Military Review

War by invitation. Will Russia start a land operation in Syria?

101
The newspaper Al-Quds Al-Arabi (an Arabic edition with a London residence permit) writes that the Russian authorities can send ground troops to Syria. It is necessary only to ask Assad how Russian special forces will immediately appear in areas of concern to the Syrian army.




Arab newspaper Al-Quds Al-Arabi, published in London, reported that Moscow could send ground troops to Syria to help Assad. The information was received with reference to sources in Syria.

According to unconfirmed reports, if President Assad formally asks for help from Vladimir Putin, Moscow may send ground troops to Syria. In this case, the Russian special forces may appear in those areas where the Syrian army is experiencing difficulties in the fight against "rebels".

The Kremlin does not comment on this anonymous "information".

But there is another comment.

According to President Putin, the effectiveness of the Russian weapons in Syria led to an increase in arms exports. Interest in Russian weapons in the world is growing.

About this, Russian President Vladimir Putin told at a meeting of the Military-Industrial Commission, reports TASS. According to the head of state, the increase in the volume of export contracts for weapons is due, among other things, to the effective use of Russian weapons in the course of the antiterrorist operation in Syria.

“This is due to the effective use of our weapons in real combat conditions, including in the antiterrorist operation in Syria,” the president’s agency quotes. He believes that "we should not miss this opportunity in order to strengthen our position in the global arms market."

According to Putin, defense companies are almost completely loaded with orders from the Ministry of Defense, and additional supplies of weapons should be further worked out: “For the production of certain types of ground weapons, the defense organizations are almost fully loaded with the tasks of the Ministry of Defense, respectively, to ensure that the required military-technical cooperation it's getting harder. I ask you to further elaborate measures for the fulfillment of export supplies of general-purpose armaments. ”

The leader of Russia noted that if Russia today refuses foreign orders, it may miss out on promising partners in the future.

V. Putin’s mention of the effective use of Russian weapons "in real combat conditions", including in Syria, we note, leads to some reflections. On the other hand, the arms trade and the demonstration of its action is one thing, and the land operation is another.

Moreover, Russian experts do not believe that the Kremlin intends to launch a large-scale ground operation in Syria. Basically, not Assad is fighting for Moscow, but Tehran.

President of the Academy of Real Politics, expert of the Academy of Military Sciences Vladimir Prokhvatilov on the website argumentiru.com notes that B. Asad greatly simplifies the situation, allowing the possibility of turning to Russia for help. Russian ichthamnets, the analyst believes, "are already present in Syria already."

In his opinion, the expansion of the ground contingent of the Russian Federation to two or three divisions (and a smaller number will not be enough for a radical change in the course of military operations) will require a corresponding expansion of the capabilities of the “Syrian express train”, and such is hardly achievable.

“In addition,” the author writes further, “Bashar al-Assad, as it seems to me, is simply cunning, waiting for the advent of the" huge army of terrorists. " In fact, in the medium term, an invasion army from the forces of the pro-American coalition can enter Syria. Now Turkey has begun to form another anti-Assad group in the north of Aleppo province. In the south, the Americans are pulling their special forces and armored vehicles to the Syrian border, which will accompany the Jordanian tank army ... "

Also, this expert believes that only Iran supports the truly firm Assad, while Russia is fighting mainly for the preservation of military bases in Hmeimim, Latakia and Tartus. They are needed for the projection of military force in the control of strategic pipelines (both existing and projected).

Interestingly, a few days ago, Bashar Asad did not consider that Syria has a need for support by ground forces.

"In fact, the Russian Aerospace Forces have been very effective and efficient over the past year and a half, a little more, in supporting the Syrian army, and everyone knows that since this support began in 2015, the balance has changed and we have been able return Palmyra, and Aleppo, and many other areas, and we were able to defend Ham recently, it was a huge and well-organized attack, but we were able to repel it, - he said in an interview RIA News". “Therefore, this support was very effective, and, of course, we must not forget the effective support on the ground of the Iranians, they did not send troops, but with their officers, with their advisers, they played a very important role. Therefore, I do not think that now there is a need for ground forces. Sometimes, when intense attacks are taking place on different fronts, as you mentioned, north, east, south, and in the middle, (since — Ed.) Russian missiles attack from the sea. Russian strategic bombers from the territory of Russia attacked (objects of terrorists. - Ed.) In Syria. So, military support, Russian military support is not limited to their base in Syria. In fact, they are aware of the need for fighting, the situation is constantly changing, but the troops on the ground up to this point are not needed. Maybe in the future, if our enemies and their supporters, their terrorists, their henchmen, change their strategy and bring more terrorists from all over the world and there will be full armies of terrorists by this moment, it may be necessary, but at this moment I will not I consider it necessary. What was done is good and sufficient. ”

According to Alexander Shumilin, director of the Center for Analysis of Middle East Conflicts at the Institute of the USA and Canada, whose opinion leads Utro.ru, the official introduction of Russian troops into Syria is unlikely, since in this case you will have to “enter the clinch” with the United States and Europe. And the Kremlin has no reason to worsen the already cool relations with Washington.

However, it cannot be excluded that Moscow can supply Damascus with additional military equipment, the newspaper notes. Chairman of the Federation Council Committee on Defense and Security Viktor Ozerov said that Moscow can supply Damascus with the necessary air defense systems if an agreement is reached.

As for the United States in Syria, then the Americans (with whom, in the event of which, they will have to “enter the clinch”) cannot win this war.

This point of view was voiced by journal observers. "National Interest"recently returned from Syria.

In their opinion, Washington’s policy toward Syria has been a “failure” for the past six years. It is time for Washington to use the new strategy.

Also, journalists believe that this conflict can not be resolved on some "external" conditions: the Syrians must fight themselves and conquer their own future. And nothing else, because "the Syrian civil war ... is like the heads of the Lernean hydra, fighting each other."

