Military Review

Syria Strategy

62
The air smells more and more of war. Moreover, the war is not a "hybrid", but a completely ordinary, "conventional" war, as is now called, to distinguish it from a nuclear apocalypse. And the most pronounced foreboding of war is in the long-suffering Syria. Turks, Europeans, Americans and Saudis are stepping up their political attacks on the pro-Syrian coalition of Russia, Iran and Hezbollah. At the same time, the Turks are concentrating their troops on the Syrian borders, and the Saudis are transferring their troops to Turkey, and Aviation to NATO Incirlik airbase. True, at the same time, the Americans removed their F-15s from Incirlik. But then flown AWACS aircraft. Such castling suggests that the United States does not intend to participate directly in hostilities, but is only going to engage in high-tech support for Saudi-Turkish aggression.


However, if you look at the comparative figures of the forces of the parties, then the Syrian coalition does not shine in this conflict. Indeed, the Syrian air force has no more than six dozen modern MIG-29 and Su-24 aircraft. In addition, about the same old Soviet aircraft (MIG-23, SU-22, those that are still alive after four years of war), the Syrians can put in the second echelon. These forces may be limited to act in the zone of its air defense. MIG-21, if some of them are still on the move, can only be considered as a kamikaze. To these forces you need to add a fighter squadron of the Russian VKS (SU-27, SU-35 and SU-30) and three dozen strike aircraft (SU-24, SU-25 and SU-34). Total, active operations can lead a little more than a hundred aircraft. These forces will be opposed by the Turkish and Saudi air forces, which together have more than 300 modern first-line aircraft (F-15, F-16, Eurofighter) and as many obsolete, but suitable for operations in the second line (F-4, F- 5, "Tornado").

The superiority, as we see, is more than threefold, though, on the Syrian side there will be Russian and own air defense systems. However, neither the C-400, nor the "Fort-s" of the "Varyag" will be able to completely cover the territory of Syria, whose air defense, especially after terrorists have walked through it, is focal. The situation is even worse on land. Turkish and Saudi troops can put in the field about 500 thousands of people. While the Syrian army even before the war had no more than 125 thousands of "bayonets." According to various estimates, there are also up to 20 thousands of fighters of the Iranian IRGC, Hezbollah and the Iraqi Shiite militia on the side of Assad. Thus, the total ground forces of the Asadites are unlikely to outperform 150 thousands of people. But at the same time they will have to fight with several tens of thousands of former enemies - militants-terrorists from the IS and other "moderates".

A thousand "Abrams" and "Leopards" of the Allies are opposed by about the same (after military losses) Syrian T-72, a fleet of obsolete tanks on both sides it is diverse and amounts to 2-3 thousand combat vehicles. Light armored vehicles from the Allies are represented by approximately 3 thousand units, while the Syrians, given the large losses of armored vehicles, may have no more than 2000 infantry fighting vehicles and armored personnel carriers. By artillery, the Syrians can hardly put more than 500 self-propelled guns and thousands of towed guns, while their opponents may well use up to 1,5 thousand self-propelled guns and up to 5000 units of towed artillery. Parties also have from 400 to 600 MLRS.

In such a situation, the actions of the Kremlin, which is plunging deeper and deeper into the abyss of this war, risking its image in the event of a defeat, seem completely illogical. However, let us not naively think that incompetent dummies sit in the Kremlin and the General Staff of the Russian Federation. What can Russian strategists expect in a possible Syrian war?

First, the Saudis, in turn, are bogged down in Yemen, where they can not cope with the Hussites. Therefore, if the kingdom can allocate 150-200 airplanes of various types for participation in the air operation, large ground forces are unlikely to come to the aid of the Turks.

Secondly, the Turks themselves must understand that after the invasion of Syria and the attacks of our group, they will have to deal not only with the aircraft of the Syrian air force group. At aerodromes in Armenia, Sochi, and Crimea, Russia can deploy up to hundreds of modern aircraft, and at the same time “calibrate” Turkish air bases from ships of the Black Sea Fleet and the Caspian flotilla and strategic aircraft. It is not for nothing that the Saudis “hid” their planes “under the wing” of the American Senti on Incirlik, although bombing ISIS, and the Syrians, is much more profitable, for example, from Diyarbakir.

