Russian airstrikes in Syria

[The balkens]

The F-22 engagement is 50 Nautical miles, far enough room to wipe out an enemy formation.

Well there goes the SU-30.

There goes every aircraft in the Russian Inventory.

The F-22 will kill you before you even get to see them on Radar.

[San Verucia]

Deleted.

[Socialist Czechia]

Well there goes the SU-30.

There goes every aircraft in the Russian Inventory.

The F-22 will kill you before you even get to see them on Radar.

Perhaps Russians will test there T-50 to see how much it's good against presumably best 'murican fighter, at least in radar and maneuvres stuff.

No risk of actual real fight, as someone thinks, since it would end in extinction of Human race.

[West Aurelia]

There goes every aircraft in the Russian Inventory.

The F-22 will kill you before you even get to see them on Radar.

Perhaps Russians will test there T-50 to see how much it's good against presumably best 'murican fighter, at least in radar and maneuvres stuff.

No risk of actual real fight, as someone thinks, since it would end in extinction of Human race.

It's only a prototype.

[Socialist Czechia]

Perhaps Russians will test there T-50 to see how much it's good against presumably best 'murican fighter, at least in radar and maneuvres stuff.

No risk of actual real fight, as someone thinks, since it would end in extinction of Human race.

It's only a prototype.

5 prototypes so far, actually.

so they totally can afford to deploy two of them, and test it in real war conditions, hypothetically of course.

[Costa Fierro]

Okay...
so are they planning to engage each other, or deter attacks on their cronies in the area by the opposing force?

It's so that they can defend their strike aircraft in the event of a confrontation.

Maybe it's Russia preempting Erdogan's plans for a "buffer zone" in Syria which happens to be in territory held by the Kurds, with whom the Syrian government has been providing assistance?

Although I imagine it'd be a dick move if Russia used it's jamming equipment against American and other allied aircraft launching air strikes against ISIS. Which most Putinophiles seem to conveniently forget.

[Uxupox]

It's only a prototype.

5 prototypes so far, actually.

so they totally can afford to deploy two of them, and test it in real war conditions, hypothetically of course.

Five prototypes against a whole fleet of 192 F-22's. Well the odds are not looking good for the T-50.

Same reason that Russia has deployed Su-30s and the US has deployed F-22s - no one is taking any chances.

The system in question is the Krasukha-4, which is /quite capeable/ and has a range of 300+ kilometres.

Here's a picture of it deployed at the Bassel Al-Assad International Airport.




Sputnik news artile about Krasukha-4 deployment which includes a video?

But does it have the capability of the F-22 or a B-2? Heck can it even track an F-117?

[Neu Leonstein]

5 prototypes so far, actually.

so they totally can afford to deploy two of them, and test it in real war conditions, hypothetically of course.

I don't think that's how prototypes work...

[West Aurelia]

It's only a prototype.

5 prototypes so far, actually.

so they totally can afford to deploy two of them, and test it in real war conditions, hypothetically of course.

That's not what you use a prototype for.

Maybe it's Russia preempting Erdogan's plans for a "buffer zone" in Syria which happens to be in territory held by the Kurds, with whom the Syrian government has been providing assistance?

I don't think Erdogan will go ahead with the buffer zone/safe zone/no-fly zone/whatever name they're using now without US support (and there has been some support among high-ranking government officials). I wouldn't put it beyond him though.

Although I imagine it'd be a dick move if Russia used it's jamming equipment against American and other allied aircraft launching air strikes against ISIS. Which most Putinophiles seem to conveniently forget.

There's no reason for them to do so - if coalition aircraft are striking IS, that's indirectly helping Assad. And they wouldn't do so anyway because of the potential consequences. They're only there as a precaution in case, God forbid, there is an actual confrontation.

[L Ron Cupboard]

I certainly would not want to be on a commercial flight going anywhere within a few hundred miles of Syria.

[West Aurelia]

5 prototypes so far, actually.

so they totally can afford to deploy two of them, and test it in real war conditions, hypothetically of course.

Five prototypes against a whole fleet of 192 F-22's. Well the odds are not looking good for the T-50.

I can't remember the exact number, but IIRC there are about a dozen F-22s assigned to Operation Inherent Resolve.

[Neu Leonstein]

I can't remember the exact number, but IIRC there are about a dozen F-22s assigned to Operation Inherent Resolve.

Not that it really matters. A prototype is a prototype... you'd have to spend most of the time aborting missions to come back and fix the latest thing that doesn't quite work yet.

[San Verucia]

Deleted.

[Nationes Pii Redivivi]

As opposed to indiscriminate gassing of the previous government?

We aren't going to support the Islamists or Assad.

Then who?

I don't know, any number of the democratic factions that may still be around?

