Military Review

Syrian Foreign Minister: Damascus will receive Russian air defense systems C-300

128
Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Moallem said that in the near future, Syria will receive from Russia anti-aircraft missile systems C-300.

Syrian Foreign Minister: Damascus will receive Russian air defense systems C-300


"We will get them (complexes) and other quality weapon within a reasonable time, ”RIA quotes him. "News".

The Foreign Minister noted that the deliveries were delayed a bit because of a number of bureaucratic formalities. He also stressed that the decision to purchase C-300 was made in connection with the fears of the Syrian authorities about the plans of the American President Barack Obama.

“We realize that Obama, because of internal reasons, wants to avoid a war with Syria and is limited to air strikes against the Islamic State. We do not know how Obama will behave under increasing pressure, so we need to prepare. (...) We asked them (the Russian Federation) ... to supply us with high-quality weapons, ”he said.

Earlier, Russia said that shipments of C-300 to Damascus were suspended.

23 September The United States and the Allied countries began to inflict airstrikes on the positions of militants "Islamic State" in Syria, a similar operation in Iraq takes place in August. At the same time, the United States does not have permission from the Syrian authorities.
Photos used:
http://ria.ru/
128 comments
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. Stanislav 1978
    Stanislav 1978 7 November 2014 09: 30
    +32
    If this is not another duck, then good. But until I hear the official response of Russia, indicating the terms, I will not believe it.
    1. Civil
      Civil 7 November 2014 09: 34
      -73
      Why Syria s-300? More precisely, the piece that controls Assad
      1. Stanislav 1978
        Stanislav 1978 7 November 2014 09: 43
        +36
        Quote: Civil
        Why Syria s-300? More precisely, the piece that controls Assad

        NATO aviation at the moment, under the guise of IS bombing, carries oil and gas fields in Syria. If there will be S-300s in Syria, then NATO will seriously think whether it is worth the risk.
        1. Alexander Romanov
          Alexander Romanov 7 November 2014 09: 45
          +14
          Quote: Stanislav 1978
          If there will be S-300s in Syria, then NATO will seriously think whether it is worth the risk.

          If necessary, these C 300 will be smashed to pieces. There is no global air defense and the C 300 will not change the situation.
          1. alex-s
            alex-s 7 November 2014 09: 47
            +16
            Why Syria s-300? More precisely, the piece that controls Assad

            To make this piece bigger!
            1. Andrea
              Andrea 7 November 2014 10: 21
              +3
              Honestly, just take it, which means why you need it.
              And by and large it would not hurt the Arabs to buy skills and fighting spirit. (Remember the war with Israel, have they learned something since then?).
              1. Dreamwriter
                Dreamwriter 7 November 2014 13: 47
                +4
                It is precisely the Syrians who are fighting, perhaps, the best among all Arabs (in the same war with Israel, it was the Syrians who inflicted heavy losses on the Jews, and if Israel definitely defeated in the battle with Egypt or other Arab countries, the situation on the Syrian front was closer to stalemate). Because at one time the USSR not only supplied them weapons, but also built universities, hospitals, schools, and trained specialists - including in military affairs.
            2. Alexander Romanov
              Alexander Romanov 7 November 2014 11: 32
              0
              Quote: alex-s
              To make this piece bigger!

              Yeah, you’re probably going to beat 300 fighters with yes
          2. Ezhaak
            Ezhaak 7 November 2014 09: 52
            +10
            Quote: Alexander Romanov
            these C 300 will be smashed to pieces.

            It is likely that this will happen. But if the Syrians manage to destroy one invisible bomber, penguins can calm down. Not completely, but partially.
            1. Natalia
              Natalia 7 November 2014 09: 59
              -1
              Quote: Hedgehog
              But if the Syrians manage to destroy one invisible bomber, penguins can calm down. Not completely, but partially.

              It will be great and final stupidity. Maybe the last ....
              The argument is that the states begin to openly blame Assad.

              Tomahawk missiles, without risk to personnel, and after 12 hours there will be neither S-300 nor Assad regime

              Only one plus winked
              Then we will have an argument to send troops to Ukraine. And roll out tanks the whole pro-European idea, and jumping generation)
              1. kolyhalovs
                kolyhalovs 7 November 2014 10: 10
                +17
                Tomahawk missiles, without risk to personnel, and after 12 hours there will be neither S-300 nor Assad regime


                Do you really think such an option is possible?

                Now everything is fluidly balancing on the brink of the outbreak of world war. Everyone is very afraid of a clash between NATO and Russia, because it can only be nuclear. And then those here - tomahawks left and right! And for what? Assad. Pffff ...
                1. Natalia
                  Natalia 7 November 2014 10: 24
                  -5
                  Quote: kolyhalovs
                  Everyone is very afraid of a clash between NATO and Russia

                  Do not be afraid of nuclear war - be afraid of its consequences. winked

                  Quote: kolyhalovs
                  for what? Assad. Pffff ...

                  Not Pffffff, but oil through Syria - this is precisely why Washington drove into Assad from the very beginning.

                  Quote: kolyhalovs
                  And then those here - tomahawks left and right!

                  And what can someone ban Americans? winked
                  Just don’t say that Russia. Russia can ban only if they shoot at it, and Russia cannot ban the shooting at other Russia.

                  In this regard, Russia may, well, say ....... express deep concern. winked
                  Russia is certainly a powerful country, but not omnipotent.
                  The states are more powerful so far, and they can do something (almost everything) without asking permission from Russia.
                  1. aleks 62
                    aleks 62 7 November 2014 11: 24
                    -2
                    You forgot about "Kuzkin's mother" ..... Not so long ago, China threatened to use its "Chinese Kuzkin mother" Amers if they intervene in the showdown between China and Taiwan, so I remember the Americans quickly and puffed up ... So puffing out (Ameram) cheeks won't help ...
                    1. Alexander Romanov
                      Alexander Romanov 7 November 2014 11: 35
                      +1
                      Quote: aleks 62
                      You forgot about "kuzka's mother" ...

                      Give me this mother’s phone number, I want to call.
                      Quote: aleks 62
                      So cheating (Amer) will not help .....

                      URRRRAAAAAAAAAAA
                  2. Nyrobsky
                    Nyrobsky 7 November 2014 12: 03
                    +3
                    Quote: kolyhalovs
                    And for what? Assad. Pffff ...

                    Quite an exhaustive "Pffff" !!! Assad, as a goal - in this alignment of forces, already belongs to the category when the dividends received by the United States from his defeat will be negligible. Something like this.
                    If they had hit him a year and a half ago, they would have been in courage.
                    Today, they need to take into account not only Russia's interest in the region, but also Iran.
                    In addition, the mattresses managed to spoil relations with Israel, which had previously been a staunch opponent of the appearance of the S-300 on Syrian territory, and now does not express protest about this.
                    In addition to everything, Saudi Arabia understands the approaching collapse of the petrodollar system and the threat to its industries, which are posed by American hawks, who are bombing the "terrorist attack" with one hand and, on the other hand, encouraging them to trade in oil for nothing, which in fact undermines the interests of other oil players in this region.
                  3. kolyhalovs
                    kolyhalovs 7 November 2014 12: 45
                    +3
                    Not Pffffff, but oil through Syria


                    And what is stopping them now under the auspices of the fight against ISIS to enter Syria and stay there, controlling almost half of Syria and the Tomahawks will save and offend the Americans not the Assad regime, according to which everything is agreed and no one will show anything. And oil areas under the Yankees. All the way. Try squeezing them out of there. And so Assad has a chance, as it were, to hint that we can handle it ourselves.

                    And what can someone ban Americans?
                    Just don’t say that Russia.