There are also “external” players: Qatar, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, the United States — with their conflicting interests in the region — are participating in the Syrian war in one way or another.

Conclusion: military force from the outside will not help. The solution to the problem can only be found within the country.

Second conclusion: Washington should recognize that a change of government in Syria is a losing strategy, and it "does not work." Her time to "throw out."

* * *


Thus, the land operation of the Russian Federation in Syria is hardly possible for a number of reasons. First, Bashar Asad himself does not believe that such an operation is now appropriate. Secondly, there is a great risk of facing the troops of the western coalition led by the United States. Third, Moscow prefers to supply and demonstrate effective weapons, rather than arrange a “second Afghanistan” for itself.

Observed and commented on Oleg Chuvakin
- especially for topwar.ru
101 comment
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Mystery12345
    Mystery12345 April 27 2017 05: 41
    +14
    Thus, the land operation of the Russian Federation in Syria is hardly possible for a number of reasons
    . mainly because it will not give anything, it’s a swamp, it will stink for decades, it’s just a training ground for everyone, the Syria that used to be, calm and prosperous, will no longer be ...
    1. Olgovich
      Olgovich April 27 2017 08: 58
      +12
      Russian special forces are fighting there, military police are serving, and sappers are also. There are shooting instructors.
      Maybe this is a land-based operation.
      You can find another word, yes ......
      1. Forest
        Forest April 27 2017 13: 44
        0
        Quote: Olgovich
        Russian special forces are fighting there, military police are serving, and sappers are also. There are shooting instructors.
        Maybe this is a land-based operation.
        You can find another word, yes ......

        An operation is a full-scale attraction of all available funds. The VKS have been tested with us in general everything that exists, except perhaps the MiG-31.
        1. Kolya
          Kolya April 27 2017 20: 09
          +3
          Russia's actions in Syria are paid from the budget of Russia. The goods are advertised, from the promotion of which to the world arms market, pockets of individuals are stuffed and this money is usually withdrawn from Russia. All that Russia receives is the “optimized” taxes of such companies in offshore, the meager salaries of employees, and the infusion of money into these companies in the form of state aid, again from the budget. That is, there is a cut of money from the budget of Russia from all sides. Are there enough advantages to cover the disadvantages? Obviously that's not enough. Russia does not need this adventure in Syria. Yes, the West is the main gangster on this scene. But there are also many questions regarding Kremlin policy in Syria. China is many times more powerful than Russia, but nevertheless it is more occupied with order in its home.
          1. nakhtigalsif
            nakhtigalsif April 28 2017 06: 19
            0
            Quote: Kohl
            Russia's actions in Syria are paid from the budget of Russia. The goods are advertised, from the promotion of which to the world arms market, pockets of individuals are stuffed and this money is usually withdrawn from Russia. All that Russia receives is the “optimized” taxes of such companies in offshore, the meager salaries of employees, and the infusion of money into these companies in the form of state aid, again from the budget. That is, there is a cut of money from the budget of Russia from all sides. Are there enough advantages to cover the disadvantages? Obviously that's not enough. Russia does not need this adventure in Syria. Yes, the West is the main gangster on this scene. But there are also many questions regarding Kremlin policy in Syria. China is many times more powerful than Russia, but nevertheless it is more occupied with order in its home.

            Yes, you, Kolya, are direct experts in everything related to corruption (cutting the budget) and foreign policy in general and in Syria in particular.
            Have you ever analyzed the situation as a whole? I'm sure not. All your attempts at broadcasting all-roundly revolve around you personally and do not extend beyond the sofa and TV.
            I will give an example of Palmyra-2. Who will say that the surrender of the city to the bearded was not under control? None. But it can be assumed that the bearded were allowed to do this, and then they wrapped their entrails on the tracks. And maybe it didn’t work out that way. Maybe it was necessary to lure someone standing out of the den, so they launched such an operation, soaked him in the outhouse and regained control of the city. We can only speculate here, and perhaps some of them will be true, but we will not know. Therefore, putting your guesses on the same level with the truth, the minimum is not correct.
            About the cut and corruption. Moscow was not built in a day.
      2. Windoffields
        Windoffields April 27 2017 13: 56
        +2
        it’s worth adding our PMCs there, more than up to a lot. This is not the army of the Russian Federation, but these are Russian soldiers. This is ours. And who did you take Aleppo !? ) I think that Aleppo and some regular parts of ours were taken. As well as a number of other "Palmyr". Assad’s troops weren’t even able to take his close 4 years!
      3. Alekseev
        Alekseev April 27 2017 18: 48
        0
        Quote: Olgovich
        Maybe this is a land-based operation.
        You can find another word, yes ......

        That's right!
        Another, word, however, is necessary.
        For, in military terms, an operation is a "form of warfare operational (operational-strategic) associations of armed forces set of coordinated and interconnected goals, tasks, place, time of strikes, maneuvers, battles and battles heterogeneous troopswhich are carried out simultaneously and sequentially in accordance with a single plan and plan for solving problems at the theater of war or theater of war, strategic or operational direction (in a specific zone, area) in a specified period of time.
        And the union, also in the military, is not even a division, but an army. yes
        I hope now the difference between what Russian sappers, special forces, the military police and the real military operation are doing is clear.
        Even our aviation conducts battles there (strikes) on a regiment scale, but does not conduct an air operation.
        Does it make sense to expand military assistance, i.e. to start this very operation? It’s hard to say ...
        Already, persistent rumors are circulating that some irresponsible Syrian military almost require the VKS to first destroy all the barmales, and only then they will go on the attack, and if not, they can "escape" into the "free army" at the hands of the Saudis and Turks , in "nusra" or, in the best scenario, to visit Mrs. Merkel. request
        Political reconciliation is necessary, and possibly the federalization (division) of Syria.
      4. For your motherland, your mother))
        For your motherland, your mother)) April 27 2017 22: 54
        0
        Maybe this is not a ground operation, but the participation of special forces groups (there was a report on RTR), the military police, heroically dying aircraft guides, military instructors definitely does not make it possible to call the operation a sea :))).
        1. For your motherland, your mother))
          For your motherland, your mother)) April 27 2017 23: 03
          0
          In general, I hope that Putin has not forgotten yet that the main goal for which he entered Syria was to divert world attention from the Donbass, which in turn was cynical (but pragmatic) to distract from the Crimea. The focus, in general, was a success: no one remembers the Crimea, few people in the world still remember the Donbass :))).