Thirdly, Turkey also has a “second front”. Turks have to deal with the Kurds, both within their borders and outside of them in the “Syrian Kurdistan”, and in the second case, the Kurds are partly under the tutelage of Uncle Sam, which prevents the Turks from dealing with them directly.

Fourthly, it is difficult for the Turks to realize their numerical superiority. With a large length of the border, the offensive can actually be developed along the Euphrates valley and in the direction of Aleppo. However, the offensive along the Euphrates is a dead end, pushing into the desert and not having convenient ways into the depths of Syria, bypassing Aleppo. Another strategic direction could be the direction to Latakia and through Idlib to the rear of Aleppo and to Ham. But at least until the fall of Aleppo, while maintaining the Syrian grouping south of it, the attack on Idlib is dangerous. Grouping can be surrounded by simultaneous strikes from Latakia, Aleppo and Hama. Moreover, it is necessary to take into account that this area is best covered by Russian aviation, air defense and artillery of the Russian group. The same applies to the attack on Latakia, the Turkish group comes with an open flank under the maximum impact of Russian aviation.

There are other possible options for strengthening the Russian position in Syria. But they are not so serious, or they are two-edged weapons. For example, the Iranian army could be of great help in repelling Syria’s aggression. But here there are several problems at once. First, Iran has no land border with Syria or other parties to the conflict, and an attempt to break through Iraq can lead to a conflict with the USA and a conflict to a nuclear war. This is the maximum problem, but at the very least, in this case, Israel will take the side of the coalition, and there will be absolutely nothing to repel the blow. It would be much better if Iran remains aloof from the conflict and continues to support the Syrians with its “vacationers”.

So, based on all of the above, we can assume how the Turkish military sees the development of events.

At the first stage, the Turkish and Saudi air forces, relying on the Incirlik and Gaziantep airfields, will use about 1,500 modern aircraft to gain air supremacy over the Latakia region. For the suppression of our aircraft at AB Hmeimim can also be used as long-range MLRS. Under the cover of these actions, Turkish troops make a shot through the territories occupied by the IG and DAN terrorists in Aleppo with the aim of encircling and defeating the large group of Syrians operating here. For the “world community,” Turks may well explain this with the fight against terrorists, in which Russians and Asadites are very much in the way.

After encircling and crushing the group in the Aleppo area, for 5-10 days (depth 50-80 km), the Allied forces develop an attack on Hama and can launch an attack on Latakia, since the left flank no longer hangs in the air. At this time, aviation is being transferred to the northern direction to counter Russian aviation and organizes air defense systems at Turkish air bases, including and from rocket attacks. Prior to this, the Turks, with the help of the West, are delaying the start of operations of the Russian Aerospace Forces in the north by diplomatic means.

Both of these operations should lead to the sweeping of the province of Latakia up to the Lebanese border, as well as to the breakthrough of the Turkish troops south of Homs with the subsequent attack on Damascus. The depth of operations is about 400 km, which, according to the experience of the Iraq campaign 2003, should take up to 40 days. Maintaining the minimum pace in 10 km per day should be ensured by a three-fold superiority in forces and a twofold superiority in means (except tanks), plus the presence of terrorist enclaves in the depths of the military building of the Syrian troops.

What are the weaknesses of this plan and what can we oppose to it? The main task of the Syrians will be delaying the time. This will allow, firstly, to fully use the potential of the Russian videoconferencing. If the Hamim grouping of the VKS manages to hold out until the start of operations in the north, the Turks and Saudis will not be able to concentrate superior forces in the north and ensure reliable air defense of their airfields. In such a situation, our aviation, having linked the Turks with battles, will be able to destroy most of the Turkish airfields with rocket attacks, which will lead to the paralysis of the Allied aviation, the domination of the Russian HVAC and Syrian air forces in the air, the resumption of the air bridge over Iran and Iraq. To do this, it is necessary to ensure the survival of our air force in Syria either by destroying long-range Turkish MLRS, or by dispersing the grouping over more remote airfields, even taking into account the weakening of the group’s actions for the time being dispersed. The first task, perhaps, can be handled by Russian ships operating along the Syrian coast and part of the air base cover, which are also in service with the MLRS.

