Chronicle of dive bombers

Chronicle of dive bombers

A year ago, on September 30, Russia launched one of the largest military campaigns in its modern stories. Its goal was to destroy the terrorists of the Islamic State banned in Russia and to move towards a political settlement of the crisis between supporters and opponents of President Bashar Assad. However, the key points of the operation, which was originally planned as a short-term one, were so achieved and were not, and Syria turned into a place where the geopolitical interests of Russia and the USA collided.

The decision on the use of armed forces in Syria was not easy for the military and political leadership of Russia. On the one hand, the government army, exhausted by the ongoing civil war, could not provide decent resistance to radical Islamists, who by the beginning of 2015 had been freely operating in the country and, according to Vladimir Putin, were a threat to the national security of the Russian Federation. On the other hand, Syrian President Bashar Asad was considered an ally of Russia in the Middle East, but there was no benefit from such friendship. Nobody had any illusions about five years ago about a promising market for military products. The last contract for combat training aircraft Yak-130 was concluded in 2011 year, but was never implemented; the agreement for the supply of C-XNUMPPMU-300 is broken, as head of the Rostec state corporation Sergey Chemezov admitted to Vlast, due to the “lost time”; and the delivery of 2 fighters MiG-12М / М29 stopped remembering a couple of years ago.

But the Syrian leader, who was considered legitimately elected in Moscow, had a lot of geopolitical enemies, and they were all strong. The United States, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Israel — Bashar Assad did not like any of them, and some even hinted at the direct connection of the head of the Syrian state with the Islamists. But in Moscow they did not have such data, and the leadership of the country did not intend to believe the unsubstantiated accusations.

A high-ranking diplomatic source, Vlast, claims that the decision to introduce military contingent to Syria was made taking into account several factors: from the results of an analysis of potential threats from the Russian Federation conducted by the special services to Vladimir Putin’s reluctance to repeat the mistake that Moscow made regarding Libya in 2011. There were risks to the country's image: just over a year ago, Crimea became part of Russia, which the Western countries regarded as an "act of annexation", and therefore the introduction of a full-fledged military contingent to Syria would provoke new attacks on Russian foreign policy. “This question was constantly on the agenda,” the interlocutor of the “Authority” said. “The Americans freely embodied their“ peacekeeping mission ”in Syria, mowed Syrians in bundles, illegally bombed its lands and all who were there, but they did not send their ground troops there , preferring to do all the dirty work on the ground by someone else’s hands. "

Assad was ready to make any concessions, just to get power support

Perhaps this is why the Kremlin decided to limit itself to non-contact methods of warfare. It was relatively safe (it was believed that the Islamists did not have air defense systems) and a much cheaper option than keeping army units in a remote theater of operations. By August 26, 2015, the plan was approved at the highest level: Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu and his Syrian counterpart Jasem al-Fredge signed an agreement on the deployment of the Russian aviation groups at the Khmeimim airbase for an indefinite period to fight terrorists. But in order to emphasize the legitimacy of the actions of its armed forces, the Kremlin needed to receive an official request from Bashar al-Assad. This would mean that Russia - the only one of all the countries fighting in Syria, operates within the framework of international rules. The document ended up with Vladimir Putin only on September 29th. But this was not connected with bureaucratic or other difficulties - diplomats say that Assad was ready to make any concessions in order to get power support. This month was necessary for the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation to prepare for hostilities.

The operation in Syria was actually the first full-fledged military maneuver since the five-day war with Georgia in 2008. Seven years later, the Syrian campaign was to not only become an exam for the Russian armed forces, which Anatoly Serdyukov had begun to reform, but also a serious test for Sergei Shoigu himself - and therefore preparation for it was carried out with the utmost care. During August-September, the build-up of forces and equipment began: large landing ships (in particular, Novocherkassk, Korolev, Saratov, Azov and Caesar Kunikov), and then Turkish ferries bought on an emergency basis received the status of ships of the Russian Navy, they began to transport ammunition, fuel and lubricants and special equipment from Novorossiysk to the Syrian port of Tartus. The planes of the military transport aviation were doing the same in parallel. Having saved enough weapons, the military had to relocate combat aircraft and helicopters. Despite the measures of heightened secrecy (the entire transfer took place against the background of the exercises "Center-2015"), the American satellite systems found an increase in the Russian military presence in Latakia, but for some reason they did not prevent this from happening in the Pentagon. By 30 September airbase Hmeymim has formed a complete mixed-aviation group of more than 50 machines (Su-30SM bombers Su-34 and Su-24M, Su-25, Mi-8 and Mi-24P and reconnaissance aircraft ).