          Now the main thing for Putin every night at night is to repeat to himself what was what, otherwise he risks confusing it. I have a hope that he still remembers what and why;))).
    2. A1845
      A1845 April 27 2017 09: 28
      +3
      Quote: Mystery12345
      it won’t give anything, it’s a swamp, it will stink for decades

      who just didn’t step on this rake .. No.
    3. siberalt
      siberalt April 27 2017 09: 28
      +4
      Let the Arabs understand each other, and this is for a long time. We should have Israel and Turkey not shot in the back.
      1. Windoffields
        Windoffields April 27 2017 13: 58
        0
        but we, unfortunately, have already climbed in there ...
      2. silver_roman
        silver_roman April 27 2017 14: 32
        0
        for this you need to have the willpower to give in the teeth, but wisely. They shot down the dryer, I personally completely agreed with the position of the Kremlin, not to be provoked, but in the future, a step to the left, a step to the right - shooting without warning.
        And reading the news, something Erdogan began to drive again.
    4. ligre
      ligre April 27 2017 13: 59
      +2
      It’s enough to get up early in the mornings and insert your comments first, people will figure it out without you, otherwise you don’t go everywhere with your opinion of poor quality, and it’s even disgusting to look at your attitude to life, you have nothing more to do.
      1. cost
        cost April 27 2017 19: 56
        +1
        Will Russia start a ground operation in Syria?

        A headline such as "Why Russia sold Alaska, and did not start a land operation there against the Anglo-Saxons." The funny thing is that the answers to both questions will be the same hi
  2. Walking
    Walking April 27 2017 05: 47
    +4
    Equipment and ammunition can be supplied, but ground forces should not be massively introduced.
    1. Greg Miller
      Greg Miller April 27 2017 12: 18
      +1
      I agree, the second Afghanistan of Russia is useless ....
    2. Windoffields
      Windoffields April 27 2017 14: 00
      +2
      Yeah ... They didn’t massively enter Afghanistan either. It was a drop from the Soviet Army. By the way, they didn’t introduce it in vain - even if you got into it, you had to enter at least 300 thousand to end the Afghan war.
    3. 34 region
      34 region April 27 2017 15: 12
      +1
      05.47. On foot Ground forces will not enter there. The meaning of entering them there? Grind into minced meat? Special forces will certainly be. Gain experience. They will show their capabilities to our dearly beloved partners (you look and they will bite your tongue a bit). But the war in Syria is generally bespontovy. The rear of the enemy does not crush. Weapons to the militants both went and goes. recruits both went and go. And in such a way this war will go on indefinitely.
  3. marmalade
    marmalade April 27 2017 06: 19
    0
    this was still not enough ...... if they introduce victims, they will make money to anyone unnecessary and even if something happens, they will “wipe themselves away with tomatoes” .... thank you am
    1. Semen Semyonitch
      Semen Semyonitch April 27 2017 06: 52
      +3
      Quote: Marmalade
      if they introduce victims will earn

      Strange somehow broadcasting ... you, whose "will be?
      1. Stirbjorn
        Stirbjorn April 27 2017 09: 12
        +3
        Quote: Semyon Semyonich
        Strange somehow broadcasting ... you, whose "will be?

        What's so strange ?! - the president said quite clearly
  4. sa-ag
    sa-ag April 27 2017 06: 41
    +8
    "... Russia withdrew about half of its aviation group from the Khmeimim base in Syria. According to the representative of the Russian Ministry of Defense Sergey Rudsky, this is due to a reduction in the number of terrorist groups in Syria." Https://www.gazeta.ru/army/2017/ 04/26/106
    46111.shtml # page1

    It is unlikely that a ground operation can be organized without reliable air cover, Assad will still merge smoothly, the electorate will create the proper background - “we did not promise them anything”, or in general from the media any mention will disappear as if it did not exist
  5. The comment was deleted.
    1. Stirbjorn
      Stirbjorn April 27 2017 11: 33
      +1
      Quote: Aleks713
      In fact, the war in Syria is a real and very valuable training for the Russian Armed Forces before a possible and increasingly likely military clash between Russia and the West. By participating in it, our army, aviation and navy gain experience, moral and psychological hardening and a margin of safety for the future.
      in Afghanistan, too, experience gained invaluable, 10 years of the whole ... maybe it’s better to train in the Donbass, your own people
    2. dmitry.kashkaryow
      dmitry.kashkaryow April 27 2017 13: 50
      +2
      For some reason, no one sees the motive of the Russian president’s policy in Syria lying on the surface. There are no eternal leaders, but in order for Syria to remain a state loyal to Russia for a long time, it is desirable to have a population in Syria, which for the most part, would trust Russia's actions. Then the leader will be loyal if Uncle Sam fails to slander and slander everything! This situation can be achieved only by long painstaking work and constant assistance to the existing Syrian state. Cowboy attacks and cavalry attacks can bring success in a single battle, but in war they do not bring success.
      1. Windoffields
        Windoffields April 27 2017 14: 06
        +2
        and therefore we support Assad, i.e. Alawite minority in Syria. Something roughly 10% of the population. Moreover, the combat-ready part of this minority - those who are ready to fight - has already perished.
        And the Syrian state in the form as it was will never be. Syria is now divided into 4 countries in fact.
        1. IS-80_RVGK2
          IS-80_RVGK2 April 28 2017 08: 49
          0
          Quote: WindofFields
          and therefore we support Assad, i.e. Alawite minority in Syria.