Secondly, to turn Aleppo into a fortress, having entrusted its defense to militiamen and Hezbollah units, which are light infantry, requires less supply and can spend more time in encircled environments. In addition, Hezbollah has a rich experience of fighting in the conditions of the city, and large cities, judging by the operations in Grozny, Sirte, Ban-Walid, Slavyansk, in the same Aleppo by the terrorists, have a great defensive potential. The defenders must be provided with a sufficient number of long-range weapons, so as not to allow the Turks to adjust the supply of their troops south of Aleppo, bypassing the city. And, accordingly, do not allow the start of an offensive by large forces until the fall of Aleppo. At the same time, the best of the Syrian units in the second column, acting in the direction of Idlib, should be thrown in order to defeat or discard this grouping before connecting it with the northern grouping. If the Syrians in Aleppo will be able to hold out for 20 days, the factor of the Russian videoconferencing system, of which the conversation is separate, will take effect.
Author:
62 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. PN
    PN 25 February 2016 12: 25 New
    10
    Yes does not smell any war. It smells like a trick, no war.
    1. cniza
      cniza 25 February 2016 12: 31 New
      +3
      This will be their strategic task to make us tricks.
    2. g1v2
      g1v2 25 February 2016 13: 35 New
      +8
      The war is not beneficial either to us or to the Turks. Another thing is that there are options when neither we nor they can retreat. Erdogan has invested tens of billions of dollars and his reputation in the overthrow of Assad. And just like that, he cannot retreat, if he loses his face, they will trample him. With sudden exercises in the south, we have demonstrated that we are ready for war and will not back down. In a full-scale war, Erdogash has no chance. It is quite possible that a ceasefire in Syria is a way to disperse, saving face on both sides. We do not need this war in any case, since in the case of even an easy victory, which is unlikely, we won nothing. There are no benefits. There are no common borders, it will not work to cut off the land. And for the growth of Armenian, Cypriot and Greek lands, shedding your blood is stupid. But there are options when there is no other way.
      1. alicante11
        25 February 2016 13: 44 New
        +3
        In a full-scale war, Erdogash has no chance. It’s quite possible that a ceasefire in Syria is a way to disperse, saving face on both sides


        It is quite possible, unfortunately, the article lay on publication from the 21 number. So the situation has really changed towards easing tensions. But still too shaky.
      2. the most important
        the most important 25 February 2016 15: 04 New
        +1
        Quote: g1v2
        We do not need this war in any case, since in the case of even an easy victory, which is unlikely, we won nothing. There are no benefits. There are no common borders, it will not work to cut off the land. And for the growth of Armenian, Cypriot and Greek lands, shedding your blood is stupid.

        There are straits ... here it is worth fighting for them + the destruction of the eternal enemy - Turkey. and all the neighbors of Turkey will help in this. when it smells fried, everyone will want to snatch their bite ... the Turks can not hold out for a week.
        1. heccrbq8
          heccrbq8 25 February 2016 15: 45 New
          0
          Why do you personally need these straits? Are you ready to risk children for their sake?
          1. Talgat
            Talgat 25 February 2016 17: 39 New
            +2
            So you can’t judge - then it’s generally better to give up right away

            Any state has interests and they need to be protected - and better away from their borders - than to wage battles in the Caspian later
            ---------------------------------------------------------------------
            And more - I am quoting an article: "... It will be much better if Iran remains on the sidelines of the conflict and continues to support the Syrians with its" vacationers "..."

            In fact, the Iranians have already made it clear that they will not stand aside
        2. g1v2
          g1v2 25 February 2016 21: 41 New
          0
          In any case, we won’t get the straits. In the best case, to the next little brothers - Greeks or Bulgarians. Both those and those members of NATO, moreover, more loyal to the mattresses, there will be an occasion for them to revise the Montreux Convention if the ownership of the straits changes. PM benefits are not observed.
  2. Abbra
    Abbra 25 February 2016 12: 26 New
    +1
    ... and what can we contrast him with? The fact that the author is Jewish was immediately clear after I read the headline. Another sofa zoom.
    1. Pereira
      Pereira 25 February 2016 12: 44 New
      0
      Indeed, the phrase
      and what can we contrast him with?
      pretty amused. So I see the IDF, inflicting a flank blow to the Turkish army.
    2. alicante11
      25 February 2016 13: 22 New
      0
      The fact that the author is Jewish was immediately clear after I read the headline.