[Allanea]

There's no longer a meaningful democratic faction in Syria. I'm sorry, it's too late.

[Shofercia]

Balkens despises Putin because under Putin, Russia became strong, but in order to get people like you on his side, he'll jump on the Human Rights bandwagon.

This makes me want to vomit. "Russia becoming strong" correlates with Russia poisoning the futures of it's neighboring nations. And what makes you think this has nothing to do with civil rights? Putin wants to rebuild Russia as a superpower, and with that he'll bring his populist conservative bullshit around with him. And unfortunately now that Russia's state as a superpower has become apparent to the world, various idiots (like the glorious Orban) have gotten the idea that they too can build civil rights abusing kleptocracies anywhere in the world.

Besides that this is a new tone Shof. I remember how you claimed Freedom House was wrong, and that political freedom has not actually decayed in Russia over the last decade. Maybe you're the one jumping on the human rights bandwagon?

Political freedom improved in terms of free speech and declined in terms of gay rights. In Russia, the Internet is the freest medium, and thus, (unless Putin's building a Great Firewall,) the more people have access to the Internet, the more people can speak out. And yes, it's monitored, (although not to the level that Windows 10 plans to monitor your system,) but the only solely internet based prosecutions I've seen were for either spreading illegal content, (usually drug making,) or rampant racism. Not really seeing a problem with those. Rampant racism is forbidden in Russia, and usually it was forbidden, so that's nothing new, and not spreading instructions on how to create hard drugs just seems like common sense. As thus, I stand by my assessment that Freedom House was wrong, because of what I described above. You'll notice the shift in my tone on Human Rights started when overbroad laws started being passed and laws directly against LGBTers were given too broad of an authority. Saying that one can have his website shut down if there's rabid racist content is totally fine. Saying that one can have his website shut down if there's rabid racist, or something that's a threat in some manner, is overbroad. My issue is with the latter, not the former.

As for poisoning the futures, well, that's bullshit. Saakashvili tried to start up warfare in the Caucasus; it shouldn't take a Nostradamus to understand that Russia will bitch slap any such attempts, in part because what happens in the Caucasus affects Russia as a whole. When Russia was weak in the 1990s, such attempts were also bitchslapped. Prednistrovie has been there irrespective of Russia's strength and/or weakness, so that leaves Ukraine, whose current government came to power through blood and violence, so Crimea River in that regard. Oh, and Russia was already strong before Ukraine happened, so really not seeing the connection there. I washed my car on Monday, it rained on Tuesday. I guess I caused the rain, according to your logic.

Also, Russia's not a Superpower overall. When it comes to Space, Nukes, Missile Tech, Winter Olympics, etc, yes, Russia is a Superpower, but to think that Russia is a Superpower as USSR and US were during the Cold War, is a mistake. It's a Multipolar World, and the Age of Superpowers is over.

I was talking about the importance of organizations that Russia's in.

That's not the way it sounded earlier, but I may have misinterpreted. Anyway, the degree to which this matters to the topic at hand is the degree to which these organisations are relevant only because China is a member, and will play a meaningful role to the extent to which Chinese leaders feel their country would benefit. Chinese policy is to, if in doubt, not put all their eggs in any one basket and maintain as much multipolarity in the world as possible. Which makes Russia useful to them. But the idea that the SCO or any other such organisation could be used to promote Russian interests if the Chinese did not share those interests is pretty far-fetched, and to that extent I think the size or importance of the SCO tells us very little about Russia's importance in the world.

Whoops, I should've been clearer, but now you know what I meant. Anyways, thing is that neither Russia nor China can take Central Asia by force, so they have to cooperate and promote peaceful cooperation with other Central Asian states. If you cannot beat them, join them. Furthermore, such relationship is symbiotic, with Russia and China treating each other as equal partners. Claiming that China would promote Russia's interests as long as these don't interfere with China's is far from being far fetched; it's reality. For instance, in exchange for Russia's support, China supports Russia in Syria. What're the Chinese interests in Syria?

We shouldn't fight Russia, necessarily, but we can and should help Israel exterminate the Iranian government. Remember, there are Iranians who hate their oppressive government. We should let Assad and the rebels fight each other for a while and then step in and choose a winner, so to speak. If we unleash our military they can do pretty much anything (In other words, remove the strict rules of engagement that they were under in Iraq and Afghanistan, and allow enhanced interoggation).

And if Russia persuades Iran to leave Israel alone? The Israelis are a lot more friendlier towards Putin than they are towards Obama; this wasn't the case with Bush.

They include India and Pakistan.

From Wiki:

On July 10 2015, the SCO decided to admit India and Pakistan as full members, and they are expected to join by 2016.[2][3]

Technically they haven't joined yet and that will make Russia even less influential in the SCO.