                    Well, I kind of already wrote the answer to this question. And this answer is "fear". Okay, I'll try in more detail. You yourself wrote

                    Then we will have an argument to send troops to Ukraine.


                    They are tomahawks across Syria - no Assad.
                    We are tanks in Ukraine - there is no Ukraine.
                    They decide to deploy nuclear weapons in the Baltic states.
                    We are tanks in the Baltic states - there are no Baltic states.
                    They are...
                    We...
                    ...
                    They ... - there is no Russia.
                    We ... - no USA.

                    "Smoked" climbs out of the bunker, looks at all this and thinks "What was there at the beginning? Assad. Ugh, you bl-dh ..."

                    Now the world is somewhat different than in the time of Milosevic. Americans now also fearfully.
                    1. Natalia
                      Natalia 7 November 2014 14: 00
                      +1
                      Quote: kolyhalovs
                      Americans are also scared now.

                      Yeah, very lol )))))
                      Quote: kolyhalovs
                      And what is stopping them now under the auspices of the fight against ISIS to enter Syria and stay there,

                      Che doesn’t interfere, but you will see how it will be winked
                      1. Alexander Romanov
                        Alexander Romanov 7 November 2014 14: 10
                        0
                        Quote: Natalia
                        Yeah, very

                        Obama hid under the table laughing
                      2. kolyhalovs
                        kolyhalovs 7 November 2014 14: 59
                        +2
                        I am sure that if the generals come to Obama and say "Huseynich, even such a mess has happened here ... In short, nuclear missiles are flying at us ...", he will not only disassemble the parquet flooring and hammer into the cracks.

                        Like, in fact, I, and you, and everything in the world.
                      3. Natalia
                        Natalia 7 November 2014 15: 45
                        0
                        Quote: kolyhalovs
                        I am sure that if the generals come to Obama and say "Huseynich, even such a mess has happened here ... In short, nuclear missiles are flying at us ...", he will not only disassemble the parquet flooring and hammer into the cracks.

                        naive ..... Obama doesn’t solve anything, and please note didn’t decide. The whole government decides consisting of the heads of major banks and corporations. And no generals can go anywhere without an invitation.
                      4. kolyhalovs
                        kolyhalovs 7 November 2014 22: 45
                        -1
                        ..has a hat with a sable, doesn’t wring it to anyone and doesn’t understand jokes either.


                        Words need to be understood in context. And accordingly interpret them. You have difficulty with this. You generally talk about something that was not even close in my words. Now, if you don’t put a smiley on people, then everything is a khan.
                      5. kolyhalovs
                        kolyhalovs 7 November 2014 14: 47
                        +1
                        I do not really understand you, so I’ll ask. Why haven't they bombed Assad yet? All the possibilities are there. How do you think?
                      6. Natalia
                        Natalia 7 November 2014 15: 46
                        +1
                        Quote: kolyhalovs
                        Why haven't they bombed Assad yet? All the possibilities are there. How do you think?

                        But just waiting for just such a moment, the fight against ISIS, everything is purely on their part. Assad will fall under this comb.
                      7. kolyhalovs
                        kolyhalovs 7 November 2014 21: 28
                        +1
                        They escalated. Pumped up. Pumped up. They also pumped it up. Assad is evil! Assad mast give! God forbid Assad will use chemical weapons, then we will smash it into pieces! Assad used chemical weapons (at least the United States recognized this). Well, we need to agree, Obama said, our friend Putin will help us build bridges with Assad.

                        Examiner, silent scene.
                        USA and AGREEMENT!?!?!? They kicked all the doors everywhere!

                        But then you know that he simply calculated two hundred moves forward. KPO (Obama’s cunning plan) somehow turns out. In fact, then, according to the logic of the actual American line of behavior, Assad should have been endured as other objectionable. So why not endure?

                        They are afraid. Not Obama in his life, of course. A loss. The world has changed. The USA cannot now dictate its will with no losses guaranteed. And the magnitude of these possible losses for the United States is inflated to the skies. Everything has become more complicated and therefore no one will throw tomahawks at Assad. We have to come up with such complex schemes as IS. But Assad, too, will not sit and pick his nose. And the United States will have to sweat more than once and rewrite the HPO, trying to replay it. Analysts in the United States sit and think: "Oh, how great it was these twenty-five years. Someone fumbled? A club in the head and no problem. And now I have to work again."

                        Good luck to you! I went.
                      8. Natalia
                        Natalia 7 November 2014 22: 06
                        -1
                        Quote: kolyhalovs
                        The world has changed. The US can no longer guarantee guaranteed dictation of its will without loss.

                        lol ))) Lol.
                        Quote: kolyhalovs
                        Good luck to you! I went.

                        That the pants are already wet. Well, I do not hold back tada)))
                      9. kolyhalovs
                        kolyhalovs 7 November 2014 22: 30
                        0
                        Smiley and insults. I see you have nothing to answer. Why didn’t Assad come up with a bomb? Or will you still drive the blizzard?
                      10. Gluxar_
                        Gluxar_ 8 November 2014 04: 12
                        0
                        Quote: kolyhalovs
                        They are afraid. Not Obama for his life, of course. A loss. The world has changed. The US can no longer guarantee guaranteed dictation of its will without loss. And the magnitude of these possible losses for the United States is inflated to heaven. Everything has become more complicated and therefore no one will throw Tomahawks at Assad.

                        And this is only with weak attention from the Russian Federation. If you add Iran and China ... the United States profiled its chance in the late 90s.
                    2. Gluxar_
                      Gluxar_ 8 November 2014 04: 09
                      0
                      Quote: kolyhalovs
                      And what is stopping them now under the auspices of the fight against ISIS to enter Syria and stay there, controlling almost half of Syria and the Tomahawks will save and offend the Americans not the Assad regime, according to which everything is agreed and no one will show anything. And oil areas under the Yankees. All the way. Try squeezing them out of there. And so Assad has a chance, as it were, to hint that we can handle it ourselves.

                      Lack of strength for such an action. How can the US enter at least somewhere? They barely carry their feet out of Afghanistan. They still lacked Syria and Iraq again. In Iraq, as many as 3 soldiers were gathered. Useless then? Such a group will be smeared in two weeks if it snoops into Syria.
                  4. Gluxar_
                    Gluxar_ 8 November 2014 04: 06
                    0
                    Quote: Natalia
                    And what can someone ban Americans?
                    Just don’t say that Russia. Russia can ban only if they shoot at it, and Russia cannot ban the shooting at other Russia.

                    A year ago, the United States banned the bombing of Syria. Everything has already gone to this ... but the exercises of the Russian Navy have a little restrained the ardor of Americans. Since then, Russia's position has only strengthened, and the United States has less and less instruments of pressure on the Russian Federation.
                    So since 2011, Syria has been holding on to and grinding the entire US potential in "soft power."
                2. Alexander Romanov
                  Alexander Romanov 7 November 2014 11: 33
                  0
                  Quote: kolyhalovs

                  Now everything is fluidly balancing on the brink of the outbreak of world war

                  So someone needs it hi
                  1. kolyhalovs
                    kolyhalovs 7 November 2014 12: 59
                    +2
                    I really hope that someone no more. hi
                3. g1v2
                  g1v2 7 November 2014 12: 02
                  -3
                  Syria is not a member of the Collective Security Treaty Organization or the SCO or the CU there, so we obviously will not get involved in the war. World War 3 will not start. Of course, we have interests in Syria, but obviously not such as to start a war with amers. Once we had already fluttered like that a century ago, when we climbed into a meat grinder because of the Serbs, but I hope this will not happen the second time. If the Americans, for example, offer to exchange Syria for Dill and promise to turn a blind eye to any of our possible actions in Ukraine, then I will be the first to say that the deal is profitable.
                  1. Gluxar_
                    Gluxar_ 8 November 2014 04: 16
                    0
                    Quote: g1v2
                    . World War 3 will not start. Of course, we have interests in Syria, but obviously not such as to start a war with amers