      I wonder how "a strategy FOR Syria can be proposed by a Jew. And I was also called an Arab Jew :).
      Read the full article, since you are already taken to comment.
      1. Abbra
        Abbra 25 February 2016 14: 17 New
        +1
        I read it completely. Appreciated. To write such material, you must at least know Russian. MASSADU hi!
        1. alicante11
          25 February 2016 15: 17 New
          0
          To write such material, you must at least know Russian. MASSADU hi!


          Well, regarding the rules of the Russian language, this is to the Massass.
          Can specific claims be voiced as constructive criticism?
          1. heccrbq8
            heccrbq8 25 February 2016 15: 47 New
            0
            Specific? And where did the Gauges go from your couch battles, plug them in somehow! Or did Tom Clancy read it? He is also a fan of distorting facts.
            1. alicante11
              25 February 2016 16: 09 New
              +1
              Specific? And where did the Gauges go from your couch battles?


              And the "calibers" are here
              If the Syrians in Aleppo manage to hold out the 20 days, the Russian VKS factor will come into force, about which there is a separate discussion.
              since the editorial office does not miss long articles in the rubric of opinions.

              Gauges in general are a good thing, but these are just weapons that have their own advantages and disadvantages and to achieve the best results it must be used competently and preferably in combination with other means of warfare.
              1. kitamo
                kitamo 26 February 2016 10: 32 New
                0
                Quote: alicante11
                And the "calibers" are here
                If the Syrians in Aleppo manage to hold out the 20 days, the Russian VKS factor will come into force, about which there is a separate discussion.


                as I understand it, in your opinion, will these 20 days Caliber be ready for combat, or is it their flight time such * days 20 *?
                1. alicante11
                  26 February 2016 11: 38 New
                  0
                  as I understand it, in your opinion, will these 20 days Caliber be ready for combat, or is it their flight time such * days 20 *?


                  Prior to this, the Turks, with the help of the West, delayed the start of operations of the Russian air forces in the north through diplomatic means.


                  Gauges in general are a good thing, but these are just weapons that have their own advantages and disadvantages and to achieve the best results it must be used competently and preferably in combination with other means of warfare.
        2. cap
          cap 25 February 2016 15: 29 New
          +1
          Quote: Abbra
          I read it completely. Appreciated. To write such material, you must at least know Russian. MASSADU hi!

          Quote: alicante11
          Well, regarding the rules of the Russian language, this is to the Massass.
          Can specific claims be voiced as constructive criticism?


          My greetings and yours already two greetings.
          We will not write strategic plans for the data provided.
          Let the heads themselves break, on whose side to speak.
          Only to transfer everything said in the article to the map the devil will break his leg.
          The article is very saturated with numbers, almost a report to the General Staff.
          To the author +.
  3. sir_obs
    sir_obs 25 February 2016 12: 34 New
    +1
    As Kozma Prutkov used to say: "If you have a fountain, shut it up; give the fountain a rest"
    1. velikoros-xnumx
      velikoros-xnumx 25 February 2016 13: 19 New
      0
      Quote: sir_obs
      As Kozma Prutkov used to say: "If you have a fountain, shut it up; give the fountain a rest"

      good I will definitely remember, great phrase.
  4. The comment was deleted.
  5. genisis
    genisis 25 February 2016 12: 38 New
    +2
    After encircling and defeating the group in the Aleppo region, for 5-10 days (depth 50-80 km), the Allied forces develop an attack on Hama and can launch an attack on Latakia, since the left flank is no longer hanging in the air.


    5-10 days)))))
    And who will give them the Saudoturi coalition ???
    Those. Russians all this time will not hammer into the Stone Age KSA and Turkey from their territory with everything that can fly and explode? Will there be strikes from the Kyrgyz Republic, OTRK (from the territory of Armenia)? There will be no systematic destruction of everything flying within the framework of the operation of air defense systems?