Nope. China and India were "grrr" towards each other, and so you have potential for Russian mediation there. Both India and China would see Russia as the Honest Broker mediating certain land claims which Russia can't get. And if Russia and China can get India and Pakistan to work together in the SCO, that's a boost to both of their power ratings.

This makes me want to vomit. "Russia becoming strong" correlates with Russia poisoning the futures of it's neighboring nations. And what makes you think this has nothing to do with civil rights? Putin wants to rebuild Russia as a superpower, and with that he'll bring his populist conservative bullshit around with him. And unfortunately now that Russia's state as a superpower has become apparent to the world, various idiots (like the glorious Orban) have gotten the idea that they too can build civil rights abusing kleptocracies anywhere in the world.

Besides that this is a new tone Shof. I remember how you claimed Freedom House was wrong, and that political freedom has not actually decayed in Russia over the last decade. Maybe you're the one jumping on the human rights bandwagon?

Putin is a bad actor, but he has done well for Russia. Their GDP is up, their wages are up, and he cut their unemployment in half. As icing on the cake he annexed Crimea and part of Eastern Ukraine. You may think, as I do, that this aggression is wrong, but it is STRENGTH.

Putin is no worse than most other leaders, and considering that the Yeltsin Coup was gathering momentum since a certain joint Yeltsin-Clinton fuck up, i.e. the Presovo Airstrip Incident and Yeltsin "forgetting" to pay his soldiers and officers, something was going to change, and most likely it'd be a lot more hard line than Putin. And yes, Putin took Crimea, so what? 75 to 80 percent of Crimeans want to be with Russia, if not more. Scotland can do what Crimea cannot? Da fuck?

As for Donetsk and Lugansk, I highly doubt that Putin would've covertly intervened under different circumstances. If Yatsenuyk federalized right away and started the four party talks, (Russia, Ukraine, Germany, France,) as well as not appointing idiotic Oligarchs and not shutting down the Kopanki, not passing the idiotic language laws, and not doing some other things, the Ukrainian Crisis would be over.

[Shofercia]

Turkey intercepted a Russian fighter that had violated its airspace. Russia has said that the violation was the result of a navigation error. I'm glad that this wasn't a deliberate provocation and nothing went out of control.

However other sources are saying that unidentified MiG-29s harassed two Turkish F-16s. I'm not sure if this is related to the other incident, since Turkey called out Russia on that one. Syria uses MiG-29s but I doubt they would actually harass Turkish jets with tensions in the region already so high.

It's funny that Turkey is getting its airspace violated for a change.

Unless Turkey learns to leave the Kurds alone, (at least those outside of Turkey,) their airspace might continue to be violated. Just like they're violating Syria's and Greece's.

I heard that Russian Electronic Jamming equipment has been spotted, what would they need that for against ISIS and Syrian Opposition groups?

To keep certain actors from hitting the Kurds outside of their borders.

>USA/Obama drops bombs in Syria for over a year, nobody bats an eye or says a word.

>Russia/Putin drops bombs in Syria for a day and-

WE INTERRUPT THIS SHITPOST TO INFORM YOU THAT VLADIMIR PUTIN AND RUSSIA ARE TRYING TO TAKE OVER THE WORLD!!!

>USA/Obama drops bombs in Syria for over a year, nobody bats an eye or says a word.

>Russia/Putin drops bombs in Syria for a day and-

WE INTERRUPT THIS SHITPOST TO INFORM YOU THAT VLADIMIR PUTIN AND RUSSIA ARE TRYING TO TAKE OVER THE WORLD!!!

Because instead of focusing on ISIS like they claimed they would Russia has been attacking other opposition groups to help prop up Assad's regime.

Russia's hitting ISIS too. Yes, Russia isn't currently focusing on ISIS, so what? There's a pocket that needs liquidating.

If assad falls then you better be ready for another holocaus but this time on Syrian christians and shias...

As opposed to indiscriminate gassing of the previous government?

We aren't going to support the Islamists or Assad.

Why not just bomb ISIS? Since when did America have to support someone to bomb someone else?

Each other. None of the rebel groups have any aerial capacity.

Okay...
so are they planning to engage each other, or deter attacks on their cronies in the area by the opposing force?

Since they're giving each other fair warning, it's most likely the latter.

[Costa Fierro]

I don't think Erdogan will go ahead with the buffer zone/safe zone/no-fly zone/whatever name they're using now without US support (and there has been some support among high-ranking government officials). I wouldn't put it beyond him though.

Turkish ground forces have already entered Syrian territory in force. They've also launched air strikes against Kurdish targets in Iraqi Kurdistan.

He did this without support from the US or NATO. Russia getting involved has more than likely made Erdogan shelve said plans.