                    Syria is a local target. no one will start a big war because of her. The article is about another. Russia will deliver long-range air defense systems, under a contract signed before this bloody roundabout. As well as helicopters and shells and much more. This transaction has already been paid and it is beneficial for us to complete it. We benefit and load our factories, Syria has a safe sky, the USA has a lot of problems in their plans to overthrow Assad. Everything is in profit, there is no war.
                4. just exp
                  just exp 7 November 2014 14: 25
                  0
                  Russia will not fight with Nata over Syria, the maximum that they supply weapons.
                  and the Syrians themselves do not have full air defense, and some air defense systems will endure for doing fucking.
                  1. Gluxar_
                    Gluxar_ 8 November 2014 04: 18
                    0
                    Quote: just explo
                    Russia will not fight with Nata over Syria, the maximum that they supply weapons.
                    and the Syrians themselves do not have full air defense, and some air defense systems will endure for doing fucking.

                    In Syria, there is an air defense system capable of repelling any aggression. Not the whole country is covered, and therefore buy what is needed. S-300 just for that and needed. There are shells, if necessary, there will be more of them. So this is the process of building Syrian air defense and should not be disturbed. It won’t work right away, but now the S-300, then the S-400 and the beeches with shells ... you’ll look at one more safe country on the planet.
              2. Tiksi-3
                Tiksi-3 7 November 2014 10: 30
                +4
                Quote: Natalia
                Tomahawk missiles, without risk to personnel, and after 12 hours there will be neither S-300 nor Assad regime

                you can familiarize yourself with this conclusion (on the basis of which you are so deeply mistaken) do you have data on the number of axes capable of destroying a c300 battery in one salvo? axes are very powerless ... here aviation is another matter ... but axes by no means ... c300 is fast-moving so axes don’t roll ..... special forces can destroy it ..
                1. aksakal
                  aksakal 7 November 2014 10: 54
                  +7
                  Quote: Tiksi-3
                  you can familiarize yourself with this conclusion (on the basis of which you are so deeply mistaken) do you have data on the number of axes capable of destroying a c300 battery in one salvo? axes are very powerless ... here aviation is another matter ... but axes not at all ... c300 is fast-moving so axes don’t roll ..... special forces can destroy

                  - if they use the newest axes, which is unlikely, then yes, these newest ones can change target designation during the flight. And the old axes, firstly, really fly like axes, do not maneuver and the speed is low, and they get lost at once. I don’t think that there are such military experts in Syria that they think we’ll get the S-300, and that’s a panacea! In theory, they should understand that these S-300s need to be integrated with each other into a single control network, and linked into echelons with the existing "Pantsir". Axes and harams (anti-radar missiles) are shot down by the Pantsir, protecting the S-300 crew, while the S-300 itself is engaged in production of larger ones - the same aircraft. Then there will be an effect. And again, the Syrians should be aware that even having created such a coherent and echeloned air defense system, they will not be able to fully defend themselves, even if Russia helps with information about launches of smoles and missiles (remember, Russia has already proved that it is able to see everything starting in the Mediterranean ), but will cause good damage to enemy aircraft. I think that the Syrians are betting on the possibility of inflicting this damage, that the Americans will count, weep and will do without direct military intervention. After all, it is necessary to consider not only direct damage from the loss of aircraft, much greater damage will be indirect. This year, the United States sold 34 lard worth of weapons, Russia has a decline this year - only 10 lard. According to the results of the aircraft shot down in Syria, it may very well be that the sales of the American "superweapon" will fall, and may fall several times, but this is already lard, and not tens of millions of direct losses from aircraft losses. The myth of the invincibility of American weapons is based mainly on the fact that they did not collide with new Russian weapons, but killed the Papuans with machine guns and drven tanks. It is quite obvious that Russia would benefit from such an indirect conflict with the United States, where it would be possible to show in real time that such a gap of 3,4 times between the level of arms sales between the United States and Russia does not at all reflect real possibilities.
                  1. aleks 62
                    aleks 62 7 November 2014 11: 32
                    +2
                    You forgot to indicate that the height of the ax is 40-50m, and this is within the limits of the possibility of the same s-300 ... Against axes at close distances, the old "Tunguska" also works very well - it was created against them ...
                2. Natalia
                  Natalia 7 November 2014 10: 55
                  -4
                  Quote: Tiksi-3
                  you can familiarize yourself with this conclusion (on the basis of which you are so deeply mistaken) do you have data on the number of axes capable of destroying a c300 battery in one salvo?

                  Sure, not a problem:
                  The carrier groupings always include URO class destroyers, Frigates - who have the BGM-109 Tomahawk in their arsenal, well, we are talking about the sea-based Sea-Launched Cruise Missile, and there is the AGM / RGM / UGM-84 Harpoon. Both can strike at ground targets.
                  The distance from the carrier group to the S-300 is about 400-415 km.
                  Ax and Harpoon's flight speed is about 1000 km / h
                  The coagulation time of the S-300 complex is 20-25 minutes.
                  And the speed on the march does not exceed 60 km. Axes can just gouge the S-300 on the march. This is a cruise missile, do not forget.

                  But as you see there are enough destroyers and frigates there, axes can also be carried by nuclear submarines, but how many are their supply?

                  S-300 in this case simply will not survive.
                  The USA has vast experience in using axes on air defense facilities, Iraq, Yugoslavia - it all works very well, and gives results, significant results.
                  1. GRAY
                    GRAY 7 November 2014 11: 09
                    +2
                    Quote: Natalia
                    Axes can just gouge the S-300 on the march.

                    Axes cannot move targets. Harpoon SLAM is likely too. Amers more missile weapons sharpened infrastructure.
                    1. Natalia
                      Natalia 7 November 2014 11: 18
                      0
                      Quote: GRAY
                      Axes cannot into moving targets

                      you do not have the correct info ....
                      Raytheon (RTN) has successfully tested the passive homing head (GOS) for the Tomahawk cruise missile (CR) in the “Block IV” version (Tomahawk Block IV), created with its own funds for research and experimental design work. winked

                      Testing of an active GSN created with Reiteon funds with a new processor in the head compartment of the Tomahawk Kyrgyz Republic. This test will demonstrate the ability of the processor to provide an active GOS, as well as the reception of electromagnetic signals from the target in passive mode, which will allow the cruise missile to strike moving sea and land targets.

                      wink
                      1. GRAY
                        GRAY 7 November 2014 11: 43
                        +3
                        Quote: Natalia
                        Raytheon (RTN) has successfully tested the passive homing head (GOS) for the Tomahawk cruise missile in the “block IV” version

                        They conducted tests only this year, and yet we need to shake the headstock out of Congress and take it into service. That's when the rearmament will be carried out then and it will be possible to talk about new opportunities.
                      2. just exp
                        just exp 7 November 2014 14: 32
                        0
                        Yes, they’re unlikely to put it, they made a bet on the UAB for moving purposes.
                      3. just exp
                        just exp 7 November 2014 14: 31
                        0
                        this is not in the troops, in addition, on the march, air defense systems should be protected by the same tungusks, which work well with axes
                        I'm not talking about the fact that the S-300 must still be tracked, but this is not as simple as it seems. and even the S-300 in stationary positions is protected from such goals, if there are funds that work according to the HARMs, which are significantly less and much faster than axes.
                  2. aksakal
                    aksakal 7 November 2014 11: 16
                    +4
                    Quote: Natalia
                    And the speed on the march does not exceed 60 km. Axes can just gouge the S-300 on the march. This is a cruise missile, do not forget.

