On February 15 2016 07:13 iPlaY.NettleS wrote: WW3 is close.
Nah, Turkey can't call on article 5 if they invade another country. I still don't think Erdogan is stupid enough to go for it.
i think they have the means to go into syria and change the tide at least against the regime
Their goal is to establish control over that strip of land between the two Kurdish entities and to reopen supply routes between ISIS and the other insurgents. Something like this:
Now if Turkey does go through with this, there are multiple ways this can play out and none of them will result in a WW3. In any case Turkey's and the Saudi airforce full of export model planes will be annihilated if Russia choses to do so, its not even up for debate. The next point depends on how serious their troop and armour deployment is. Turkey won't be fighting ISIS or the other groups so I highly doubt that the Syrian Army + Kurds have the manpower and equipment to push them out even with non-stop Russian bombing raids on Turkish positions. So if Turkey gets a foothold and doesn't get pushed out immediately this war just gets 2-3 years longer.
Insurgents are leaving en mass since their supply corridor was cut which is evident by the mass of young men, some of them still carrying their guns building up on the Turkish border. Every single major population center save for Raqqah and 40% of Aleppo and parts of Daara is under the control of the Syrian government, and there is no way the Syrian people would just surrender to foreign invaders after 5 years of war. 80% of the population as well as 4 million internally displaced don't want the Jihadists and Turks there and there so there is no way a Turkish and Saudi invasion will achieve anything in regards to the government of Syria.
If their plan is to just break the ISIS part of the country off and have the oil corridor under a 'UN protectorate' thats actually plausible.
THe russian assets in the region would be destroyed, the turks have enough to do that and with the help of the saudi airforce it would be hard for the russians with what they have there right now to stop them.
I think you don't understand that Turkish planes won't even make it to the anti-air missiles, and even then the Russians have jamming equipment that can disable all NATO electronics within a 600km radius. They will be sitting ducks for eveyone, let alone an SU-35.
What can cause WW3 though is if the RC-135 and other high altitude spy and electronic warfare planes the US has deployed around Syria start counter jamming Russian tech to help Turkey. Maybe if they can shut down the jamming equipment the turks could just throw bodies (planes) at them and hope for the best. But without the Americans fully on board the Turkish airforce can do nothing.
edit: Wonder what will happen when the Russians shoot an S-400 at that American spy plane to stop the jamming? Thats crazy, the US won't risk helping Erdogan of all people.
the thing you fail to understand is that the s-400 batteries are not very mobile.. they can target them with artillery or missiles or even use their planes to strike them from turkey, the missiles have enough range.
Dubai: While the world focuses on Russian military jets in the skies of Syria, Moscow is quietly engineering political changes within the Syrian political system, ahead of parliamentary elections next May, sources close to the government told Gulf News.
With minimal media attention and little fuss, the Syrian Baath Party dissolved its 21-man strong National Command this week, which had been in power since 1970.
The Syrian government ordered that all their offices, automobiles, state funds, and human resources to be re-distributed within the political system.
The symbolic move was at the urging of Russian advisers, ahead of upcoming parliamentary elections next May. Not only do the Russians see such public spending as a complete waste, but the National Command has become a subject of ridicule in Syria for years, with its ageing autocrats ideologically stuck in the 1960s with flashy cars, government funds, and all the pomp of authority.
The party hasn’t officially elected a secretary-general since Syrian President Bashar Al Assad’s father, Hafez, died in 2000, leaving its leadership in the hands of the octogenarian Baathist Abdullah Al Ahmar.
For more than four decades the Baath party monopolised power through a constitutional clause that mandated that the party was “leader of state and society”.
That clause was scrapped in the 2012 constitution but on the ground, nothing has changed for the Baath.
Party members still get the lion’s share of seats in government and parliament, and pack the bureaucracy and armed forces.
The day of their seizure of power, March 8, is still officially celebrated.
The reset seats of the Baath Party will be waivered in the next elections, thanks to Russian lobbying in Damascus.
The Russians believe that it is bad politics to continue using Baathist ideology, and are working on reforming the party from within.