          We support the President of Syria in the first place, the legally elected, and we are trying to help the people of Syria come to a nominal solution to their problems. Or are you for these inadequacies from the so-called opposition?
          Quote: WindofFields
          And the Syrian state in the form as it was will never be. Syria is now divided into 4 countries in fact.

          Even if it would be better, let it be decided by a legal referendum and the whole people will decide, and not a bunch of thugs.
    3. 34 region
      34 region April 27 2017 15: 26
      0
      06.47. Alex! An interesting comment. But the only thing there is probably not so much in the army as in geopolitical interests. The purpose of the army is not war, but to uphold the interests of their country. And maybe we in Syria give slack. The neighbors have already come to share the booty and quietly hammer our ally. Or maybe he is not an ally to us, but a victim? Well, if we let him peck at our partners, then he is still a victim. What do we want in Syria? To control the territory through which the gas pipeline can be laid? Why not? This pipeline will compete with our Gazprom. Do we need this? So it turns out that we are there for a long time. As long as there is a war, they will not conduct a gas pipeline. What if the war ends? Then there will be territories belonging to the sponsors of these territories. And then, how will we negotiate with so many territory owners? It is clear that everything will not belong to one person. So everyone will have their share. Let's say five players. Each has a 20% share (profit). Or is such a scenario impossible?
  6. alex-cn
    alex-cn April 27 2017 07: 21
    +1
    In the 53rd USSR provided Korea with weapons, and China a million volunteers. Maybe here it’s about the same, Russia and Iran.
    But, actually, it may be worthwhile to slightly increase our contingent, a "demonstration of presence", but without participating in hostilities, in order to cool some hot heads.
    1. Zhuk18
      Zhuk18 April 27 2017 07: 42
      +8
      And what was the result in Korea? Where did Kim Il Sung start the war, exactly in the same place it ended. So there is actually something to think about.
      1. alex-cn
        alex-cn April 27 2017 07: 45
        +3
        And there would be no such help, there would be no North Korea
        1. Zhuk18
          Zhuk18 April 27 2017 08: 59
          +7
          And why is this? Nobody attacked the DPRK, Kim attacked. And the fact that they saved Kim Il Sung from defeat is unlikely that there is something positive. There would be a united Korea with a sane leadership, the standard of living is the same as today in Kazakhstan, and there would be no constant hemorrhoids.
          1. alex-cn
            alex-cn April 27 2017 09: 49
            0
            There was simply nothing Western to interfere in, in essence, a civil war. What kind of Korea would there be, the matter is different ...
            1. Zhuk18
              Zhuk18 April 27 2017 11: 46
              +4
              Then Russia should not have got into the civil war in Syria? What else would Syria have been there ... By the way, the intervention of the United States (and its allies) in the Korean conflict was decided by the UN Security Council if they did not know.
              1. sabakina
                sabakina April 27 2017 13: 21
                +3
                Do not tell me the number of the UN resolution?
                1. Zhuk18
                  Zhuk18 April 27 2017 14: 14
                  0
                  Okay, I’ll take a look.
                  1. Zhuk18
                    Zhuk18 April 27 2017 14: 23
                    +3
                    He looked - this is UN Security Council resolution number 83 of June 27, 1950.
          2. Nyrobsky
            Nyrobsky April 27 2017 13: 44
            +2
            Quote: Zhuk18
            And why is this? Nobody attacked the DPRK, Kim attacked. And the fact that they saved Kim Il Sung from defeat is unlikely that there is something positive. There would be a united Korea with a sane leadership, the standard of living is the same as today in Kazakhstan, and there would be no constant hemorrhoids.

            Eh ..... Well, when the issue of recognizing Israel was being decided, the United States and Great Britain were clearly not on the side of Israel. Only the position of I.V. Stalin and the USSR played the most important role in this matter. Well, probably it wasn’t necessary. There would be no Turks with the Golan Heights, Palestinian settlements, filth in Syria, butts with Lebanon and Iran. You look and the world would be in B. Vostok. And there would not be this constant hemorrhoids.
            1. Zhuk18
              Zhuk18 April 28 2017 02: 28
              0
              There would be a permanent fight between the Sunnis and Shiites in this place. They are very fond of finding out which of us is their tru-Muslim. And so there is an island of civilization in the wild BV.
          3. Windoffields
            Windoffields April 27 2017 14: 09
            +1
            write nonsense. Sane leadership in South Korea appeared only in the mid-90s, and only when the United States ceased to be needed military power in South Korea. Until then, to consider him sane is absurd. By the way, BEFORE the war in South Korea was shot, about 200 thousand people were shot.
            1. Zhuk18
              Zhuk18 April 28 2017 02: 31
              0
              You bent it. Already in the early 80s, the Juche appeared in all its glory, and the RK sharply rushed forward. As a result, the DPRK slipped into absolute UG, and today the RK are leaders in world progress.
              1. svp67
                svp67 April 28 2017 05: 06
                0
                Quote: Zhuk18
                Already in the early 80s, Juche manifested itself in all its "glory", and the Republic of Kazakhstan sharply rushed forward.

                Do you know that the ideology of the RK is called JUKHESon? And its content is not only in name consonant
          4. IS-80_RVGK2
            IS-80_RVGK2 April 28 2017 08: 35
            0
            Quote: Zhuk18
            There would be a united Korea with sane leadership, the standard of living is the same as today in the Republic of Kazakhstan, and there would not be this constant hemorrhoids.

            There would be a stronger enemy on our borders. Do we need this?
  7. Sirocco
    Sirocco April 27 2017 08: 03
    0
    Also, journalists believe that this conflict can not be resolved on some "external" conditions: the Syrians must fight themselves and conquer their own future. And nothing else, because "the Syrian civil war ... is like the heads of the Lernean hydra, fighting each other."