                    Dear, axes do not hit moving targets, they are stupid. There are the latest modifications, but they have just begun to produce and re-equip Amer strike groups, so it is unlikely that these newest will be in Syria. On the march? Well, the rules of tactics, such as camouflage, radio silence and other things of self-rescue, have not been canceled. Making those dummies - here you are writing:
                    Quote: Natalia
                    Yugoslavia - it all works very well

                    - Yes, it was the land military of Yugoslavia that almost did not suffer losses due to dummies! Read the hit results summary! There are mostly civilian objects, including the Chinese Embassy, ​​but the landmen simply laughed at these attacks. It’s just that Yugoslavia, more precisely, the leadership of Yugoslavia, considered that its population does not deserve the hardships that Ukrainians are waiting for this winter, that this is not worth Kosovo, that’s why they gave up. Despite the fact that the Army practically did not suffer any losses from airstrikes. And they could zombie the population and rest against the horn - I would then see how it is
                    Quote: Natalia
                    works
                    . The Americans would have come to the need for a ground operation - and there they are waiting for the practically unscathed army of Serbia. Silent scene - sailed.
                    1. Natalia
                      Natalia 7 November 2014 11: 19
                      -4
                      Quote: aksakal
                      Dear, axes do not hit moving targets,


                      Shche Odyn umik ..... winked
                      Raytheon (RTN) has successfully tested the passive homing head (GOS) for the Tomahawk cruise missile (CR) in the “Block IV” version (Tomahawk Block IV), created with its own funds for research and experimental design work. winked

                      Testing of an active GSN created with Reiteon funds with a new processor in the head compartment of the Tomahawk Kyrgyz Republic. This test will demonstrate the ability of the processor to operate an active GOS, as well as receiving electromagnetic signals from the target in passive mode, which will allow the cruise missile to strike on moving sea and land targets.
                      1. aksakal
                        aksakal 7 November 2014 11: 50
                        +4
                        Natalia, I quote my quote again:
                        Quote: aksakal
                        There are the latest modifications, but they have just begun to produce and re-equip Amer strike groups, so it is unlikely that these newest will be in Syria.
                        - I am aware of these missiles, but I immediately posted that they will not be in Syria. Why? Do you understand that there is a time lag between "successfully tested" and "all units are equipped with this successfully tested"? And what is this lag - at best it is measured in a few years, and more often - a good ten years passes - in the course? Check it out.
                        And yet - if anything, that same laser on Boeing was repeatedly "successfully tested" and even shot down something there. Where is that laser? This does not mean that between "successfully tested"
                        and the real adoption of the armament can still arise circumstances? We read - "at own expense"? That is, the Pentagon did not come to Rytheon on its knees and did not ask to modify the axes, you say? So, on the contrary, Raytheon still needs to sell it to the Pentagon. Will it work? So a request, well, just a request - well, stop passing what you see as valid. And what about
                        Quote: Natalia
                        Well, Syria can’t measure by pipes with America, well, completely different weight categories. This is generally few people can do. And even if we take into account the valor of the defenders of Syria.
                        - Yes, such a task is not set by Syria. The task is to frighten the States with the possibility of causing unacceptable damage, in other words, to die - so with the music! and this is a real and attainable goal. If every country does this, then the United States will quickly ward off the desire to act like this in the world
                      2. Natalia
                        Natalia 7 November 2014 14: 05
                        0
                        Quote: aksakal
                        simply put - to die - so with the music!

                        Well, they will die with music, but many Americans will die there, but when did it stop the States?

                        Do you know what Republicans think about this?
                        - Shit happens you know

                        The main thing is that the goal will be achieved. Syria will not be able to scare the United States today or tomorrow. And if the United States decides, then it means they will decide so, and here ..... request

                        In addition, the Arabs agreed, remember, to pay the military company against Assad to the last cartridge. Seductive wink
                  3. Tiksi-3
                    Tiksi-3 7 November 2014 11: 26
                    +1
                    Quote: Natalia
                    And the speed on the march does not exceed 60 km. Axes can just gouge the S-300 on the march

                    ktozh topram will give TsU when s300 on the march ????
                    1. Natalia
                      Natalia 7 November 2014 11: 35
                      +1
                      Quote: GRAY
                      Axes cannot move targets. Harpoon SLAM is likely too. Amers more missile weapons sharpened infrastructure.

                      Quote: Tiksi-3
                      you can familiarize yourself with this conclusion (on the basis of which you are so deeply mistaken) do you have data on the number of axes capable of destroying a c300 battery in one salvo?

                      Quote: aksakal
                      . The Americans would have come to the need for a ground operation - and there they will find the almost unscathed army of Serbia.


                      I apologize for my french ....
                      Well, Syria can’t measure by pipes with America, well, completely different weight categories. This is generally few people can do.
                      And even if we take into account the valor of the defenders of Syria.

                      And myths you can tell only if you want to amuse yourself.
                      And the stories about the Americans knocking off a couple of planes and they get scared and run away is a myth.
                      Yugoslavia squeezed and squeezed. And no matter how heroic the Serbs fought the finale is known.
                      1. nelson
                        nelson 7 November 2014 12: 15
                        +2
                        Well, Syria can’t measure by pipes with America, well, completely different weight categories.
                        And how long has this "cannot" been going on? Take a look at the calendar. Russia, in my opinion, did not refuse its support for Syria.
                      2. Natalia
                        Natalia 7 November 2014 12: 28
                        +1
                        Quote: nelson
                        And how long has this "cannot" been going on? Take a look at the calendar. Russia, in my opinion, did not refuse its support for Syria.


                        No dear, you are mistaken.

                        If the States decide to bomb Assad, Russia will not start a nuclear war. She will allow to bomb Syria. Alternative forms of support are possible - it is possible, yes. With regards to direct confrontation over Syria-this is nonsense.

                        Just like the States will not start a nuclear war if, say, Russia sends troops to Ukraine.

                        So that Russia does not supply, whatever weapon ....... in case of direct aggression of the USA, it (Syria) does not save it, it just delay the inevitable for a couple of hours, yes. And that’s it.
                      3. just exp
                        just exp 7 November 2014 14: 35
                        +1
                        here I agree, in addition, I admit the idea that the execution of the Americans with a needle is a CIA staging to give the Amers a chance to bomb the territory of Syria, now they just mentally prepare everyone, and then I can start the land.
                    2. Alexander Romanov
                      Alexander Romanov 7 November 2014 11: 39
                      0
                      Quote: Tiksi-3
                      ktozh topram will give TsU when s300 on the march ????

                      You really consider the amers to be dupaks, or you don’t have enough of the armies of Iraq and Libya distributed by them. Budey must be destroyed and they won’t ask.
                      Enough to push the slogans, and then over many posts in this subject in the Pentagon have already broken their bellies.
                  4. aleks 62
                    aleks 62 7 November 2014 11: 34
                    0
                    .... In Yugoslavia there was no S-300, although they very much asked Russia to deliver them ..... If such complexes were available, I think the Amer’s agility would be reduced ...
                3. Alexander Romanov
                  Alexander Romanov 7 November 2014 11: 36
                  +1
                  Quote: Tiksi-3
                  ) Do you have data on the number of axes capable of destroying a c300 battery in one salvo?

