria.

The attacks on the air bases which were claimed by the Russians on the other hand might have stung a bit, but the Americans made no mention of them.
 
90% of KSA pop live in the main cities with the other 10% inhabiting the reamining 2 million square km.
They only need to defend against what's coming in against the big cities.
If KSA hadn't decided tried, in 2015, to push the 'civil war' in favour of their Sunni mate rather that the Shia OPFOR and drop western (US/CAN/UK/frog/AUS) kit on the heads of civilian women/children/babies (sounds familiar?) creating the worst cholera outbreak in world hstory- there wouldn't be any OPFOR for them to need to defend against in the 1st place.
But as the situation has already been created Iran may be helping out their ally.
Exactly the same scenario is present in Syria with different/same players.

I'm still waiting to hear the int source that confirmed to Mattis that Syrian forces used CW in Douma 2 days before the OPCW had even started their investigation.
The US/UK/Fr are now back-pedalling on what they initially used to justify the crime of hitting a foreign country based on flimsy int and false pretences.
Breaking: US Defense Secretary says US doesn't have proof chlorine, sarin used in Syria
Pentagon admits NO evidence of chemical attack in Syria, relying on ‘social media’
The Pentagon's 'large body' of evidence that steered Trump to Syria strikes

May has said the action was 'right and legal'.
You couldn't make this stuff up.


War porn/ keeeerching?
Former head of Britain's special forces says Assad 'doesn't need to use gas' | Daily Mail Online
Nobody denies Assad is ‘winning’. He’s been ‘winning’ since 2015 and direct Russian involvement, well ... okay .... Palmyra x 2 etc. In fact, he is congratulated on having ‘won’ by Putin in November 2017. General Shaw or Adm West goes on to say:
'But one must give Theresa May the benefit of the doubt and trust she has seen some unequivocal evidence which leaves no doubt that Assad was behind the atrocity.'
Shaw’s timeline is remiss as well. JaI didn’t ‘get on buses until after the CW attack.

If only there was a mechanism for establishing blame? What happened to that unanimously appointed and renewed UNSC Joint Investigative Mechanism? What did they say?
 
Last edited:
May has said the action was 'right and legal'.
You couldn't make this stuff up.
Syria has historically used Chemical weapons. This has been independently agreed. Russia agreed Syria had to stop too (hence the ineffective agreement a few years ago where Russia would oversee its dismantling). So everyone, including Russia, agrees Syria has used chemical weapons against its people.

Why are you (Russia) so in favour of allowing chemical weapon proliferation?
 
To add to my previous post, I've done some googling on the Barza research centre, and it appears to have been a complex of buildings dedicated to a wide variety of scientific research purposes. It was established with the assistance of the French. As such, any chemical weapons research being done there was likely a small part of any activities there.

If this is indeed the same facility, then they likely have lost a large selection of expensive scientific equipment, research results, libraries, and other items unrelated to any military purposes. In this case, the air strike will have been expensive for the Syrian government even if there is no effect on any chemical weapons efforts.
 
The CBC has a video of a US press conference which gives more details on the recent attack on Syria. I haven't seen a text version of the press conference so I will post a quick summary of the main points that were made while leaving out the PR waffle which made up much of it.
'Completely accomplished': U.S. vice-president touts success of Syria strikes | CBC News

The strike strike was directed against 3 syrian chemical weapons facilities targets.
  • Barza research centre (Damascus) - 76 missiles. 57 were tomahawk. 19 were joint air to surface standoff missiles.
  • Chemical weapons storage faciility near Homs - 22 weapons - 9 US TLAMS, 8 Storm Shadow, 3 naval cruise missiles, 2 SCALP missiles.
  • Chemical weapons bunker facility near Homs - 7 SCALP missiles.
Naval ships involved.
  • US Cruiser Monta Ray (not sure how to spell this) - 30 Tomahawk missiles (from Red Sea)
  • US Destroyer Laboon - 7 Tomahawk missiles (from Red Sea)
  • US Destroyer Higgins - 32 Tomahawk missiles (from north Arabian Gulf)
  • French destroyer Languedoc - 3 SCALP missiles (from Mediterranean)
  • US submarine Warner - 6 Tomahawk missiles (from Mediterranean)

Aircraft involved (not counting support)
  • 2 B1 bomber - 19 Joint Standoff missiles
  • Combination of Tornado and Typhoon - 8 Storm Shadow missiles
  • Combination of Rafale and Mirage - 9 SCALP missiles

Results were:
  • No missiles or aircraft were engaged by Syrian air defences.
  • No indication that Russian air defence systems were employed.
  • All missiles reached their targets.
  • All aircraft returned to their bases.