    This is where the truth lies, the truth in defending the homeland, and not fleeing to warm places in the EU, for a free life, both in Syria and Ukraine, it is very similar, people do not defend their future in their own country, but flee for the bright and a warm future, albeit over the hill, so apparently the man is built.
    And about ichtamnets, on our part, they are not there on the part of the EU and the USA, the SA and Qatar, Turkey, Israel, there is nobody there, but somehow the watchdogs began to fight in flip flops.
    Well, in the end, the most important thing is why this is not desirable for the Russian Federation.
    Moscow prefers to supply and demonstrate effective weapons, rather than arrange a "second Afghanistan."
    1. Zhuk18
      Zhuk18 April 28 2017 02: 39
      0
      The Syrians are not interested in the "Defense of the Homeland" because the Assad regime does not like the absolute majority there and does not see a particular prospect. Therefore, they prefer to bring it far away to Europe. There are definitely no Israeli ones about the "ichtamnets". Only yellow garbage sheets like " Veterans Today "and agencies regularly throwing fakes, such as the Iranian FARS, counting on the absolute lamer and the complete ignorance of their adherents in these matters. They have already taken prisoners and" Israeli instructors in Aleppo, and even the whole Israeli general in Iraq ":)))
  8. bandabas
    bandabas April 27 2017 08: 09
    +4
    And a complete silence about the source of ukropiteksky infection in the abdomen of Russia in the south-west.
  9. aszzz888
    aszzz888 April 27 2017 08: 20
    0
    “This is also due to the effective use of our weapons in real combat conditions, including in the anti-terrorist operation in Syria,” the president’s agency quotes.


    ... the mericatos have already erased their teeth for powder, it’s like hot oil on their heads ... laughing
    1. Zhuk18
      Zhuk18 April 28 2017 02: 43
      0
      In fact, the "mericatos" just quite successfully fight precisely with the IS in Iraq, which is already almost freed from the IS.
  10. rotmistr60
    rotmistr60 April 27 2017 08: 50
    +1
    (Arabic edition with a London residence permit)

    And at once for some reason all questions to the one who wrote this disappear.
  11. The comment was deleted.
  12. Stirbjorn
    Stirbjorn April 27 2017 09: 14
    +1
    According to President Putin, the effectiveness of Russian weapons in Syria has led to an increase in arms exports. Interest in Russian weapons in the world is growing.
    If only interest - real contracts are not visible, which somehow can be attributed to the demonstration in Syria. C-400 is not for China
  13. Kenneth
    Kenneth April 27 2017 09: 22
    +2
    Assad seems to need to start eating more carefully. And look under the legs more often.
  14. novel66
    novel66 April 27 2017 09: 46
    +3
    if you enter the contingent, it’s all in vkraina, and contact the Arabs ....
    1. Windoffields
      Windoffields April 27 2017 14: 13
      +2
      +1000. This Syria did not bother us. Especially when we are killing Russian people in the Donbass. And as Shapiro does not flood with the nightingale - this does not change the essence. In the Donbass, Russians are being killed, and they are rubbing us about some kind of Syria.
  15. Heimdall__48
    Heimdall__48 April 27 2017 10: 19
    +3
    I believe that if it is itching for our government to preserve Syria as an ally, then it is possible to send parts formed on religious and ethnic grounds from representatives of the North Caucasus. And people will have something to do with it and Syria will benefit and, in which case, there will not be much damage to Russia - that is, where the pluses do not spit everywhere.
    1. Windoffields
      Windoffields April 27 2017 14: 14
      0
      One problem. Alawites (i.e. Assad forces), many Muslims DO NOT consider Muslims.
      1. Heimdall__48
        Heimdall__48 April 27 2017 14: 29
        0
        Those. Do you think that if you send Nokhchi battalions there, they will begin to conflict with the Syrian government army? It seems to me that the main thing is to take them away from Russia, and that they will already do the tenth thing there. The main thing is not to bring back))
  16. Zaurbek
    Zaurbek April 27 2017 10: 22
    +1
    The most effective is to take the Syrians, create brigades from them on our territory (train, arm and feed) according to our standards and send them back to fight with our support from advisers and aviation and intelligence (maybe special forces). Such ideas were long ago, but Assad and the Iranians are afraid of losing control of the military.
    1. Glory1974
      Glory1974 April 27 2017 11: 50
      +1
      The most effective is to take the Syrians, create brigades from them

      So they do. Formed and trained the whole building. In all parts there are our advisers. Aviation and special forces help. The only cook in Syrian territory.
      1. Zaurbek
        Zaurbek April 27 2017 11: 58
        0
        ... the Syrians should have an understandable structure for us in management and efficiency.
        1. Glory1974
          Glory1974 April 27 2017 12: 44
          +1
          the Syrians should have a structure that is clear to us on management and efficiency

          The Syrians have an army organized in our likeness, officers are trained in our military schools, our equipment. So there are no problems.
          The problem is the presence of personnel, promotion to team positions by abilities.
    2. YGV-97219
      YGV-97219 April 27 2017 12: 29
      +1
      And what kind of drag them to Russia when the same thing can be done and is being done in Syria!
      1. Zaurbek
        Zaurbek April 27 2017 12: 33
        0
        Because here all this can be worked out peacefully at the training grounds and calmly put into their heads and send the combat ready to fight. Not necessarily in the Russian Federation, it is possible in Kazakhstan, Armenia. There, by the way, there are many Armenians and Kurds. It is entirely possible to create ethnic military units with command from our Armenians or Kurds.
        1. Zymran
          Zymran April 28 2017 12: 12
          0
          Quote: Zaurbek
          Not necessarily in the Russian Federation, it is possible in Kazakhstan, Armenia. There, by the way, there are many Armenians and Kurds. It is entirely possible to create ethnic military units with command from our Armenians or Kurds.