In addition to the pilots, military personnel of the 810th Black Sea Brigade were transferred there fleet (Sevastopol), 7th Airborne Assault Mountain Division of the Airborne Forces (Raevskaya village), as well as special operations forces. The first two were supposed to provide protection for Tartus and Khmeimim, and the rest - if necessary - to conduct sabotage and rescue operations. Representatives of industry, who were to carry out operational control of weapons, and military police officers, on whose shoulders lay the tasks of law enforcement, were seconded to Khmeimim. The total number of personnel reached, according to expert estimates, from 1500 to 1900 people. The air base itself was covered by Buk-M2 and Pantsir-C1 air defense systems and modernized Syrian complexes (they were also repaired by experts from the Russian Federation in advance). Unmanned aerial vehicles (such as Orlan-10), Wolf armored vehicles, BTR-82A armored personnel carriers were deployed there, Tanks T-90S, TOS-1A heavy flamethrower systems, as well as Urals and KamAZ trucks.

With these forces, Russia began a military air operation, which, according to high-ranking Kremlin and military officials, was planning to launch an offensive by the Syrian army. A year later, they refrain from such formulations in Russia.

“No matter how much bombing you can achieve, we initially understood this and planned these actions only in coordination with the Syrian armed forces,” the then head of the presidential administration, Sergei Ivanov, admitted to journalists, adding that only the Syrian army should fight on the ground. A year later, it became clear that the estimates regarding the combat readiness and training of the Syrian army were overly optimistic. According to Vlast, even at the preliminary consultation stage, the Syrian Armed Forces headquarters operated with numbers up to 130 thousand troops, but after the start of the operation it turned out that no more than 25 thousand people could actually fight. This state of affairs radically changed the alignment of forces: it was necessary not only to cover government troops at the time of the attack on militant positions, but also to provide them with support on the ground, which would mean a fundamental change in format from a military-air operation to a full-scale one with all the ensuing consequences. The Russian leadership could not take such a step, so they had to look for emergency ways out of the situation in the field. For example, gunners-gunners were sent to the Hamrat region of Homs province, who carried out fire adjustments against the enemy from six Msta-B howitzers, which were sent there to reinforce the government army. The measures taken partly helped: the Syrian command was able to mobilize all the available resources, but this was still not enough for a radical change.

A big mistake was to consider the militants of the "Islamic State" savages with a gun

The work of the Syrian command and command staff of military advisers, created by the General Staff of the Syrian Armed Forces, stabilized somewhat. It was with their direct support and with great difficulty that the 4 th assault corps were assembled, which on October 8 launched an offensive in Al-Gab and the mountains of northeastern Lattakia. Parallel to this, Russian negotiators, who arrived in Damascus to coordinate efforts, were forced to persuade troops of Syrian mercenaries to begin hostilities against the Islamists. According to military sources, "Vlasti", it was these mercenaries who turned out to be the most trained fighters, with whom the achievements of the government troops are directly related. Without them, the latter could hardly conduct not only offensive operations, but even defensive operations.

It was a big mistake to consider the Islamic State militants as savages with an automatic weapon: in fact, they turned out to be very prepared tactically and materially. According to Russian intelligence, the militants have fully mastered the artisanal production of poisonous and explosive substances, large-caliber guns, mortar systems and heavy artillery.

An officer of the General Staff of the Russian Armed Forces says that until recently, the option of creating several battalion-tactical groups from among the most trained Syrian troops was considered. They were supposed to be used as a decisive force in large-scale clashes (before that, under the command of Russian military advisers, they had to undergo training), but due to disagreements between different ethnic groups - Alawites, Sunnis and Shiites - they did not succeed. Despite personnel problems, a number of operational and tactical successes were nevertheless achieved: for the first time in four years of hostilities, the Syrian army, together with the "patriotic opposition", liberated several hundred settlements. The Quaires airbase was unblocked, the strategic points in Latakia were cleaned, and Palmyra was liberated. However, it is impossible to talk about a strategic turn: the Islamists are not defeated, do not ask for mercy and continue to attack defeated positions or hold major points. The latter includes Aleppo - once the second largest city in the country. Despite the numerous attempts by the Assad army to take it by storm, none succeeded.