    In 5-10 days, all the aircraft of the KSA and Turkey will look significantly disheveled.
    1. alicante11
      25 February 2016 13: 24 New
      +2
      And who will give them the Saudoturi coalition ???


      Well, 5-10 days are easy, while ours will carry out all the necessary political events within the UN, etc. See situation with knocked dryer.
      So the Syrians and our group will have to hold out this time.
  6. raf
    raf 25 February 2016 12: 38 New
    +2
    To these forces it is necessary to add a fighter squadron of Russian airborne forces (SU-27, SU-35 and SU-30) and three dozen attack aircraft (SU-24, SU-25 and SU-34)
    If Turkey and the Saudis dare to strike at Russian units in Syria, then they will not be dealing with three dozen of our aircraft, but with all the might of the Russian army!
    1. square
      square 25 February 2016 13: 17 New
      0
      Georgia also thought that it was only necessary to sentence our peacekeeping contingent. Not fused, lost the territory and tie.
    2. alicante11
      25 February 2016 13: 26 New
      0
      If Turkey and the Saudis dare to strike at Russian units in Syria, then they will not be dealing with three dozen of our aircraft, but with all the might of the Russian army!


      In the end, yes. What I’m talking about at the end of the article. Very strange manner, do not read the article to the end and comment.
      1. raf
        raf 25 February 2016 14: 16 New
        0
        In the end, yes. What I’m talking about at the end of the article. Very strange manner, do not read the article to the end and comment.
        I never comment on articles without reading them! In your article you write as if the war will be waged only by the forces of the Aerospace Forces and in Syria! I wrote in a comment
        with all the power of the Russian army!
        Feel the difference ?! If you do not know, then the army is not only the VKS, but also a lot of different types of troops, including missile!
        1. alicante11
          25 February 2016 15: 11 New
          0
          I never comment on articles without reading them! In your article you write as if the war will be waged only by the air forces and in Syria!


          If the Syrians in Aleppo manage to hold out the 20 days, the Russian VKS factor will come into force, about which there is a separate discussion.


          It does not say about the territory of Syria.
          And we will not succeed in applying something other than the videoconferencing from our territory. We do not have a fleet sufficient for landing on Constantinople. Like the land border too. So just bomb and fire. However, in this case, the Turks will not be too good.
          1. raf
            raf 25 February 2016 15: 31 New
            0
            And we will not succeed in applying something other than the videoconferencing from our territory. We do not have a fleet sufficient for landing on Constantinople
            There is no point in landing a landing force, only unnecessary losses. However, a fleet can work out calibers for military units in Turkey quite well, and also inflict enormous damage on the Turkish fleet with anti-ship missiles, but there is little else to think of!
            1. alicante11
              25 February 2016 15: 51 New
              0
              However, the fleet can work out well with calibers for military units in Turkey, as well as inflict huge damage on the Turkish fleet with anti-ship missiles


              Well, about the "shelling" I indicated their possibility. And this is just missile strikes from the sea and from the air by ships and strategists, respectively.

              , but you never know what else you can think of!


              Yes, nothing more can be imagined. However, this is enough for the Turks.
              1. raf
                raf 25 February 2016 16: 35 New
                0
                However, this is enough for the Turks.
                Here I completely agree with you!
  7. voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 25 February 2016 12: 38 New
    +3
    "Second, turn Aleppo into a fortress," ////

    In order to turn Allepoo into a fortress, one must first capture it.
    In Aleppo, President Assad with his Alawites is not very popular.
    And the Shiite heretics of Hezbollah or Iranian Islamic Guards there
    will not tolerate at all. But, it should be noted, ISIS members are also local "rebel fighters.
    the terrorists "were not allowed into the city when they tried to break through from the east.
    Sadly, Turkey has the greatest influence in Aleppo. On trade
    Aleppo and Turkey survived in recent years.
    1. Abbra
      Abbra 25 February 2016 12: 42 New
      +1
      The words "heretics" and "guards" are from the Middle Ages. This is the first thing. And secondly - ... Okay, I’m silent, Israel ...
      1. voyaka uh
        voyaka uh 25 February 2016 14: 39 New
        +1
        "guards" - from the Middle Ages "////

        Claims not to me, but to the Iranians. So they called their organization, part of which is fighting in Syria.
        I am not good at Persian, but hopefully the translation into English is correct.
        Army of the Guardians of the Islamic Revolution (Persian: سپاه پاسداران انقلاب اسلامی / Sepāh-e Pāsdārān-e Enqelāb-e Eslāmi
        1. Weyland
          Weyland 26 February 2016 03: 12 New
          0
          Quote: voyaka uh
          I am not good at Persian, but hopefully the translation into English is correct.