                  On one boat there are 148 of them, a bunch more on kreiseraz, plus aviation can destroy them without entering the air defense access zone. Any other questions?
                  1. Dry_T-50
                    Dry_T-50 9 November 2014 18: 55
                    0
                    Quote: Alexander Romanov
                    On the same boat their 148

                    154 hi
              3. Ezhaak
                Ezhaak 7 November 2014 10: 41
                +4
                Quote: Natalia
                Tomahawk rockets, no risk to personnel

                And why not the Minutemen? A couple of pieces to Syria, and there is neither Assad nor S-300 with crews. The coverage will be full in area and the oil and gas will be completely penguin.
                Quote: Natalia
                Then we will have an argument to send troops to Ukraine.

                But I would categorically refrain from this! However, how many people, so many opinions. love
              4. aleks 62
                aleks 62 7 November 2014 11: 19
                0
                ...... Here it is just imprisoned for Tomogavk missiles ..... And also for something (meaning carriers) .... Do you really think that Assad does not have short-range air defense ????
                1. Alexander Romanov
                  Alexander Romanov 7 November 2014 11: 40
                  +2
                  Quote: aleks 62
                  . Do you really think that Assad does not have close air defense ????

                  Skrlko, once Israel bombed Syria, show at least one downed Israeli plane or rocket.
                2. Natalia
                  Natalia 7 November 2014 12: 36
                  +3
                  Quote: aleks 62
                  ..... Here it is just imprisoned for Tomogavk missiles ..... And also for something (meaning carriers) .... Do you really think that Assad does not have short-range air defense ????


                  Suppose Syria knocks down every hit-and-kill ax.
                  Well, the S-300 ended its missile defense, and then what?
                  The United States has significantly more axes. They stupidly cast Syria.

                  And this is provided that the Syrian arrows are well trained.
                  1. Natalia
                    Natalia 7 November 2014 13: 09
                    +1
                    But the most interesting thing is that here no one has any doubt that the Syrian air defense will be suppressed in the end.

                    And just further, the most interesting .......... rather terrible
                    Although for none (for Americans) it’s fun.
                    Tons of democracy.

                    And this is not necessarily the B-52, it can be anything, the F-18 (they are also deck-based), the F-22 that they experience there ..... well, in short, the most diverse possibilities, in conditions of completely suppressed Syrian air defense.
                  2. just exp
                    just exp 7 November 2014 14: 37
                    0
                    the number of tomahawks is also not very large, the emnip is a little more than a thousand.
                    and not only the S-300 can beat them.
                    but if the Butch begins, then the states will crush Syria anyway.
              5. Sergei1982
                Sergei1982 7 November 2014 13: 31
                0
                [quote = Natalia] [quote = Hedgehog]
                And roll out the tanks the whole pro-European idea, and jumping generation) [/ quote] I liked the phrase so that the great Ukrainians felt what the Russian army is.
              6. just exp
                just exp 7 November 2014 14: 24
                0
                I generally think that Putin does not send troops to Ukraine in exchange for the fact that 3.14ndos will not bomb Syria.
                and xs why but Syria is considered a fucking important globally.
              7. Yeraz
                Yeraz 7 November 2014 22: 57
                0
                Quote: Natalia
                Then we will have an argument to send troops to Ukraine.

                Russia did not reach the level to capture Ukraine and yet control this vast territory and huge population. Even with total superiority, the Americans, too, were very tough when they started to settle there.
                Keeping things is not easy. Especially the territory where the local population will not be very different from the intruders and this further complicates the situation.
              8. Gluxar_
                Gluxar_ 8 November 2014 04: 03
                -2
                Quote: Natalia
                It will be great and final stupidity. Maybe the last ....
                The argument is that the states begin to openly blame Assad.

                Tomahawk missiles, without risk to personnel, and after 12 hours there will be neither S-300 nor Assad regime

                Only one plus
                Then we will have an argument to send troops to Ukraine. And roll out tanks the whole pro-European idea, and jumping generation)

                The cost of one tomahawk is 1 dollars. It goes astray without problems. How many tomahawks does the US have left there? And will there be enough of them after shelling Syria also on Iran?
                Shoot down an enemy aircraft over its territory is the legal right of any state. Moreover, it will even strengthen the authority of the Syrian authorities in the Arab world. Definitely need S-300 Syria. especially with trained crews.
                Once they let Obama smell the gunpowder, he will forget about Syria in an instant.
              9. Dry_T-50
                Dry_T-50 9 November 2014 19: 06
                0
                Quote: Natalia
                And roll out tanks the whole pro-European idea, and jumping generation)

                And for that, plus! love
          3. Natalia
            Natalia 7 November 2014 09: 57
            +3
            Quote: Alexander Romanov
            If necessary, these C 300 will be smashed to pieces. There is no global air defense and the C 300 will not change the situation.

            And I'm interested in another question winked

            Damascus will receive Russian air defense systems S-300

            Once again? lol )))))
            1. The Art of War
              The Art of War 7 November 2014 11: 22
              +1
              Once again your dad and general lol
            2. starpom
              starpom 7 November 2014 11: 43
              +4
              Quote: Natalia
              Once again?

              Then the question is: What continues to carry the Syrian Express?
              http://topwar.ru/61829-po-puti-v-akvatoriyu-chernogo-morya-amerikanskiy-esminec-
              ross-vstretilsya-s-rossiyskimi-bdk.html # comment-id-3580765
              1. g1v2
                g1v2 7 November 2014 12: 18
                +3
                I think our Syria is carrying really useful things for them - armored vehicles, artillery, communication systems, small arms, and so on. As far as I remember, the S300 was not sent to them but promised to be disposed of, although this is most likely an excuse and the S300 is either in storage or will pop up somewhere sooner or later. Well, about the fact that the air defense of Syria will be able to withstand amers, this is from the category of dreams. The United States has vast experience in overcoming air defense and complex air strikes, including Yugoslavia, Iraq, Libya, eloquently testify to this. To inflict significant damage on them, the air defense system must be correctly built and echeloned, but as I already wrote, even in this case it will not save the Israelis. Including the downing of an Amer plane for Syria will mean the end of an independent country. Well, Assad, we if we take out to ourselves, it’s not Gaddafi or Hussein, it’ll be useful.
          4. Tiksi-3
            Tiksi-3 7 November 2014 09: 59
            +6
            Quote: Alexander Romanov
            If necessary, these C 300 will be smashed to pieces. There is no global air defense and the C 300 will not change the situation.

            Well, at the same time, we must take into account that some part of the NATO flyers will not return home .... and the axes will not fly all .... but it’s like + tweaking the RF piggy bank ... well, it’s time to test the c300 in real actions. ... but it’s not clear what kind of modification there will be ...
            1. Stypor23
              Stypor23 7 November 2014 10: 02
              -5
              Quote: Tiksi-3
              Well, it must be borne in mind that some part of the NATO flyers will not return home.

              Allow me to add. And let's say these 10 destroyed planes will scare the lice to such an extent that they will have to fall back over the ocean.
              1. Tiksi-3
                Tiksi-3 7 November 2014 10: 32
                +2
                Yes...one the battery makes 10 decks and this is enough to sober up ... and if Assad has 20-40 batteries ?? ....
                1. Alexander Romanov
                  Alexander Romanov 7 November 2014 11: 42
                  +1
                  The forum of schoolchildren in the subject, whether it’s Valu Otsedova or Natalya, you’re going to argue, they will carry half of the US Air Force with this battery.
                  1. The Art of War
                    The Art of War 7 November 2014 12: 04
                    0
                    hi No namesake with one battery, battery -4 of the complex -16 missiles. The exact composition of the air defense armament has not been written, so there is no point in talking about it. Moreover, Iran helps Syria much more than we do, and Iran will help with a well-organized defense.
                  2. Natalia
                    Natalia 7 November 2014 12: 44
                    +1
                    Quote: Alexander Romanov
                    The forum of schoolchildren in the subject, whether it’s Valu Otsedova or Natalya, you’re going to argue, they will carry half of the US Air Force with this battery.

                    winked it seems like .....
                    And for schoolchildren twos.)))
                2. Alexander Romanov
                  Alexander Romanov 7 November 2014 13: 12
                  +2
                  Quote: Tiksi-3
                  yes ... one battery carries 10 decks

                  And where was that?
                  Quote: Tiksi-3
                  .and if Assad has 20-40 batteries ?? ....