The Tu-160 bomber aircraft launches X-101 airborne cruise missiles against militant targets in the provinces of Aleppo and Idlib, November 20 2015 of the year

Last year showed that Russia did not have a truly reliable military allies in the region. The created coordination center in Baghdad (it included the military from Syria, Iraq, Iran and Russia) was used only for exchanging intelligence, as well as coordinating targets for strikes. The Iraqi military had enough problems with the "Islamic State" on its territory, the Iranians helped to bring Lebanon's "Hezbollah" to military action, which, having lost about 1400 fighters, began to take a much more selective approach to participating in joint operations with the army of Bashar al-Assad. Small units of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps took part only in several clashes, after which they refused to fight. Relationship tensions arose after the parties failed to agree on the permanent deployment of aircraft at the third Hamadan air base in Iran. "The Russians are interested in showing themselves as a superpower and guaranteeing their role in determining the political future of Syria. And of course, they showed a certain amount of posturing and non-Dental behavior," Defense Minister Hossein Dehgan told 22 on August 2016. Although Russian officials stated that there was no need to continue using the facility, unofficially, the military recognized that the Iranian side, which had just gotten rid of the sanctions regime, simply did not want to shine in this story. And the plans of the Russian military to deploy there arsenals with high-explosive fragmentation bombs such as OFAB-250-270 and OFAB-500 threatened to turn into new problems.

Entering the Syrian campaign, the Russian army hoped not only to secure the title of peacekeepers, but also to test the latest models of military equipment and weapons in combat conditions (see the reference below). According to Vlast, it didn’t do without difficulties here: in particular, several times the Su-35С fighters recorded failures of onboard systems, at least once the plane couldn’t fire an air-to-ground cruise missile suspension, but it was all uncritical and subsequently eliminated. Representatives of the industry, specializing, for example, in the production of aviation weapons, do not have to complain: for them the war in Syria is a guaranteed order for many years. For example, a number of enterprises belonging to the Tactical Missiles Corporation have been working around the clock for almost a year.

Moreover, if the creation of an aviation group in Khmeimim or the firing of terrorists with cruise missiles such as Caliber-NK or Caliber-PL was a deliberate step, then the deployment of strategic aviation in the person of Tu-22М3, Tu-95MS and Tu-160, deployed in Syria the Triumph anti-aircraft missile systems C-400 or the short-term transfer of Iskander tactical complexes was a reaction to the tragic events. It can be assumed that, depending on the state of the Syrian troops, sooner or later all the same it would turn out to be in Syria, but their direct connection with the October-November 2015 incidents of the year is obvious. Then, we recall, the militants of the "Islamic State" committed a terrorist attack aboard the Kogalymavia Airbus-A321 aircraft en route from the Egyptian Sharm el-Sheikh to St. Petersburg. And then Turkish Air Force fighters shot down a Russian Su-24M bomber, allegedly crossing the Syrian-Turkish border.

The ships of the Caspian Flotilla for the first time carry out combat launches of Caliber cruise missiles from the Caspian Sea, October 7 2015

In addition to the technical aspects, the military pursued another goal in Syria: at all the major exercises of recent years, they worked out the transfer of personnel from permanent places of deployment to unfamiliar training grounds to create heterogeneous connections there. According to high-ranking sources of the authorities in the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation, all the units coped with this task, and the head of the General Staff of the Russian Armed Forces, Valery Gerasimov, said with satisfaction that the experience of the Syrian campaign was taken into account during the Kavkaz-2016 major command and staff exercises .

The air operation in Syria has become a serious test for Russia in the international arena: from its very first day, the Russian Space Forces were constantly accused of bombing opposition representatives, not terrorists. But all the charges and diplomats, and the military categorically denied.

By the beginning of March 2016, the composition of the air group in Hmeimim exceeded 70 machines: it seemed that in the short term, the Ministry of Defense would bring their number to hundreds and begin an intensive shelling of the positions and infrastructure of the militants. However, instead, Vladimir Putin decided to begin the withdrawal of the main forces and assets from Syria, ordering to leave there only the weapons and equipment necessary to protect the group and fire on the terrorists. During the week, the composition of the air group is reduced to 40 aircraft, and soon the presidents of Russia and the United States agreed to introduce a truce regime in Syria, the main purpose of which was to separate the "moderate opposition" from the terrorists. The logic was simple: you need to make lists of opposition groups, in which the blows should not have been dealt to either side. If we single them out, we could designate areas and provinces where the terrorists are located for joint attacks.