Syrian air defences:
  • Syria launched more than 40 surface to air missiles
  • Most launches occurred after last impact of attacking missiles
There is a very large variance between the American list of targets and that supplied by the Russians. The Russians claimed that a number of air bases or air ports were also targeted.

Also the Russians claimed that a number of the missiles were shot down, while the Americans claim that none were.

All chemical weapons facilities were supposedly decommissioned after a previous chemical weapons use incident. I have not seen anything in the press which stated that any of these had been brought back into use for any purposes, so it is difficult to understand whether Friday's air strikes had any significant effects other than to add to the already long list of damaged buildings in Syria.

The attacks on the air bases which were claimed by the Russians on the other hand might have stung a bit, but the Americans made no mention of them.
I suspect that a lot of the attacks in airbases were spent SAM's falling back down.
 
There’s a difference between not needing to in a tactical sense and doing it anyway for the hell of it because you’re the head of a mafia crime family who has a desire to terrorise the population. How naive are you?
Well, Putin had no need in a tactical sense to send a Buk into Ukraine and murder nearly 300 passengers.
And he is head of a mafia crime syndicate that wants to terrorise the world.
How naive are you, troll?
 
There’s a difference between not needing to in a tactical sense and doing it anyway for the hell of it because you’re the head of a mafia crime family who has a desire to terrorise the population. How naive are you?
Well, Putin had no need in a tactical sense to send a Buk into Ukraine and murder nearly 300 passengers.
And he is head of a mafia crime syndicate that wants to terrorise the world.
How naive are you, troll?
I was aiming the naive comment at 118 so apologies if that was not clear.
I am well aware of the Russians culpability re MH17. A friend of ours was on it.
 
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 planes involved included B-1B, F-15, F-16, and Tornado.


According to preliminary reports, there were no civilian or Syrian Army casualties.


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.


A total of 71 cruise missiles were intercepted.


S-125, S-200, Buk, Kvadrat, and Osa Syrian AD systems were used in opposing the attack.


The Syrian air defence system has been brought up to scratch again over the past 18 months.


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.


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.


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".


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.
Shayrat air base was shown yesterday on Putin's agitprop TV Russia-1. There are BUK launchers and Syrian soldiers playing football. Commander of local AD claimed that all 12 cruise missiles were downed on distances from 12 to 26 km from the airbase. However, remains of 'downed' cruise missiles were not shown. So this claim looks doubtful or at least unconfirmed.
Moscow's narrative is well known. But as for Western version of events then I failed to find more or less detailed information in MSM. Do you know what Washington, London and Paris tell about
- number and locations of targets.
- number of cruise missiles launched and bombs dropped
- what is contribution of the UK and France
- is there information about any downed missiles
According to Putin's agitprop French jets took part in the raid but didn't drop any bomb, didn't launch any missile. What Paris does tell?
 
Shayrat air base was shown yesterday on Putin's agitprop TV Russia-1. There are BUK launchers and Syrian soldiers playing football. Commander of local AD claimed that all 12 cruise missiles were downed on distances from 12 to 26 km from the airbase. However, remains of 'downed' cruise missiles were not shown. So this claim looks doubtful or at least unconfirmed.
Moscow's narrative is well known. But as for Western version of events then I failed to find more or less detailed information in MSM. Do you know what Washington, London and Paris tell about
- number and locations of targets.
- number of cruise missiles launched and bombs dropped
- what is contribution of the UK and France
- is there information about any downed missiles
According to Putin's agitprop French jets took part in the raid but didn't drop any bomb, didn't launch any missile. What Paris does tell?
I think anyone who knows the truth won't be on ARRSE and if they are they won't post on here.
 
Shayrat air base was shown yesterday on Putin's agitprop TV Russia-1. There are BUK launchers and Syrian soldiers playing football. Commander of local AD claimed that all 12 cruise missiles were downed on distances from 12 to 26 km from the airbase. However, remains of 'downed' cruise missiles were not shown. So this claim looks doubtful or at least unconfirmed.
Moscow's narrative is well known. But as for Western version of events then I failed to find more or less detailed information in MSM. Do you know what Washington, London and Paris tell about
- number and locations of targets.
- number of cruise missiles launched and bombs dropped
- what is contribution of the UK and France
- is there information about any downed missiles
According to Putin's agitprop French jets took part in the raid but didn't drop any bomb, didn't launch any missile. What Paris does tell?
Answers to your questions were given here: https://www.arrse.co.uk/community/threads/syria.161743/post-8522784
There is a video in the news story which has more detail. Skip over the first part of the video, because it's just meaningless PR waffle. The second speaker talks about the actual details.
 
Answers to your questions were given here: https://www.arrse.co.uk/community/threads/syria.161743/post-8522784
There is a video in the news story which has more detail. Skip over the first part of the video, because it's just meaningless PR waffle. The second speaker talks about the actual details.
Sorry, I missed your post.
From my point of view 'Western' version is more realistic. Downing of cruise missile is not so easy thing. For the Syrians it is almost impossible. Yes, BUK in theory is quite able to intercept cruise missile but only in hands of experienced operator.
 