                  But who puts such pluses to such posts, scream wassat
                  1. Natalia
                    Natalia 7 November 2014 14: 12
                    +2
                    Quote: Alexander Romanov
                    But who puts such pluses to such posts, scream

                    Yes, why 20-40 batteries, that ear PGRK RS-poplar immediately, what little things.

                    And here's a shorter listen on .... means
                    winked One RS-24 missile covers one aircraft carrier ...... laughing laughing laughing ))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) )))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
                    ...... and if Assad has 20-40 of them? laughing )))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) )))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))




                    ))))))))) uuuuuuu ......... scream.
                    10 seconds of laughter prolongs life lol ))
                    1. Alexander Romanov
                      Alexander Romanov 7 November 2014 14: 44
                      +1
                      Quote: Natalia
                      10 seconds of laughter prolongs life

                      Natalia, for today you’ve already extended it for a month already, look this way and until 200 years old you will run on the ground half-bent laughing
                      1. Natalia
                        Natalia 7 November 2014 15: 48
                        +1
                        Quote: Alexander Romanov
                        look this way and until 200 years you will run on the ground on bent

                        laughing Yes Yes ))))))
                      2. absurdity
                        absurdity 7 November 2014 18: 38
                        -1
                        Assad has been fighting for almost four years, surrounded by "friends" and no one can do anything with him.
                        And Natasha and Roma are making life for themselves here with a silly giggle: -
                        Yes, if America wants, but if you wish, hahaha, hehehe, axes with passive seekers, from 300 on the march, sixth fleet, blablabla ...
                        Well, from your posts real health grows. As if with 300 it's the anti-aircraft gun of the second world war. This is a complex, and they just don’t sell it like that, they sell it with knowledge and application tactics based not only on theoretical calculations, but also on intelligence from all the latest conflicts, their development options and results ... with supply, cover, guard, and rebuild systems , and so on and so forth and so on and so forth.
                      3. Natalia
                        Natalia 7 November 2014 19: 34
                        +1
                        Quote: Absurdidat
                        This is a complex

                        which is cut down by one hit of a harpoon.

                        And patriotism (by the way are not interesting to anyone) shove your false cheers into your ass. wink

                        Quote: Absurdidat
                        Assad has been fighting for almost four years, surrounded by "friends" and no one can do anything with him.

                        I'm not interested in what you think about this.
              2. aksakal
                aksakal 7 November 2014 11: 05
                +5
                Quote: Stypor23
                Quote: Tiksi-3
                Well, it must be borne in mind that some part of the NATO flyers will not return home.

                Allow me to add. And let's say these 10 destroyed planes will scare the lice to such an extent that they will have to fall back over the ocean.

                read my post above - no one, incl. both China and Russia do not set themselves the task of defeating the United States. The objective is to contain it through the potential for unacceptable harm. If Russia and China stand on that, then about Syria can be increased by 10 times - Syria certainly cannot set the task of defeating the United States. And for unacceptable damage, I also highlighted - these 10 aircraft are in total direct damage of 500 lima (50 lima per plane) + compensation to pilots, well, let lard. And the indirect damage from arms sales will amount to a much larger amount, and all these Boeings and Lockheeds simply cannot allow this to happen! So even 10 planes will be enough to destroy the myth of the "invincibility of American weapons", and this is already damage close to unacceptable. But I am sure the S-300, with a certain professionalism of both the managers responsible for the competent location of the crews and, in general, for organizing the air defense, and the combat crews themselves (it is difficult to say about the Syrians here) make much more "hornets".
            2. father nikon
              father nikon 7 November 2014 10: 20
              +2
              ..it’s just not clear what kind of modification there will be ...

              What to guess, export!
          5. kolyhalovs
            kolyhalovs 7 November 2014 10: 06
            +8
            When there was a war in 888, the Georgians won how many of our planes were shot down, including the Tu-22, until we "smashed" their radar to pieces. Do they have global air defense? So the S-300 will change the situation, I think. This expands the capabilities of Syria's air defense.
            1. Natalia
              Natalia 7 November 2014 10: 27
              +4
              Quote: kolyhalovs
              until we smashed their radar to pieces.

              It happened on the third day of the war, we used the only Su-34 at that time.
              His job wink

              And the radar was called 36D6, which Misha drove the godfather from Ukraine.
              1. The comment was deleted.
              2. absurdity
                absurdity 7 November 2014 18: 46
                -1
                The Su-34 had nothing to do with it, they could have recaptured without it, just like they fought the first three days, because the cables to the containers of the reb were stupidly forgotten in Siberia at the airport
                1. Natalia
                  Natalia 7 November 2014 22: 12
                  0
                  Quote: Absurdidat
                  Su-34 had nothing to do with it, they could have recaptured without it,

                  First you finish school and then give a voice.
                  It would be great if you thought something else.
            2. FREGATENKAPITAN
              FREGATENKAPITAN 7 November 2014 10: 51
              +4
              the Georgians didn’t just beat ..... the calculations of air defense systems were from fraternal then Ukraine ....... This was already shown and told
            3. aleks 62
              aleks 62 7 November 2014 11: 38
              +4
              ..... About Tu-22 you shouldn’t do it ..... It was to send a plane sharpened for other purposes to attack (bombardment) ..... So we got ....
              1. absurdity
                absurdity 7 November 2014 18: 42
                -1
                He was sent to aerial photography and not to attack (:)) and the bombing.
          6. g1v2
            g1v2 7 November 2014 11: 54
            +2
            Somehow they already argued about this here. No matter how cool the c300 was, but without a systematic air defense system, in conditions where Israel can destroy systems with barrel artillery from its territory, it will not help against amers or Israelis. Even if he is not immediately destroyed, he will not be able to protect Syria from the air. Of course, if the Americans score on him or if they oversleep the withdrawal of the complexes on combat duty, then a couple of goals can be knocked down and succeed, but this will not change anything. Americans will quickly crush them. And even a full-fledged layered air defense system, and not separate complexes, will not help Syria either, as it will be destroyed from the territory of Israel by artillery. It’s better for Syrians not to engage in self-deception and to focus on the procurement of armored vehicles and artillery from the RSZO.
          7. Gluxar_
            Gluxar_ 8 November 2014 03: 59
            0
            Quote: Alexander Romanov
            If necessary, these C 300 will be smashed to pieces. There is no global air defense and the C 300 will not change the situation.

            If it doesn’t change, where did the stink come from on this issue? The point is not in the closed sky, but in the fact that US planes can shoot down. In this case, the S-300 is also becoming a political weapon. In any case, the S-300 will not hurt the Syrians. And there are already shells there.
          8. Cynic
            Cynic 8 November 2014 17: 21
            0
            Quote: Alexander Romanov
            If necessary, these C 300 will be smashed to pieces.