Attempting to distinguish between terrorists and the "moderate opposition" twice will result in failure

It seemed that, despite all the political differences that had arisen at the beginning of the campaign, all civilized countries should have one enemy - radical Islamism, because it was his supporters who destroyed the Russian plane along with 224 passengers over Sinai in October, and in November they carried out the attacks to the death of 130 citizens in Paris. After these incidents, the creation of a broad antiterrorist coalition did not seem so impossible. Harsh rhetoric left the statements of the parties: US President Barack Obama said that he supported Russia's efforts to fight the Islamic State, and Vladimir Putin proposed to create an international coalition against terrorists. As it turns out later, it was just one of the few bright episodes, replaced by serious accusations from all sides in Syria.

The attempt to separate the terrorists and the "moderate opposition" will fail twice: the Pentagon will not provide clear information about the opposition groups, and while the US is in no hurry to fulfill its part of the promised agreements, the radicals will have time to recuperate, largely replenishing their arsenals and resume active hostilities.

Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu at the highest level is trying to coordinate the actions of the Russian Aerospace Forces and the Syrian army (on the left is President Bashar Asad)

On the eve of the anniversary of the Syrian campaign, the agreement reached on the night of September 10 by Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and US Secretary of State John Kerry on a truce in Syria was thwarted: renewed hostilities between government forces and the opposition coincided with the destruction of a humanitarian convoy in Aleppo. This incident was called "an attack on humanity" by the UN. The Russian Defense Ministry claims that the Syrian army could not launch an air strike, since its aircraft, unlike the American attack drone Predator, were not in the air at that time.

In the West, Russian arguments are not heard. During his speech at the UN General Assembly, Barack Obama raised the question of "Russia's responsibility" for existing international crises, saying that Moscow "is trying to regain its former greatness with the help of force." French President Francois Hollande, who spoke in the same place, added that the regime of President Assad and "those behind him," that is, Russia, are to blame for the ongoing war in Syria. And John Kerry said that he had allegedly been in a "parallel universe", listening to the UN Security Council on the report of Sergei Lavrov on the Syrian crisis.

The second year of the Syrian operation begins in the same way as the first: the most severe confrontation between the two superpowers, the clashes between the opposition and the government forces, as well as the radical Islamists who are strong and ready for war. Moscow and Washington had opportunities to negotiate for 12 months, but all of them were missed: the parties realize the importance of an exclusively diplomatic resolution of the crisis, perhaps even coordination, but in fact they don’t go beyond words and promises. So, in the near future, the key players in the Syrian field will finally become the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation and the Pentagon.

Aleppo, once the second largest city in Syria, has been in a combat zone for several years.

What weapons Russia first tested in Syria

In November, 2015, the Chief of the General Staff of the Russian Armed Forces, Valery Gerasimov, reported on the first ever combat use of Russian strategic missile carriers. The 12 long-range Tu-22МЗ bombers, taking off from Russian airfields, attacked the targets of terrorists in the provinces of Rakka and Deir-Ez-Zor. Then the missile Tu-160 and Tu-95MS fired the latest X-101 airborne cruise missiles at militant targets in the provinces of Aleppo and Idlib.

October 7 Russia used the Caliber cruise missiles in Syria. Then four ships of the Caspian flotilla executed 26 launches on the positions of militants "Islamic state". This was the first combat use of such missiles. Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu reported on the results of the strike at a meeting with Vladimir Putin, which was shown by all state-run television channels. December 8 submarine "Rostov-on-Don" project 636.3, while in the waters of the Mediterranean, struck missiles 3М14К Caliber-PL from a submerged position on the objects of terrorists in Syria.