The National Progressive Front (NPF), a leftist parliamentary coalition headed by the Baath, is expected to be dissolved by May.
It has had the lion’s share of seats in Parliament since 1973. The only Baath ally that will survive the Russian shake-up is the Syrian Social Nationalist Party (SSNP), a left-wing party created in the early 1930s.
It commands a real power base and appeals to young educated men and women in rural towns and the urban interior.
After years of working in the underground from the mid-1950s to the 2000s, it was allowed to join the NPF and is now active both in military affairs and political life, sending a representative to negotiate with Syrian officials in Geneva this February.
Although some domestic voices are demanding that the parliamentary elections are postponed, Moscow insists that they need to take place as planned — under Russian supervision — and to produce a multi-party and democratic system, approved and backed by the Kremlin.
This chamber will work hand-in-hand with a “cabinet of national unity” that includes members of the Russian-backed opposition; attendees of Moscow I and Moscow II conferences.
The Turkish-backed Syrian opposition will be discarded, and so will the Riyadh-sponsored Higher Negotiations Committee, or any form of Syrian Islamists.
In addition to politics, changes have been noted over the past few weeks in top military positions, also believed to be the work of the Russians.
The commander of the republican guard, an elite force charged with presidential security, has been sacked and replaced by General Talal Makhlouf, a relative of the unit’s founder General Adnan Makhlouf.
Previously, Talal Makhlouf was in charge of Unit 105 of the Republican Guard, once commanded by Al Assad’s long-time friend, who defected to join the opposition in 2012. General Aws Aslan, the son of ex-Chief-of-Staff Ali Aslan, was made commander of the Second Corps of the Syrian Army.
The sidelining of an older generation of officers and replacing them with trustworthy adults in their early 50s is also an attempt at giving the armed forces a face-lift.
In the coastal city of Latakia, near the airbase of Hmaymeem, where the Russians are now based, checkpoints within the city have been removed in order to restore a feeling of confidence to local inhabitants, and soldiers on street-corners have been sent to the frontlines in the Syrian north — again at the advice of Moscow.
On February 15 2016 19:38 trulojucreathrma.com wrote: Ignoring nukes, Turkey and Saudi together have more military power than Russia.
That's a joke right? By what metric do they have more military power?
Budget, plane numbers, advantage fighting on home soil, percentage of equipment that is likely to be operational. Russia must be the army with the second lowest morale on the planet(assuming that of North Korea is really lower). The number of suicides, abuses are numerous and the pay and treatment of veterans is poor.
Turkey and Saudi also have more tanks that Russia. Put Egypt into the picture, who has an even stronger military than the other two, yeah odds for a banana republic, but hey free US equipment, and it isn't even close.
And that ignores the fact that those Russian numbers are both largely outdated and mothballed. Some of their stuff has been collecting dust for 15 years now. They haven't even been able to fund and maintain their nuclear submarines; pride of their navy, properly.
Part of Russia is near Turkey, but most of it is on the other side of the world. Russia has never been able to defend it's own borders against a real opponent. It is just too damn big.
The cold war was the cold war because of nukes. Those are a game changer.
Where does the myth come from that Russia is a military superpower? Sure, if you are Serbian you hate NATO, because you lost, and you'd like to think Russia has a magic button they just need to press to destroy/jam all NATO stuff. But Russia is as weak as Putin is loudmouthed. Russia has like the economy of Italy, and is shrinking. The complete economy is based on oil and natural gas, which will be gone in 20 to 30 years.
The outcome of a real war is of course very unpredictable and depends on who attacks who how. But on paper, Russia is the underdog. If Putin truly wants to flex his muscles, why doesn't he beat the rebels in occupied greater Russia first? If his military can do that, then he can fight a real war. What will Georga do? What about Iran? Obviously entering with your planes into the enemy's SS zone is a risk.I don't know how much stuff Russia actually has positioned at the Black Sea. Might not have been their most predictable theatre of war.
Also, if those countries are smart, they don't fight a war. There are no clear military goals for any of them. Makes no sense to fight.