          Yeah, and Kazakhstan has signed up to train terrorists.
          1. Zaurbek
            Zaurbek April 29 2017 14: 08
            0
            This is the trouble. As for the ass will take the CIS countries so immediately Russia. And how to participate, everyone looks into his pocket. There are few Kazakhs in ISIS?
            1. Zymran
              Zymran April 29 2017 14: 42
              0
              Quote: Zaurbek
              This is the trouble. As for the ass will take the CIS countries so immediately Russia. And how to participate, everyone looks into his pocket. There are few Kazakhs in ISIS?


              Officially about 300 people, including children and women. Why do we need to expose our country to the attack of international terrorists, getting into their conflict in the Middle East? The Russian Federation climbed in - received terrorist attacks in the subway, why do we need it?
              1. IS-80_RVGK2
                IS-80_RVGK2 April 29 2017 15: 09
                0
                Quote: Zymran
                The Russian Federation climbed in - received terrorist attacks in the subway, why do we need it?

                In order not to get Libya, Iraq, Syria and Afghanistan in Kazakhstan later. But for Kazakh small-town nationalists, this is a very complicated idea so that they can think about it.
                1. Zymran
                  Zymran April 29 2017 15: 38
                  0
                  Quote: IS-80_RVGK2
                  In order not to get Libya, Iraq, Syria and Afghanistan in Kazakhstan later. But for Kazakh small-town nationalists, this is a very complicated idea so that they can think about it.


                  Russian imperial paranoids are not aware that in Syria and without Kazakhstan they are fighting ISIS quite successfully (you believe in the statements of your media), so Kazakhstan’s participation there is superfluous and can only put the country under the blow of world terrorism.
                  Instead, Kazakhstan imposes strict control over religious movements in the country, imprisons terrorists returning from Syria, and does not allow the propaganda of extremism. Although, of course, it would be best to fight the social base of terrorism, i.e. with the reason why young people turn to extremist movements.
                  1. IS-80_RVGK2
                    IS-80_RVGK2 April 29 2017 16: 35
                    0
                    Quote: Zymran
                    Russian imperial paranoids are not aware that in Syria and without Kazakhstan they are fighting ISIS quite successfully (you believe in the statements of your media), so Kazakhstan’s participation there is superfluous and can only put the country under the blow of world terrorism.

                    With the help of Kazakhstan, the struggle would be even more successful. But the Central Asian Ukrainians pose as a Chinese monkey sitting on a palm tree near the river and waiting for the tiger corpse to swim by. What will happen if he does not swim or if the remaining tigers come for the monkey, the monkey carefully does not want to think.
                    Quote: Zymran
                    Instead, Kazakhstan imposes strict control over religious movements in the country, imprisons terrorists returning from Syria, and does not allow the propaganda of extremism.

                    This all of course must be done, but the treatment of symptoms in itself for some reason never leads to recovery.
                    Quote: Zymran
                    Although, of course, it would be best to fight the social base of terrorism, i.e. with the reason why young people turn to extremist movements.

                    For this, it is necessary to close within the borders of Kazakhstan and ignore the problems of others? Extremely dubious point of view.
                    1. Zymran
                      Zymran April 29 2017 16: 38
                      0
                      Quote: IS-80_RVGK2
                      With the help of Kazakhstan, the struggle would be even more successful. But the Central Asian Ukrainians pose as a Chinese monkey sitting on a palm tree near the river and waiting for the tiger corpse to swim by. What will happen if he does not swim or if the remaining tigers come for the monkey, the monkey carefully does not want to think.


                      That's just funny. Kazakhstan's participation can only be a symbolic contribution. Well, send our battalion of soldiers - the same battalion can send the Russians or ethnic forces. And nothing one Kazakh battalion will decide.

                      Quote: IS-80_RVGK2
                      This all of course must be done, but the treatment of symptoms in itself for some reason never leads to recovery.


                      I say that the main fertile soil on which terrorism is growing is the poverty and ignorance of the people. This is what we must fight first of all.

                      Quote: IS-80_RVGK2
                      For this, it is necessary to close within the borders of Kazakhstan and ignore the problems of others? Extremely dubious point of view.


                      It is certainly not necessary to send troops to Syria or train the Syrian opposition.
                      But you ask Kasym. He will surely say that ours are already there, just a military secret. laughing
                      1. IS-80_RVGK2
                        IS-80_RVGK2 April 29 2017 17: 45
                        0
                        Quote: Zymran
                        That's just funny. Kazakhstan's participation can only be a symbolic contribution. Well, send our battalion of soldiers - the same battalion can send the Russians or ethnic forces. And nothing one Kazakh battalion will decide.

                        It’s like someone. On the contrary, I’m sad. From all of this. From the fact that everyone is for himself.
                        Quote: Zymran
                        I say that the main fertile soil on which terrorism is growing is the poverty and ignorance of the people. This is what we must fight first of all.

                        I see how the struggle against poverty and ignorance is going on throughout the territory of the former USSR. Success, frankly speaking, is not very. Even in many ways the opposite.
                        Quote: Zymran
                        It is certainly not necessary to send troops to Syria or train the Syrian opposition.

                        Your hut from the edge, of course. Only then if you don’t cry.
    3. den3080
      den3080 April 27 2017 12: 53
      +1
      so it will be and has been successfully going on for many years with other representatives of Asian countries in Russia.
      a team of janitors from Tajikistan, a team of masons from Kyrgyzstan, a team of garment workers from Vietnam, a team of plumbers from Turkey.
      experience is wassat
    4. Windoffields
      Windoffields April 27 2017 14: 19
      0
      you just forgot about the main problem of the Assad army - he did not have people left. Physically no more. There are simply no people! Nowhere to take the Syrians for Assad’s army. These are not all of his problems - the BIG part of his army, now and for a long time, can only stand. Just stand by. And with the sound of a shot, she can only retreat. Zero motivation. Therefore, our Iranians, hezbollahs are fighting there, and the miserable remnants of the combat-ready parts of Assad, of which there are very, very few left.
      1. Zaurbek
        Zaurbek April 27 2017 14: 24
        0
        Yes, but the army is fighting in Syria and there has been no mobilization ... doesn’t it seem strange to you? Since there are few people, the more they need to be trained and equipped.
  17. vlad007
    vlad007 April 27 2017 12: 31
    +1
    1. There is a civil war in Syria. Without a political settlement, no ground operation will have any effect. You can destroy the alien gangsters, but what to do with the armed opposition?
    2. Our aircraft confirmed their high combat level, but in the development and use of UAVs, we are seriously behind even China.
    1. Glory1974
      Glory1974 April 27 2017 12: 41
      +1
      but in the development and use of UAVs, we are seriously behind even China.