The operation of the Russian Aerospace Force of the Russian Federation in Syria was the first experience of large-scale use of unmanned aerial vehicles that conducted round-the-clock reconnaissance and shooting of air strikes. On the eve of the operation, the Defense Ministry reported plans to train more 1100 specialists for unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) companies at the State Center for Unmanned Aviation of the Ministry of Defense.
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +3
    28 September 2016 06: 10
    The situation is more and more reminiscent of the Afghan 80s .. The government controls the capital at a number of centers, government troops are not capable, our army is gradually being drawn into a ground operation. We cannot reverse the situation with air support alone. Putin will have to make a very responsible decision - there is nowhere to retreat. Having taken a knife, they do not swing it, but beat it.
    1. +1
      28 September 2016 06: 25
      It looks like how. “You can't leave,” such a dilemma arises. But I think Putin will not go for a ground operation.
      1. +2
        28 September 2016 06: 48
        "... I think Putin will not go for a ground operation."
        We will wait and see ... As for me personally, I hope it really will not work, especially in a situation where Russia has practically no allies in the region and the critical "weakness" of Assad's armed forces, which, in fact, "sounded" in the article.
        1. +1
          28 September 2016 07: 21
          Quote: sub307
          especially in a situation of virtually no allies in Russia in the region

          Especially Iran, which does not understand what it is trying to achieve
        2. kig
          28 September 2016 08: 27
          The land operation is not entirely land because it will require the delivery of goods by sea. Maritime transport is still the cheapest, with the help of BTA it is possible to deliver only something very urgent .. And with the current state of maritime transport under the Russian flag, this, alas, is utopia.
      2. +3
        28 September 2016 08: 32
        there is no dilemma here .... no one needs peace in Syria, neither Amers, nor Turks, nor Russia .... therefore, our troops will not leave either, nor will they expand (globally) their presence .. ..
        1. 0
          13 October 2016 09: 30
          I do not agree that "no one needs peace in Syria, neither the Amer, nor the Turks, nor Russia ..." - it is needed (the same refugees in Turkey are not free), but everyone wants to tailor this world slightly in their own way. ... about the need for war as such: (((? Do we, for example, have (in the Russian Federation) test ranges, etc., where, in peaceful conditions, it is relatively safe to test cruise missiles?
    2. +3
      28 September 2016 08: 40
      Quote: dmi.pris
      It’s impossible to reverse the situation with air support alone. Putin will have to take a very responsible decision - there’s nowhere to retreat. Having reached the knife, they don’t swing them, but beat them.
      It was expected that decisive air support would radically turn the tide and Assad’s troops would quickly end all the opposition, and the West and the Gulf would not have time to intervene and help the bandits. The speed of success was supposed to confront everyone with a fait accompli. However, due to the weakness of the Syrian army this did not work, and the Gulf and the West managed and strengthen their support for the barmaley.
      To compete with them in resources is unrealistic for Russia and, no matter how bitter, most likely, you have to (and it's better) leave ....
      1. avt
        28 September 2016 10: 24
        Quote: Aleksander
        It was expected that decisive air support would radically turn the tide and Assad’s troops would quickly end all the opposition, and the West and the Gulf would not have time to intervene and help the bandits.

        wassat Expected by WHO ???? You can cite a quote about our OFFICIAL representative, that now ka-a-a-ak all rakoloshmati, he will cry and everyone will die? Somehow, on the contrary, I remember when some caps were thrown into the air because of the "taste of victory", they reassured them from the TV screens, saying that the same ISIS is at least in Iraq and there is no move for ours, so there will be no short fight, but, , on the far side "- yes.
    3. avt
      28 September 2016 08: 50
      Quote: dmi.pris
      The situation is increasingly reminiscent of the Afghan 80s .. The government controls the capital at a number of centers, government troops are not capable, our army is gradually being drawn into a ground operation.

      ,, It's dark as a moor in the ass. And you know all that Vasily Ivanovich and you have been everywhere " fool “Inoperable” government troops of Najib held out in Afghanistan for two years, exactly until the moment when, after hump, and then EBN refused to sell fuel and lubricants and spare parts for equipment for MONEY. Then Dostum went to the Uzbek border, Ishmaelites to the Iranian and spirits in galoshes entered Kabul. Yes, Akhmat Shah then locked himself tightly in Pandshera. And yet, already from the authority of Boni - “You can do everything with bayonets, you can’t sit on bayonets.” If Assad does not have a concrete plan to reformat the country, then the only way out is One is to cut out all opponents on the principle of all except those who have not grown to a check with a cart. And the option of returning to 2011 is not realistic. Here Bagdasarov is right. Even some kind of semblance still requires reformatting the administrative system. Yes, in fact, Lebanon is nearby, where the same batch was bred by the Syrians in the corners.
      1. +3
        28 September 2016 09: 30
        Quote: avt
        If Assad does not have a specific plan to reformat the country, then there is only one way out - to cut out all opponents according to the principle of all but those who have not reached the cart check.