          And in Chinese? laughing This I mean that we always translate the word "hungweipings" as "red the guards", while in real life it is a tracing paper of the Russian" redguardsmen"!
          According to the meaning - Guardians can not be translated at all, but left as is: guards !
        2. The comment was deleted.
      2. Abbra
        Abbra 25 February 2016 17: 25 New
        0
        Israel is excited. What is it for?
    2. alicante11
      25 February 2016 13: 26 New
      0
      In order to turn Allepoo into a fortress, one must first capture it.


      Well, about half of the city is in Assad’s hands, and that’s enough.
  8. aleks 62 next
    aleks 62 next 25 February 2016 12: 39 New
    +3
    ... Nonsense ... Yesterday at Babayan's ("The Right to Vote") one such "strategist" said about the same thing ..... But he was specifically told - Russia is a nuclear power .... In the event of such a development of events the use of tactical nuclear weapons is possible .... The author for some reason does not take this into account ... hi
    1. alicante11
      25 February 2016 13: 30 New
      +1
      In the event of such a development of events, the use of tactical nuclear weapons is possible .... For some reason, the author does not take this into account .... hi


      Tactical nuclear weapons do not far exceed the power of conventional weapons. So there is no sense in its application. And its use is even harmful, because it demonizes the one who applied it. Moreover, conventional arms are quite enough.
      1. Generalissimo
        Generalissimo 25 February 2016 19: 43 New
        0
        And why do we need it then? ;-)
        1. alicante11
          26 February 2016 11: 41 New
          0
          And why do we need it then? ;-)


          Now I do not know. Previously, to solve tactical problems in a nuclear confrontation.
  9. konetit
    konetit 25 February 2016 12: 49 New
    +1
    Something we have a lot of "experts". All and sundry are writing about the war, when it starts and how everything will happen. The military are silent, politicians are silent, and all kinds of "experts" write and speak.
  10. 75 hammer
    75 hammer 25 February 2016 12: 50 New
    +2
    Probably some kind of publication from the arsenal of Western media would be more suitable for such forecasts. Really someone seriously thinks to declare war on Russia. Moreover, our country is not absolutely independent from the West, we are happy to sell our wealth for beads for savages. Therefore, the war with the Russian Federation is almost the same thing — how to cut the branch on which you sit. And Turkey is just a tool and ascribing to it an independent geopolitical strategy is nonsense! Only an indication because of the Phasington Regional Committee can provoke a conflict! Everything else is from the evil one.
  11. andranick
    andranick 25 February 2016 12: 55 New
    0
    Article minus for the phrase, and did not read further
    we will not naively think that in the Kremlin and the General Staff of the Russian Federation sit unsuitable dumbasses

    This phrase programs the reader to doubt, "what if there really are stupid people sitting there?" Just don't think about pink elephants.
    Maybe I'm already a senile and see "subversive activity" in the empty space? And on topvar too - quite systematically.
    1. alicante11
      25 February 2016 13: 32 New
      +1
      This phrase programs the reader to doubt, "what if there really are stupid people sitting there?" Just don't think about pink elephants.


      Well, I put into my phrase exactly the meaning that there are no "dumbheads" there and if you see something else in it, then ...
      1. andranick
        andranick 25 February 2016 14: 18 New
        0
        It seems to me that the person publishing the article should approach with all responsibility the unambiguous communication of his thoughts to the mass audience and not allow elements of NLP (if he obviously does not set such a goal).
        1. alicante11
          25 February 2016 15: 13 New
          0
          It seems to me that the person publishing the article should approach with all responsibility the unambiguous communication of his thoughts to the mass audience and not allow elements of NLP (if he obviously does not set such a goal).