Unless Turkey learns to leave the Kurds alone, (at least those outside of Turkey,) their airspace might continue to be violated. Just like they're violating Syria's and Greece's.

Wait, Russia is violating Turkish air space to assist the Kurds? Also, Turkish aircraft violated Syrian air space once. And even then, the aircraft did so mistakenly.

Compare this with three Syrian aircraft shot down by Turkey for violating Turkish air space.

[American Imperial Union]

Let's support Russia and bomb all the rebels. Let's support Bashar Al assad. It is better to have an authoritarian dictatorship than an ISIS caliphate or a Libya style fragmentation that allows Islam to gain power and control.

We need to outlaw this religion in the west, we need to forbid immigration fron Mexico, south and central America, Africa and the middle east to European or us and Canadian countries. We must do this to preserve our people, our culture, our religion and our civilization. These savages(referring to the people that constitute such groups as isis, and are generally inferior) are not compatible with our intelligence, culture, civilization and people.

[Socialist Czechia]

There is another interesting question, though: what to do, when ISIL will collapse and it's troops will surrender?
I mean, will be there any places in Syria left for mass graves?

I hope westerners won't interfere in such completely legitimate justice as well. They were always too soft. At least publicly.

[Costa Fierro]

There is another interesting question, though: what to do, when ISIL will collapse and it's troops will surrender?

Go home?

I mean, will be there any places in Syria left for mass graves?

No...

I hope westerners won't interfere in such completely legitimate justice as well. They were always too soft. At least publicly.

Oh for fuck's sake. No. There will be no mass killing and mass...whatever else that is abhorrent that you consider to be "legitimate justice". No, most normal, civilized people are better than simply massacring people en mass.

And you hope Westerners won't interfere. Two things. One, it'a a bit too late now. Two, the massacres of thousands of people is bad regardless what they have done and it's highly unlikely that they will actually take place.

Either way such notions of what is "legitimate justice" are quite pathetic. It makes those who claim to be better than ISIS no better than them. It's not really justified, from a moral standpoint.

[Socialist Czechia]

And you hope Westerners won't interfere. Two things. One, it'a a bit too late now. Two, the massacres of thousands of people is bad regardless what they have done and it's highly unlikely that they will actually take place.

Either way such notions of what is "legitimate justice" are quite pathetic. It makes those who claim to be better than ISIS no better than them. It's not really justified, from a moral standpoint.

Some people are beyond any redemption.

Same, if I lived in WW2 in any Allied nation, I would order to shot every SS soldier without any exception and would rather face the consequences than spare inhuman creatures.

So yes, I guess you are better person than me, because I am sure that I am not able to forget or forgive such things.

I mean, If I went there as a volunteer, and saw first hanged or chopped civilians, I would completely stopped to see them as a humans, just creatures to seek and kill.

[Neu Leonstein]

For instance, in exchange for Russia's support, China supports Russia in Syria. What're the Chinese interests in Syria?

Two things: 1) a more stable middle east is beneficial from the Chinese view point - less spill over in terms of Muslim extremism, lower commodity prices, that sort of thing; and 2) a very obvious aversion to authoritarian governments being overthrown, especially if that overthrowing involves some sort of violation of sovereignty by foreign powers (which is an interpretation some people advance for the Arab Spring).

But anyway, the support is limited to not saying much to condemn Russia's activity and vetoing anything that could be seen as a violation of Syria's sovereignty (where "sovereignty" is narrowly defined as the freedom of an authoritarian government to do as it pleases within its national boundaries). I would imagine we would see hell freeze over before China would do anything substantial to help Russia if, say, for argument's sake, Russia was to get bogged down in a lengthy quagmire in Syria or something.

And the notion that China could consider Russia an equal partner on anything other than short-term arrangements is ridiculous. The only thing Russia has going for it is a military the long-term usefulness of which is, as I said earlier in this thread, conditional on a pretty broken fiscal model. They're not in the same league, and the Chinese leadership is more aware of this than most, considering how they think in time scales of several decades as a matter of course.

[Finland SSR]

I know this was likely already noticed by people here before, but...

US is backing Syrian rebels. Russia is backing the Syrian government.

Soo... proxy wars in 2015?

[West Aurelia]

I don't think Erdogan will go ahead with the buffer zone/safe zone/no-fly zone/whatever name they're using now without US support (and there has been some support among high-ranking government officials). I wouldn't put it beyond him though.

Turkish ground forces have already entered Syrian territory in force. They've also launched air strikes against Kurdish targets in Iraqi Kurdistan.

He did this without support from the US or NATO. Russia getting involved has more than likely made Erdogan shelve said plans.

A buffer zone would be more difficult because that would actually involve defending and managing it. Something like that would most likely require US support. But like I said, I wouldn't put anything past Erdogan.