        It is welcome when you consider that Assad is a really elected president and has real support from the population. At the same time, you need to lay a bolt on the howls of the exceptional and democratic. Too much their words diverge from deeds ...
  2. +2
    28 September 2016 07: 39
    Syria has turned into a place where the geopolitical interests of Russia and the United States clashed

    And it can drag on for a long time. The United States does not suffer losses in Syria, therefore, it can continue to infinity its fuss under this political carpet. The war in Vietnam, where our geopolitical interests also clashed, ended with the Americans fleeing as a result of the enormous losses they suffered. So you need to make sure that the United States began to suffer losses not only in manpower and equipment, but also political. But how can this be done, and even with the wrong hands, let those who receive a salary in their posts (from an ordinary analyst to a member of the government) think about it.
    1. +1
      28 September 2016 07: 55
      The United States does not suffer losses in Syria, therefore, it can continue to infinity its fuss under this political carpet.

      Actually, so here you are wrong.
      1. +1
        28 September 2016 09: 40
        What exactly? One or two instructors for the occasion? This is not a loss for the United States. In Vietnam, there were tens of thousands of losses, so the nation reared up and the Americans had to shove their "exclusiveness" under the tail and flee from there, taking the main Saigon puppets.
  3. +2
    28 September 2016 09: 49
    History teaches that teaches nothing.
    The Kremlin made a strategic mistake, getting into Syria.
    It was clear from the start.
    At present, Russia has a second Afghanistan in Syria
    and the grandiose failure of all the "great strategists." fool
    1. +5
      28 September 2016 10: 11
      There are decisions that, if not made, will be even worse. Before, everyone whined that we were not helping Syria, now whine that we are bombing there. We are not sending thousands of soldiers, but only bombing. And sometimes there are more losses during exercises due to bungling. In 14, a photo was posted here, where in clumsy Russian it was written "first Syria, then Russia" - there was so much howling that it was necessary to beat nuclear weapons, send the 58th army. And now, I am sure, these same people write "the second Afghan, Russia is drowning in blood."
      1. +2
        28 September 2016 11: 20
        You're right. Now Syria is one of the fronts of the global war, waged not only by the USA, EU, Russia. Syria was the final stop of the Arab Spring, launched by the United States in Tunisia in 2011. Russia refused the United States to support the intervention in the SAR in 2013 (as in Libya in 2011), as a result of which a strike was struck in Kiev in November 2013 - Feb . 2014 and so on. IMHO
  4. BAI
    28 September 2016 14: 11
    Always said - combat experience is priceless (no matter how expensive it may be). Only by participating in real combat conflicts can an army capable of fighting be formed. No teachings will give such an experience. For all the exercises conducted during the Soviet and post-perestroika times, the army always solved the assigned tasks, and how these results diverged from real life.
  5. 0
    28 September 2016 14: 16
    "And John Kerry said that he allegedly visited a" parallel universe "while listening to the UN Security Council report by Sergei Lavrov on the Syrian crisis."

    Who would doubt that! For Russia and those who share its views, this is one universe with its laws and norms of behavior; and for the United States and its vassals - another, where robberies, murders, coups d'etat in unwanted countries is the norm of behavior of the "exclusive nation."
    They just forgot the "exceptional", than usually the exclusivity for such countries and their leaders ends. It would be necessary to look through history textbooks, starting with the Ancient World.
  6. +1
    28 September 2016 22: 16
    An interesting article from Kommersant, if you don't know whose Kommersant is. And the fact that Russia in Syria and Ukraine is successfully using the tactics of the Anglo-Saxons "Controlled chaos", somehow they kept silent. If you analyze the wars of the last 40 years, you will notice that they do not end with the "installation of a flag on the dome of the Reichstag". These wars turn into eternal civil war. And in this situation, Russia receives more dividends than the United States with the Middle East monarchies. As long as the war continues, there can be no talk of any gas pipeline or oil pipeline through Syria. At the same time, Russia received a powerful military base in the Mediterranean. How much such a database costs can be understood from this article The article, of course, is not new, but the order of zeros in a digit can be understood. I am already silent about the combat experience and the organization of interaction between the special services in the region. It is not clear just why the Decree of the President of the Russian Federation on the classification of data about the death of servicemen is being violated.
  7. 0
    29 September 2016 13: 43
    Persians are potential US clients. Turkey is a NATO outpost in the area. Israel ... To cooperate, of course, it is necessary to strive, but it is more important to respond with blow to blow, for a kind word and "Colt" are more effective than just a kind word. Assad's troops must clear Aleppo of the enemy until the supply of the entire spectrum of "lethal weapons" in unlimited quantities begins. Then you have to either strike at strategic depth, or admit defeat and leave.
  8. 0
    29 September 2016 16: 47
    Quote: Oles
    A good article, without hurray-patriotism puts everything on the shelves. I remember a flurry of "cap-rocking" articles and comments about how barmaley surrender in crowds and scatter, one has only to see a plane in the sky. As practice shows, life is a little different, not like what is shown on Channel One.