          For the first time, I’ve heard that the unequivocal statement that non-stupid people are in headquarters is part of NLP.
  12. biserino
    biserino 25 February 2016 12: 58 New
    0
    Such US scenarios will not allow.
  13. Yuyuka
    Yuyuka 25 February 2016 13: 00 New
    0
    We must go and light a candle in gratitude that such Enerals HERE play in the General Staff ... If only we reasoned like that at 41! Stalin would have counted on the "calculator" and would have said, "Oh, well, he nafig! There are so many of them! All of Europe will rise for them, also England and America! No chance! Zhukova to me! An urgent plan to surrender Moscow!" belay Suvorov would read a lot about "not in number but by skill" and no one canceled the fighting spirit!
    1. alicante11
      25 February 2016 13: 34 New
      0
      All of Europe will rise for them, and also England and America! No chances! Zhukov to me! Urgent plan for delivery of Moscow! "


      Sharp, but where is the plan for surrendering Damascus? There is a plan for the defense of Aleppo and the defeat of the Turkish group that invaded Idlib. Damn, half readers :(.
  14. timothy61
    timothy61 25 February 2016 13: 04 New
    0
    All these conversations are idle chatter or someone is serving in G. Sh.
    1. alicante11
      25 February 2016 15: 19 New
      0
      All these conversations are idle chatter or someone is serving in G. Sh.


      Well, with this approach, only existing employees can talk about something. Are there any specific claims for inaccuracies?
  15. samoletil18
    samoletil18 25 February 2016 13: 10 New
    +1
    And the hosts from overseas will give good? The Russian air forces can also hit the oil industry to the Saudis, having preliminarily taken care of the inexhaustible flows of financing global terrorism in the Security Council. Yes, ringing will not be frail. Only all sanctions will be limited to high-profile anti-Russian speeches.
    1. alicante11
      25 February 2016 13: 35 New
      0
      The Russian air forces can also hit the oil industry to the Saudis, having preliminarily taken care of the inexhaustible flows of financing global terrorism in the Security Council.


      They can, but in general I have the feeling that the Americans decided to merge the Turks and Saudis. And best of all, in their opinion, Russia is suitable as a sinker.
  16. xam0
    xam0 25 February 2016 14: 31 New
    -1
    Another vyser sofa strategist, even nothing to comment!
    1. alicante11
      25 February 2016 15: 13 New
      0
      Another vyser sofa strategist, even nothing to comment!


      You have a very talking nickname :).
  17. Alexez
    Alexez 25 February 2016 15: 35 New
    0
    The article, to be honest, struck me as crazy. Some comments are also especially about the use of nuclear weapons by Russia in this conflict. If you think about why Erdogan needs all this, there is an opinion that he wants to amend the constitution of Turkey and make it an exclusively presidential republic, and specifically change the paragraph of the basic law that the president cannot be re-elected. To do this, he needs to declare a state of war or a state of emergency to purge the VNST (Grand National Assembly of Turkey) under this sauce. But excuse me, Erdogan took over the presidency only 1,5 years ago, he is still 5,5 years ahead - the term is not short, why rush? There is also an opinion about the "underground oil business" - it is very doubtful given that the money there, in general, is not so big, and the hemorrhoids for organizing and laundering funds are up to the tonsils (and you can't hide the sewing in a sack). If someone does not remember, we not so long ago offered him a "gas hub" to make for Europe, an order of magnitude more money, and most importantly legal. The third opinion about the restoration of the "great Ottoman Empire" is generally utopia, given the degree of risk, both for Erdogan himself and for Turkey as a whole. Only a reckless adventurer or a sick person can put everything on the line with vague prospects, at least something to win, not to mention a larger-scale success. IMHO the roots of all this mess must be sought in all the same amerovskoy concept of "controlled chaos", in this case they want to wear down Russia with several simultaneous undying conflicts. Bite from different sides with a pack of petty riffraffs until we run out of strength. And Erdogan, most likely, was promised in words both unlimited presidency and the Ottoman Empire in exchange for provoking Russia to engage in full-scale hostilities in which case they would cover it with a NATO umbrella. And the oil trade is being conducted to cover the financing of the Basmachi, as the American intelligence services often like to do around the world.
    All this is my IMHO, I do not pretend to the truth in the last resort.
    1. alicante11
      25 February 2016 16: 03 New
      0
      If you think why Erdogan needs all this -