            Spread it, smash it, but _
            Will a game worth the candle?
            request
        2. WKS
          WKS 7 November 2014 10: 30
          +2
          Quote: Civil
          Why Syria s-300? More precisely, the piece that controls Assad
          Now over the territory of Syria, NATO planes fly like at home. In order that they do not do this and these air defense systems are needed.
        3. Vita_vko
          Vita_vko 7 November 2014 10: 57
          +5
          Quote: Stanislav 1978
          If there are S-300s in Syria, then NATO will seriously think whether it is worth the risk

          The S-300 is not a panacea for all airspace problems. The complex is good only if it is part of an air defense system. This system should include modern electronic intelligence systems, necessarily combined active and passive, electronic warfare systems, a reliable ACS system and a secure communication system. It is also necessary to have reliable low-altitude air defense systems to cover the S-ZOO itself, protection systems against SNS of the "Gazetchik" type.
          It should be borne in mind that so far the S-300 air defense system has never been used in real combat conditions. Therefore, if it is delivered to Syria, NATO’s aviation and intelligence will begin to hunt for it in the first place, in order to later report that the Russian air defense system based on the S-300 is vulnerable, which means that NATO’s air strikes on Russian targets will become more realistic .
          1. aksakal
            aksakal 7 November 2014 11: 31
            +5
            Quote: Vita_vko
            The S-300 is not a panacea for all airspace problems. The complex is good only if it is part of an air defense system. This system should include modern electronic intelligence systems, necessarily combined active and passive, electronic warfare systems, a reliable ACS system and a secure communication system. It is also necessary to have reliable low-altitude air defense systems to cover the S-ZOO itself, protection systems against SNS of the "Gazetchik" type.

            - in general, for the protection of the S-300, a short-range air defense system of the "Pantsir" type was conceived, Syria has it. It does not fit in my head that when working out a contract for the supply of such weapons, neither Russian suppliers nor the Syrians themselves, as consumers, take into account what you have written. If so, then you can get to the delivery of just missiles from the S-300, and the rest is not needed. But this is nonsense. By default, I assume some kind of professionalism of those who are in this transaction, and therefore I think that when it comes to the SABJ briefly about the S-300, it means everything that is minimally necessary for the full and effective functioning of the purchase, otherwise the shadow falls on the Russians, who should reason with their Syrian colleagues that simply purchasing the S-300 will not do anything, but will only harm the good name of Russian manufacturers of air defense systems. But in general, I think. because the deliveries have not taken place so far, because a full-fledged complex in the set Syria is not capable of BUYING or DEVELOPING, and the purchase of bare calculations is an easy prey for both the amers and the Israelis. If so, then the decision to dispose of those same S-300s is correct. And it is better to defend Syria in other ways - with the help of the same diplomacy.
        4. Yeraz
          Yeraz 7 November 2014 22: 53
          0
          Quote: Stanislav 1978
          in Syria will be S-300 then NATO will seriously think whether it is worth the risk.

          In order for these S-300s to work, at least the land under it must be controlled, and when you control a small piece, and there are only enemies around, they will not help.
        5. Civil
          Civil 7 November 2014 23: 41
          0
          Quote: Stanislav 1978
          Quote: Civil
          Why Syria s-300? More precisely, the piece that controls Assad

          NATO aviation at the moment, under the guise of IS bombing, carries oil and gas fields in Syria. If there will be S-300s in Syria, then NATO will seriously think whether it is worth the risk.

          Well, X (X) with them with deposits, not a single one - a sane answer, is completely degrading ..
      2. avg
        avg 7 November 2014 10: 01
        +6
        Quote: Civil
        Why Syria s-300? More precisely, the piece that controls Assad

        So that NATO aviators would more often hit ISIS and less often the Syrians fired "friendly fire". So that Obama thinks less about dirty tricks for Russia and worries more about protecting the "mattress".
      3. Kostyar
        Kostyar 7 November 2014 10: 02
        +13
        Civil

        Why Syria s-300? More precisely, the piece that controls Assad


        And what for you winter clothes? All the same, summer will come, love ...
      4. Slavyanin
        Slavyanin 7 November 2014 10: 02
        +3
        So that the piece does not decrease.
      5. FREGATENKAPITAN
        FREGATENKAPITAN 7 November 2014 10: 48
        +1
        They comrades, I think in vain .... maybe he didn’t put it that way ..... I also think that it is at the moment great that our complexes will go to terrorists or ISIS, or the so-called moderate ...... .. Such questions as they say with a candelabrum are not solved ....
      6. Nayhas
        Nayhas 7 November 2014 11: 01
        0
        Quote: Civil
        Why Syria s-300? More precisely, the piece that controls Assad

        So that ISIS militants pose on the background of the captured S-300, terrifying the whole world ...
      7. saturn.mmm
        saturn.mmm 7 November 2014 12: 17
        0
        Quote: Civil
        Why Syria s-300? More precisely, the piece that controls Assad

        The Russian leadership thinks the same way. [Media = http: //www.newsru.co.il/mideast/06nov2014/muallim_a201.html]
    2. Juborg
      Juborg 7 November 2014 09: 37
      +5
      Here is the answer to the question where the decommissioned S-300s are "disposed of" in a recent article on VO. All for some reason decided that to Iran, but not to Syria.
      1. Vitaly Anisimov
        Vitaly Anisimov 7 November 2014 09: 46
        +1
        Well, finally .. I think they were there for a long time but didn’t just deploy .. Now the time has come!
        1. ksv500
          ksv500 7 November 2014 10: 20
          +3
          It is high time! The world today would be different if C-300 had been delivered to Yugoslavia in due time!
    3. Giant thought
      Giant thought 7 November 2014 12: 06
      +1
      For a long time it was already necessary to deliver these complexes to Syria.
    4. The comment was deleted.
    5. Sergei1982
      Sergei1982 7 November 2014 13: 28
      0
      Of course it’s not bad that we’ll deliver the S-300, but I doubt that it will stop NATO or the United States if they decide to bomb.
    6. Gluxar_
      Gluxar_ 8 November 2014 03: 57
      0
      Quote: Stanislav 1978
      If this is not another duck, then good. But until I hear the official response of Russia, indicating the terms, I will not believe it.

      initially the S-300 in Syria was supposed to appear in the second half of 2014. Moreover, together with trained officers. I hope the "moratorium" on the supply of the S-300 has not affected the training of the crews.
      If anyone is in the topic, then share the information. Were the Syrians seen in our studies?
  2. Kosta153
    Kosta153 7 November 2014 09: 31
    +7
    Let’s see. For a long time this topic has been procrastinated, but things are still ....
  3. Dazdranagon
    Dazdranagon 7 November 2014 09: 31
    +7
    Either it gets it, it doesn’t get it — it’s dismantled, then not dismantled ... Damn, as with the Mistrals ... I still hope that Syria will receive the S-300! soldier
  4. Tarpon
    Tarpon 7 November 2014 09: 32
    +3
    If there was a real deal, then there would be no such high-profile statements.
  5. insafufa
    insafufa 7 November 2014 09: 34
    +1
    Wait and see
  6. lwxx
    lwxx 7 November 2014 09: 34
    +9
    Hurry, they still need to learn how to manage them, or as usual, our tourists will sit at the controls.
  7. Vladimirets
    Vladimirets 7 November 2014 09: 35
    +1
    Unfortunately, this is not Muallem decides.
    1. sergey32
      sergey32 7 November 2014 09: 49
      0
      To begin with, like many of us, he needs to learn how to keep his mouth shut. It is necessary to report this not earlier than the complexes will take up combat duty. Jews can cover them immediately after unloading with a blow.
  8. Loner_53
    Loner_53 7 November 2014 09: 35
    +2
    So let’s see if the mattress covers are ready and take off for our C 300. I’m sure they will have a lot of (pleasant) surprises wink
    1. Vladimirets
      Vladimirets 7 November 2014 10: 18
      +3
      Quote: Loner_53
      So let’s see if the mattress covers are ready and take off for our C 300. I’m sure they will have a lot of (pleasant) surprises