    And what exactly was not shown on Channel One? Specifically, without spreading thoughts on the tree. Give examples of false statements.
  9. 0
    29 September 2016 17: 02
    Quote: Yeraz
    Quote: dumpy15
    Judging by the map, Assad controls the coastal zone and transport hubs. Rakka and the desert are for the friends of Syria.

    As required to prove. There civil war at the level of faiths and Assad controls the territory of the Alavites.

    The territory of compact residence of the Alawites is a shred by the sea. Now the SAR controls many times larger territories than the Alawite enclave.

    Well, I will never believe in the nonsense of federal channels that the people of Syria support Assad

    You can not believe or believe in anything. But in order to know, you need factual information. Do you own it? If not (and where, private intelligence?), Then maybe you yourself rave?

    The Russian Aerospace Forces supports Assad, Shiaiot militias from around the world, Iran supports, but he still controls the lands of the Alevites.

    You're lying. The Alawite enclave is many times smaller than the current control zone of government forces.

    I, as a Shiite, initially understood the delusional nature of the return of land, etc. Jin was released, the majority of the people of Syria, and they are Sunnis against Assad

    Facts where? Sit your finger suck, and sucked write on the forum?

    there are Kurds, especially with the support of the powerful from the United States, which incidentally also drag ISIS forces and simplify the task for Assad, it is scary to imagine if the Kurds and the opposition would go against Assad.

    Why do they need it? ISIS is a separate project with huge financial flows, on which its bonuses are sitting, the Kurds are sideways. They are not crazy to die for free. They need autonomy, but they do not have and are not expected to independently make abrupt movements in the geopolitical sense.
    1. 0
      13 October 2016 17: 39
      Me too - mostly looking at the map, I ask myself questions. For example, why is Russia (maybe (maybe), following Assad's desire) in the first place now so "grabbed" Aleppo? Most of Syria is occupied by the "gray color" of IS - albeit there is a lot of desert, but not only Raqqa - there are many "points" on the coasts of the Euphrates and Khabur on more detailed maps (there are probably IS bases in any conventional settlements - and there is water, which is extremely important in the geographic conditions of Syria). ... In Aleppo, of course, Nusra "mixed" with the population and with a non-Islamist relatively secular opposition (although there are certainly other Islamists in Aleppo besides Nusra), but Aleppo is indeed a very densely populated city. There, from the destruction of buildings alone, many ordinary residents die. These bombings are truly prohibitively terrible ... Why did not Russia and Assad prioritize the reduction of the "gray color" of IS? Consolidation and expansion around Deir ez-Zor? from Palmyra - to the northeast and along the main rivers (Euphrates and Khaburu)? (Forgive my, perhaps stupid questions, but maybe you can somehow explain this situation to me)
  10. 0
    29 September 2016 17: 08
    Quote: Yeraz
    Quote: Oles
    Judging by the map, the opposition and the Kurds have no less successes and territory, while we are all told that coalition allies cannot fight a priori. Strange, huh?

    So there’s another moment, they constantly talked and argued that the United States and its allies miss the mark, they don’t even shoot. Here they say that having so many planes and so many bombings can not be defeated. And what? They have already bombed the year and according to statements more intensively than the United States, and the result is the same, if not worse, since the Kurds in 1 year almost doubled the territories they control.

    And where were the Kurds before this 1 year? Their successes are directly related to a) the adoption of certain political decisions; b) material support; c) pulling out the huge forces of ISIS and Co. due to the actions of the Russian Aerospace Forces.

    The Americans did not and do not give any evidence of the success of their operations. Unlike the United States, Russia provides full factual material on the results of sorties.
  11. 0
    12 October 2016 16: 12
    especially interesting map, thanks for the info.

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"