      In development, it may be lagging behind, but not in application. In Syria, about 80 UAVs are used. And where does China apply?
    2. Zaurbek
      Zaurbek April 27 2017 12: 46
      0
      First, cut off the armed opposition from the border with Turkey, then bomb the same.
      1. Windoffields
        Windoffields April 27 2017 14: 27
        0
        you think correctly, but you forgot that for this you need to fight with ... Turkey. If you try to cut off the border with Turkey, the Turks will start to fight. By the way, Turkish troops have long been in Syria. In many key places on this border.
        1. Zaurbek
          Zaurbek April 27 2017 14: 30
          0
          As the classics said: Colt and the Good word are always better than just a good word. There are many levers of influence on the Turks and their creation of problems.
  18. Maz
    Maz April 27 2017 12: 31
    +2
    What is it to boil water, let the Israelis carry out a land operation, but they cannot overthrow Assad and secure the Golan, and we do not have land borders with Syria.
  19. serega.fedotov
    serega.fedotov April 27 2017 12: 45
    +1
    It is strange to listen to "experts" claiming the absence of the United States goal in the east. The goal is simple as a nail without a hat, chaos and a war of all with all, but not crossing certain borders (so that the number of slaves is not reduced)
    When war, you need a lot of money, more oil is sold, more oil is sold, lower price, lower price, more US profit (despite oil being imported, oil is shale) The same applies to arms trade and food (when the war is not before production)
    In my opinion, if the United States has a goal to seize Syria, it will be captured, but there is no special reason for us to start World War 3 because of Syria, only the United States will only lose from the capture of Syria, and the Crimea, if everything becomes really bad, can repeat Crimea, and the Americans won’t be able to to do! Moreover, the "Syrian Crimea" will be completely legitimate.
    Therefore, the division deployed to "guard our bases" will not surprise me at all, but there will be no sense in engaging in clashes between these "guards", because if Assad can cope on his own, they will not be needed, if not cope all the more!
  20. garnik
    garnik April 27 2017 13: 24
    +2
    I think Assad has repeatedly asked for help in the land operation of the Russian troops. This will not happen. Russia (power), (damn how often you need to separate these two words in topics.) Essentially invited the Turks to Syria with their silence. Once again, they will surrender Syria , the maximum under control will be Latakia and maybe even Damascus. And Idlib is under the Turks. And what not to surrender, they will pay.
  21. andrew xnumx
    andrew xnumx April 27 2017 13: 27
    0
    In general, everything is correct. We do not need a second Afghanistan and the land operation is dangerous for many reasons. But to create a powerful base near Damascus, on the basis of a large unit of attack helicopters, for which runways are not needed, may and may be necessary. Also place on this base a serious special forces unit. Not for military operations but for covering the capital from the south. Since a strike from Jordan is possible. This will allow part of the Syrian troops to use in other directions.
  22. demo
    demo April 27 2017 13: 37
    +3
    There are also “external” players: Qatar, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, the United States — with their conflicting interests in the region — are participating in the Syrian war in one way or another.
    Conclusion: military force from the outside will not help. The solution to the problem can only be found within the country.