What is more important now is that apparently, Saudi Arabia is a bigger ally to Turkey than NATO. It was always odd, as Turkey's second biggest (natural) enemy, Greece, is supposed to be their ally. Turkey is only in NATO because the US throught it helped them be more powerful.
What keeps Putin awake each night is how he will stay alive for the next 10 years, not how he is going to reshape the middle east.
Not to comment on any of the war theory since apparently everyone's an expert so I won't even bother but the Russian Navy has a couple of frigates, half a dozen corvette class ships and a couple more anti ship missile boats stationed in the Caspian Sea.
10) Turkey Budget: $18.2 billion Active frontline personnel: 410,500 Tanks: 3,778 Total aircraft: 1,020 Submarines: 13
2) Russia Budget: $84.5 billion Active frontline personnel: 766,055 Tanks: 15,398 Total aircraft: 3,429 Submarines: 55
so unless Saudis have 2.4k aircraft and more than 11k tanks you have nothing. you whole speech is either incorrect, outdated, biased or just flat out wrong on all accounts and your take on what matters, what doesn't and why it is so, it's pretty laughable.
Russia is at almost half that, and that after some crazy budget increases the last decade that they won't be able to sustain. I mean, it was like at 1/5th or something of what it is now 10 years ago.
Also, don't forget the freebees Saudi Arabia gets from the US. They arent reflected in their spending budget. It is how US indirectly subsidizes their own defense industry.
Also, you don't divide their number of planes by the no of square kilometers of territory they have to defend, but you do adjust for that. Maybe the square root?
The thing is, xM(Z, that Turkey can deploy most of its army at the syrian front, without weakening its other borders and - and that is the most important part - without hyper logistical gymnastics.
Rusiia can't and wont deploy even a fourth of its army at that front!
The idea that either country would deploy a significant fraction of their military in a moderately important regional conflict is laughable. It's important but it's not a matter of survival.
well you can have your assumptions, i won't argue on them but they're ifs and buts(i found a doc. about magnetic pole reversal and its more interesting than this).
ps: i'd just dump everything i have on the turks and defend the rest of my territory with nuke threats.
On February 16 2016 01:56 xM(Z wrote: 10) Turkey Budget: $18.2 billion Active frontline personnel: 410,500 Tanks: 3,778 Total aircraft: 1,020 Submarines: 13
2) Russia Budget: $84.5 billion Active frontline personnel: 766,055 Tanks: 15,398 Total aircraft: 3,429 Submarines: 55
so unless Saudis have 2.4k aircraft and more than 11k tanks you have nothing. you whole speech is either incorrect, outdated, biased or just flat out wrong on all accounts and your take on what matters, what doesn't and why it is so, it's pretty laughable.
A few things about the Russian numbers. First, and last I heard, Russia's military readiness isn't very good. Only a fraction of available forces are actually usable in combat. Second, Russia almost certainly does not have the logistical capability to project force in Syria -- particularly if the Dardanelles are closed off. Third, Russia would have difficulty fielding a significant expeditionary force given its other defense commitments.
On February 16 2016 01:56 xM(Z wrote: 10) Turkey Budget: $18.2 billion Active frontline personnel: 410,500 Tanks: 3,778 Total aircraft: 1,020 Submarines: 13
2) Russia Budget: $84.5 billion Active frontline personnel: 766,055 Tanks: 15,398 Total aircraft: 3,429 Submarines: 55
so unless Saudis have 2.4k aircraft and more than 11k tanks you have nothing. you whole speech is either incorrect, outdated, biased or just flat out wrong on all accounts and your take on what matters, what doesn't and why it is so, it's pretty laughable.
A few things about the Russian numbers. First, and last I heard, Russia's military readiness isn't very good. Only a fraction of available forces are actually usable in combat. Second, Russia almost certainly does not have the logistical capability to project force in Syria -- particularly if the Dardanelles are closed off. Third, Russia would have difficulty fielding a significant expeditionary force given its other defense commitments.
Fourthly, they literally cannot afford it. Their government is burning savings fast and still projected to be unable to meet their current obligations within 2 years. Russian power is a joke and Syrian adventurism is Putin's way of trying to stop the Russians noticing.