Last edited:
Shayrat air base was shown yesterday on Putin's agitprop TV Russia-1. There are BUK launchers and Syrian soldiers playing football. Commander of local AD claimed that all 12 cruise missiles were downed on distances from 12 to 26 km from the airbase. However, remains of 'downed' cruise missiles were not shown. So this claim looks doubtful or at least unconfirmed.
Moscow's narrative is well known. But as for Western version of events then I failed to find more or less detailed information in MSM. Do you know what Washington, London and Paris tell about
- number and locations of targets.
- number of cruise missiles launched and bombs dropped
- what is contribution of the UK and France
- is there information about any downed missiles
According to Putin's agitprop French jets took part in the raid but didn't drop any bomb, didn't launch any missile. What Paris does tell?
Pentagon Officials Describe Syria Strikes, Hope Assad Gets Message > U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE > Article
According to Lt General McKenzie
“The three facilities are – or more appropriately, were – the fundamental components of the regime’s chemical weapons warfare infrastructure,"
I quite like the US DoD response to the Syrian SAM engagements:
“Most of the launches occurred after our strike was over,” the general said. “When you shoot iron into the air without guidance, it has to come down somewhere.”
 
The CBC has a video of a US press conference which gives more details on the recent attack on Syria. I haven't seen a text version of the press conference so I will post a quick summary of the main points that were made while leaving out the PR waffle which made up much of it.
'Completely accomplished': U.S. vice-president touts success of Syria strikes | CBC News

The strike strike was directed against 3 syrian chemical weapons facilities targets.
  • Barza research centre (Damascus) - 76 missiles. 57 were tomahawk. 19 were joint air to surface standoff missiles.
  • Chemical weapons storage faciility near Homs - 22 weapons - 9 US TLAMS, 8 Storm Shadow, 3 naval cruise missiles, 2 SCALP missiles.
  • Chemical weapons bunker facility near Homs - 7 SCALP missiles.
Naval ships involved.
  • US Cruiser Monta Ray (not sure how to spell this) - 30 Tomahawk missiles (from Red Sea)
  • US Destroyer Laboon - 7 Tomahawk missiles (from Red Sea)
  • US Destroyer Higgins - 32 Tomahawk missiles (from north Arabian Gulf)
  • French destroyer Languedoc - 3 SCALP missiles (from Mediterranean)
  • US submarine Warner - 6 Tomahawk missiles (from Mediterranean)

Aircraft involved (not counting support)
  • 2 B1 bomber - 19 Joint Standoff missiles
  • Combination of Tornado and Typhoon - 8 Storm Shadow missiles
  • Combination of Rafale and Mirage - 9 SCALP missiles

Results were:
  • No missiles or aircraft were engaged by Syrian air defences.
  • No indication that Russian air defence systems were employed.
  • All missiles reached their targets.
  • All aircraft returned to their bases.

Syrian air defences:
  • Syria launched more than 40 surface to air missiles
  • Most launches occurred after last impact of attacking missiles
There is a very large variance between the American list of targets and that supplied by the Russians. The Russians claimed that a number of air bases or air ports were also targeted.

Also the Russians claimed that a number of the missiles were shot down, while the Americans claim that none were.

All chemical weapons facilities were supposedly decommissioned after a previous chemical weapons use incident. I have not seen anything in the press which stated that any of these had been brought back into use for any purposes, so it is difficult to understand whether Friday's air strikes had any significant effects other than to add to the already long list of damaged buildings in Syria.

The attacks on the air bases which were claimed by the Russians on the other hand might have stung a bit, but the Americans made no mention of them.
I am surprised at the number of missiles directed at each target. A standard number or more than necessary, possibly from concern that Russia might have tried to defend against the attacks?
 
I am surprised at the number of missiles directed at each target. A standard number or more than necessary, possibly from concern that Russia might have tried to defend against the attacks?
Also to ensure a follow up strike is not required. Overkill makes it more likely to be a one and done strike.

Forgot to add to destroy any CW weapons completely. If you damage a facility and this crap gets out and kills any civs you look like a retard just doing Assad’s job. WMD are no joke!
 
Last edited:

Goatman

ADC
Book Reviewer
Today Russia's pres.Medvedev answered question on a big press conference (with about 900 journalists). He was asked would he support UNSC resolution aimed at Syria similar to the Libyan one? His answer was a firm no.

Though who gives a stuff what Russia thinks.
especially when your Foreign Minister floats the frankly lunatic notion that Novichoking a former G RU man and his kid in the middle of a busy shopping precinct was down to Britain......
 

Latest Threads

Top