      Our S-300s still need competent calculations and a bunch of different stray. The S-300 itself is not a child prodigy.
  9. Almatinets
    Almatinets 7 November 2014 09: 37
    0
    maybe they are already there, just a "bureaucratic delay" remains - to warn the
  10. navara399
    navara399 7 November 2014 09: 38
    0
    If we put complexes, it will be a good blow to the position of the mattresses. We will be waiting for the official confirmation, if so, then really the confrontation between Russia and Russia is growing!
  11. Ivanhoe
    Ivanhoe 7 November 2014 09: 40
    0
    it would be wiser to first and then notify the world community !!!
  12. rotmistr60
    rotmistr60 7 November 2014 09: 45
    0
    A mistake was made in that the decision on the supply of the complexes was postponed. Looks like they made a deal with the ameri on some important issue concerning Syria. Now, if there is a political opportunity, then it is necessary to supply. The United States will be "more careful" with its aviation.
  13. Mercenary
    Mercenary 7 November 2014 09: 49
    +2
    And who will manage the complexes? Syrian geeks or, as usual, our "tourists" laughing ?
  14. Roman_999
    Roman_999 7 November 2014 09: 51
    +2
    Great news, now a completely objective opportunity to provide this will follow the heartfelt wishes of a clear sky over Syria. I think our specialists will also be present and taught. Syria must survive, they have no other choice.
  15. mishaia_23
    mishaia_23 7 November 2014 09: 52
    +1
    No wonder two Russian BDKs passed through the straits
    1. GRAY
      GRAY 7 November 2014 10: 53
      +3
      Quote: mishaia_23
      No wonder two Russian BDKs passed through the straits

      The American destroyer Ross (USS Ross), heading for the Black Sea, met the Russian large landing ships Novocherkassk and Kaliningrad smile . Photos of ships that missed each other on November 4 were published by Turkish blogger @YorukIsik.
    2. Proud.
      Proud. 7 November 2014 12: 31
      +1
      Quote: mishaia_23
      No wonder two Russian BDKs passed through the straits

      Yes, they go with the frequency and frequency of the weaving shuttle, on the same loom! From December 2012, to the present, about 80 flights of Russian BDKs to the Mediterranean Sea. And most of them to Syria.
      Large project 775 landing ships can carry up to 500 tons of equipment and cargo, 225 paratroopers.
  16. Tulip
    Tulip 7 November 2014 09: 54
    0
    Let the Yankees fly !!!
  17. CIANIT
    CIANIT 7 November 2014 09: 56
    0
    What haven't they been delivered yet?
  18. Walk
    Walk 7 November 2014 10: 00
    +2
    I'm interested in something else. Israel has repeatedly stated (and confirmed by actions) that it will not tolerate any missile air defense systems in Syria, and will immediately destroy installations. How will this get around? After all, Israel has repeatedly bombed the Syrian armed forces under far-fetched pretexts, and "the entire world community" stubbornly does not notice this. These complexes may not reach the place of combat duty.
  19. combat66
    combat66 7 November 2014 10: 01
    +2
    The complexes will not be left without support. It will not be so easy to break. "Tourists" will certainly be ...
    What is important here is the very principled decision "Giving", which means they crossed the line.
  20. ferrumio
    ferrumio 7 November 2014 10: 01
    -2
    Quote: Hedgehog
    Quote: Alexander Romanov
    these C 300 will be smashed to pieces.

    It is likely that this will happen. But if the Syrians manage to destroy one invisible bomber, penguins can calm down. Not completely, but partially.

    But what does the invisible bomber have to do with it? these s-300s are simply filled with tomahawks and business, a couple of S-300 systems will not change anything there at all ...
  21. fomkin
    fomkin 7 November 2014 10: 02
    0
    Something tells me that again good wishes.
  22. Zomanus
    Zomanus 7 November 2014 10: 03
    0
    Well Syria is not so relevant. Although if through it it turns out to click on the nose of amers, it is worth putting complexes. Just to exclude the possibility of their falling into the hands of the IG.
  23. pahom54
    pahom54 7 November 2014 10: 06
    0
    Complexes are complexes, and where will the trained calculations come from? Our? Return to Soviet times?

    Those who are above in the comments are right that the individual S-300 divisions will not save Syrian airspace ... Here everything must be done in a complex - and urgently - to do ...
    And so - this is just a political demarche on our part, such as a warning to the United States, so as not to overestimate their capabilities ...
  24. pvv113
    pvv113 7 November 2014 10: 19
    +3
    Syria will receive S-300 anti-aircraft missile systems from Russia.

    It is high time. You can’t leave friends in trouble good
  25. YGV-97219
    YGV-97219 7 November 2014 10: 21
    +1
    If Russia supplies the S-300 to Syria, this will be a huge contribution to the consolidation of world peace! wink lol hi
  26. or
    or 7 November 2014 10: 42
    +3
    Correctly. There are only their own interests. Then they will respect and talk. This is Obama for dessert, after a hearty dinner in Congress.
  27. aszzz888
    aszzz888 7 November 2014 10: 56
    0
    Yes, there was a lot of talk, talk, about C-300 for Syria. I really wanted this next information to be true.
  28. Urri
    Urri 7 November 2014 11: 17
    0
    Quote: Civil
    Why Syria s-300? More precisely, the piece that controls Assad


    Quote: fomkin
    Something tells me that again good wishes.


    I don’t think so. Americans in Iraqi Kurdistan began building a military base for their air force. The solution is good - there is no way to prevent it, so you have to wait until the end of construction, and then place nearby that multiplies all multi-billion dollar investments by zero
  29. Makarov
    Makarov 7 November 2014 11: 36
    0
    ok so the security council consulted)
    1. GUS
      GUS 7 November 2014 12: 41
      +1
      It's only the beginning.
  30. padded jacket
    padded jacket 7 November 2014 11: 57
    +1
    It's time to put these Syria air defense systems, the US planes and their satellites, in any case, will already fly with caution.
    And the main enemy of Syria, Israel will beware of delivering vile blows to the back of this country fighting with terrorists.
    And it's time to finally drop Medvedev's "stupid" (to put it mildly) ban on the export of these complexes to Iran, and it is better to immediately put the S-350 "Vityaz" air defense systems there, as they can be tested there by Israeli "air pirates". In cases of their unprovoked aggression against this peaceful country.
  31. GUS
    GUS 7 November 2014 12: 38
    0
    Quote: Civil
    Why Syria s-300? More precisely, the piece that controls Assad


    For this piece to become Syria again.
  32. coconut
    coconut 7 November 2014 12: 39
    +1
    We don’t have fools either, and if they sell, they will sell with all shame down to the hammer for clogging the ground, so that all that is needed is fired and lived, and what is not needed is fallen and died smile
  33. Dragon-y
    Dragon-y 7 November 2014 13: 28
    0
    If you were planning to supply the S-300 to Syria - maybe the calculations for them have already been trained?
  34. Figvam
    Figvam 7 November 2014 13: 57
    0
    up to C 300 they need TORs of tens of five shells no less
    and put aviation on the wing
    then the air can be considered covered
    and so with 300 a little help
  35. Tommygun
    Tommygun 7 November 2014 14: 05
    0
    Latvian Foreign Minister admitted that he is gay
  36. Tommygun
    Tommygun 7 November 2014 14: 38
    0
    Each Foreign Ministry has its own reasons for joy!)))
  37. Gans1234
    Gans1234 7 November 2014 21: 43
    0
    In time fussed)))