On February 16 2016 01:56 xM(Z wrote: 10) Turkey Budget: $18.2 billion Active frontline personnel: 410,500 Tanks: 3,778 Total aircraft: 1,020 Submarines: 13
2) Russia Budget: $84.5 billion Active frontline personnel: 766,055 Tanks: 15,398 Total aircraft: 3,429 Submarines: 55
so unless Saudis have 2.4k aircraft and more than 11k tanks you have nothing. you whole speech is either incorrect, outdated, biased or just flat out wrong on all accounts and your take on what matters, what doesn't and why it is so, it's pretty laughable.
A few things about the Russian numbers. First, and last I heard, Russia's military readiness isn't very good. Only a fraction of available forces are actually usable in combat. Second, Russia almost certainly does not have the logistical capability to project force in Syria -- particularly if the Dardanelles are closed off. Third, Russia would have difficulty fielding a significant expeditionary force given its other defense commitments.
Fourthly, they literally cannot afford it. Their government is burning savings fast and still projected to be unable to meet their current obligations within 2 years. Russian power is a joke and Syrian adventurism is Putin's way of trying to stop the Russians noticing.
Russia would for sure have bases in Iran to use if shit hit the fan. They could also probably count on Hizbollah and Iranian ground troops. Possibly they could also start arming kurds. If the situation really goes bad with Turkey and SA goes into Syria they will surely attack kurds, enemy of my enemy etc. Massive arms transfers is something Russia and Iran should easily be able to do. Russia mainly needs to provide air support and specialized troops like advanced anti-aircraft systems like in Ukraine.
Obama needs to go out and do a Trump statement. Something like: "The united states don't give a shit if Turkish or Saudi Arabian troops get bombed inside of Syria if they are in there stirring up shit and NATO will not considered that an attack".
On February 16 2016 05:03 trulojucreathrma.com wrote: Pretty sure Obama, or any else country with some skill at diplomacy, do that off the public record.
Also funny you mention Trump. As good at he is at what he is doing now, he would make for a terrible diplomat.
Of course they are all fighting each other through proxies. Cheap, low-risk, can't really backfire, etc etc.'
Syria being flooded with arms is of course lengthening the conflict and increasing the number of refugees and the body count.
Of course Obama and everyone else is doing exactly that. The point is that Erdogan, Saud Arabia, Putin, Iran doesn't give a shit. The problem comes when Turkish troops attack an Assad position, Russia bombs them, Turkey flies into Syria and shoots down the Russian planes, Russian S-300 shots down the Turkish planes, Turkish artillery open fire from inside Turkey on the AA and Russian artillery or aircraft responds. And in a war it's real easy that happens. In fact some of it has already happened.
And Turkey is in NATO. Which means it's dangerous if they get in a military conflict with Russia. And since they don't give a shit what their European and American allies want (bombing the kurds all day for example, supporting ISIS more or less) and now thinking about invading perhaps someone needs to go public and tell them that no, we don't care what happens to you as long as you are inside Syria.
i think the shelling of hospitals became a strategy in this war. you fight the terrorists, you kill some, wound some others; the wounded ones would then go to a hospital. you wait until you have a good number of them there and then bomb the whole hospital.
seriously fucked up but should also be pretty effective.
If you make the assumption that the the first bombs hit, sure. If the first bombs hit civilians then so will the second. That said it's basically the "double tap" strategy that the US got accused of using in Iraq. Hit the target, wait for first responders to arrive, hit the same spot again. Guarantees kills on anyone who cares about the people you hit the first time.
Complete collapse of the insurgents north of Aleppo yesterday.
This map is a bit old though, Kafr Nasih was taken by the Kurds, and this was with Turkey shelling the Kurds non-stop and bringing in 400 islamists from Idlib. Also reports coming in that the Syrian army kicked ISIS out of the Aleppo thermal power plant (its in the bottom right corner of the map).
The past two weeks in north Aleppo in gif form. + Show Spoiler +
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/95BPaM2.jpg)
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/4ZtGJqm.jpg)
![[image loading]](https://imagopyrenaei.files.wordpress.com/2016/02/northaleppo.gif)