    Two sentences contain contradictions to each other.
    If there are external “players” interested in destabilization, then why should solutions be sought internally?
    Kind of weird.
  23. Volksib
    Volksib April 27 2017 13: 50
    +2
    ISIS has a lot of educated erudite people, a lot of young people who are easy to recruit and psychological processing. Syria is both a training ground and a meat grinder for processing unwanted human capital, it is beneficial for the authorities to leave the so-called buzzers in the sands of Syria. How to improve the socio-economic situation in the country .And the question of the pipe from Qatar to Europe for the so-called national treasure is acute. Therefore, the recycling site in Syria will work for a long time
  24. bratchanin3
    bratchanin3 April 27 2017 14: 02
    +1
    Dear Oleg, in his conclusions is not right. Civil war is started and fueled from outside and inside this war is not solvable without external "players". When this outer pack occupies the Syrian regions and territories, it will be difficult (impossible) to get them out of there, it is easier now to occupy all energy-bearing regions and protect them from external intervention. The participation of our special forces in Syria is not Afghanistan, but practical skills in the new conditions. Special Forces must fight!
  25. Viktor is the winner
    Viktor is the winner April 27 2017 15: 30
    +1
    If we merge Syria into an already small country (not counting Israel and Palestine), or leaving most of it only the coast of the Mediterranean, then why do we need a military base in a weak country, it is even possible in the future to change the leadership of this country to pro-American and we will be asked to leave from Syria. It is necessary that in Syria there would be a leader loyal to our country, and Syria within its former borders, which would allow controlling trade flows, etc. Otherwise, why did we get into this conflict, spend money, time, and life — to advertise our military-industrial complex and work on living targets? Of course, a large stratum of interests, and especially property, power that they hide from us, behind the 7th seals, they have a greater influence on decision-making in the ATS conflict and other conflicts.
    1. Zhuk18
      Zhuk18 April 28 2017 02: 53
      0
      It was time for the Russian leadership to understand that maintaining bases in Syria as a last resort to maintain influence on the BV was not worth the damage and expenses that were incurred. Moreover, it is absolutely unclear how to get out of all this. At the same time, the operation was initially positioned solely as a struggle with the IG under the pretext that otherwise it would immediately be in Russia.
  26. Tektor
    Tektor April 27 2017 16: 32
    0
    I would like to have developed an operation to protect the territory of Syria using any and sufficient minimum forces. Any - means that there is no restriction on the choice of funds.
    First of all, I would like to see our robotic tools in battle, including the robot operator Fedor controlling some kind of prodigy (T-14, for example, either Mi-28NM, or Coalition-SV). As well as combat equipment Warrior with the Sagittarius subsystem.
    The second - Tornado-S with high-precision missiles. Especially - with cluster warheads with new tricky mines.
    In the third - our hidden weapons systems, such as a pulsed explosive magnetic generator of different power. Perhaps in the form of warheads on the Tornado-S.
  27. SHOCK.
    SHOCK. April 27 2017 17: 57
    0
    I don’t know about the special forces, but I read a lot about PMCs operating in Syria. I think they don’t lie.
  28. ANDRE - LATVIA
    ANDRE - LATVIA April 27 2017 18: 45
    0
    To send Russian ground forces into Syria now, when Syria is completely confused - it is being bombed, except for the Russian air force, which is legally present there, and the American coalition, and the Turks, and the Israelis mean risking the lives of thousands of Russian soldiers. First in the sky you need to restore order. And, if it is fraught with the Americans to whip, then several Turkish and Israeli flyers from the sky are simply necessary to be lowered. As they say, "for nefig" as in an enemy country to wield. The Israeli lobby in the Kremlin has completely beguiled the shores, Russia is being held for its slaves. And with Erdogan no affairs can be had in principle. This psychopath is not able to think in terms of not only long-term, but also short benefits. How many times has he declared Assad a "bloody tyrant to be overthrown"? Then, after running around the Kremlin, he gritted his teeth that he was misunderstood, but that he was missing for a short while. Hope to build through Turkey "Turkish Stream" can only complete. This means to strengthen its dependence on when the harness again falls under his tail. Thrown money, in short.
    So first you need to at least put smaller participants into the stall, and only then talk about the land operation.
  29. Holoy
    Holoy April 27 2017 20: 02
    0
    I think that 8 BTG is quite enough ...
  30. Farid05
    Farid05 April 27 2017 20: 28
    0
    The whole question is for what?
  31. Petrol cutter
    Petrol cutter April 27 2017 22: 27
    +1
    Thirdly, Moscow prefers to supply and demonstrate effective weapons, rather than arrange a “second Afghanistan”.
    That is the glory of God.
  32. iouris
    iouris April 28 2017 11: 24
    0
    Quote: Thus, the land operation of the Russian Federation in Syria is hardly possible for a number of reasons. The end of the quote.
    Napoleon: "General, why is Toulon not taken?"
    General: "First, there were no cores ..."
    Napoleon: "Enough" First "."
  33. dedboris30
    dedboris30 April 28 2017 16: 24
    +1
    The introduction of a large number of ground forces into Syria is an option to get bogged down in this war for a very long time, but we do not need it at all.
  34. A. Privalov
    A. Privalov April 28 2017 22: 47
    +3
    Oh, don't! Sorry for the guys.
  35. Zymran
    Zymran April 29 2017 18: 00
    0
    Quote: IS-80_RVGK2
    It’s like someone. On the contrary, I’m sad. From all of this. From the fact that everyone is for himself.


    Once again, Kazakhstan’s participation there is not required. They wanted the Russian Federation to get into the Syrian conflict - they didn’t ask us. Cooperation with us in the fight against terrorism is quite fruitful. Now, if you had not yet allowed millions of Gaster to come to you, or at least you could control them, it would be generally wonderful.

    I see how the struggle against poverty and ignorance is going on throughout the territory of the former USSR. Success, frankly speaking, is not very. Even in many ways the opposite.


    Your truth. Fair distribution of income, social elevators, etc. we don’t have, and you don’t think much better.

    Your hut from the edge, of course. Only then if you don’t cry.


    Enough already? You blurted out stupidity about the need for Kazakhstan to participate in the Syrian conflict, now you can’t calm down, although you probably no worse understand that Russia’s help to Kazakhstan in Syria is like a father’s bag of potatoes. Probably on the contrary, it will be calmer for you if everything in Kazakhstan is quiet without explosions of civilians and any battalions of Imam Shamil.
    1. IS-80_RVGK2
      IS-80_RVGK2 April 30 2017 00: 36
      0
      Quote: Zymran
      They wanted the Russian Federation to get into the Syrian conflict - they didn’t ask us.

      Did we have a choice?
      Quote: Zymran
      Cooperation with us in the fight against terrorism is quite fruitful. Now, if you had not yet allowed millions of Gaster to come to you, or at least you could control them, it would be generally wonderful.

      It would be even better not to break the country into independent principalities, so that later there would not be all these problems that we now have. Stupidity is very expensive ..
      Quote: Zymran
      Your truth. Fair distribution of income, social elevators, etc. we don’t have, and you don’t think much better.

      No, not better.
      Quote: Zymran
      Enough already? You blurted out stupidity about the need for Kazakhstan to participate in the Syrian conflict, now you can’t calm down, although you probably no worse understand that Russia’s help to Kazakhstan in Syria is like a father’s bag of potatoes.

      You know, a lot of things also seemed to me stupid, but partly it passed with age. laughing
  36. Atlant-1164
    Atlant-1164 April 29 2017 19: 19
    +2
    Do not categorically introduce troops. Strict VKS and Navy. Caliber, FAB. etc. everything is remote.
  37. Natalia777
    Natalia777 April 30 2017 13: 35
    0
    There will be no Russian land operations in Syria. Moreover, even in the most difficult times they were not there. So why now carry out ground operations when it comes to victory?
  38. Alexey-74
    Alexey-74 5 May 2017 14: 16
    0
    This is not necessary yet. To arm and train the Syrians is quite possible .... well, the Russian Federation should help Syria with American "friends," Turkish and others .........
  39. The comment was deleted.