      Honestly, I don’t understand this either. But forced to accept the fact.
      And the facts are that Turkey most likely acts independently without the approval of the United States and even, somewhere, contrary to it.
      I will give facts that allow us to talk about this.
      1. Several years ago in Turkey there were riots similar to the notorious Arab spring. "The technologies of" color revolutions "are perfectly mastered by the Americans. Nevertheless, Erdogan suppressed these protests.
      2. After the downed Russian bomber, the Turks quickly hit the road for support in Brussels. If it was a "homework" agreed with the alliance, why is this "running in a hare"?
      3. The Americans do not want to "surrender" the Syrian Kurds, even in spite of their relative loyalty to Assad. In principle, it is clear that the amers in Syria need infantry that would fight against ISIS and, at the same time, would not incite special protests from Damascus, Tehran and Moscow, which would follow if the Turkish army tried to act as such an infantry. But the Turks for some reason do not want to listen to the "beholder" and continue to hammer the Kurds wherever they can be caught.
      In general, the situation is very strange and resembles the "divorce" of the pro-Syrian coalition with the good (USA) and bad (Turkey) police officers. But, again, I don't really see the reasons for the development of such a combination.
  18. infantryman2020
    infantryman2020 25 February 2016 15: 57 New
    +1
    Quote: timothy61
    All these conversations are idle chatter or someone is serving in G. Sh.


    1) everyone who insults sofa analysts, and you yourself what are you doing on the forum? flood and empty cheers-patriotic slogans?
    2) no need to talk nonsense, not a single GS officer will ever post a construct there.
  19. urapatriot
    urapatriot 25 February 2016 17: 24 New
    0
    I liked the article. To the author + for analyzing a possible scenario. An unlikely option, but still possible. I’ll only note that in the conditions of Turkey’s aggression, Russia will not wait for a decision by the UN Security Council to launch attacks on Turkish military infrastructure.
  20. Kyrgyz
    Kyrgyz 25 February 2016 18: 54 New
    +1
    And why not a word about the Turkish fleet, it is definitely not inferior to the Black Sea, and it’s a stone's throw before the grouping of ships off the coast of Syria
  21. surfcap
    surfcap 25 February 2016 20: 59 New
    0
    The author is a big minus. Not too lazy, after all, it was Turkish tanks to count and type "analyzes" to do. For the gifted, Putin personally said "whoever needs it, we'll get everyone," meaning missile strikes.
  22. avebersek
    avebersek 25 February 2016 22: 36 New
    0
    Quote: surfcap
    The author is a big minus. Not too lazy, after all, it was Turkish tanks to count and type "analyzes" to do. For the gifted, Putin personally said "whoever needs it, we'll get everyone," meaning missile strikes.

    And I assure you, in Turkey there will be more "couch" fighters dreaming of the greatness of Porta. Turkey is a country of resorts with its own national problems (hello to the Kurds). After a good "slap", many will not want to fight. This is a problem for Europe too - well, there are no soldiers, there are a lot of traders, but there are no soldiers. And the glory that we do not live like in Europe (we didn’t get drunk to the point where FSUs. Whom does your son bring home a girl or a boy). Even normal children grow up and play war, and not ...
  23. Sagittarius YaNAO
    Sagittarius YaNAO 25 February 2016 23: 25 New
    -1
    However, neither the S-400, nor the "Forts" of the "Varyag" will be able to completely cover the territory of Syria,

    Not a single air defense shot, but they will not be able to. nonsenseлAnza.
    1. alicante11
      26 February 2016 11: 48 New
      0
      Not a single air defense shot, but they will not be able to. nonsense of a deserter.


      You try to think first, before commenting, take a map of Syria, a ruler and draw on it the radii and diameters of the ranges of C-400 and Forts.
  24. 8140
    8140 26 February 2016 01: 02 New
    0
    Why bring to a direct confrontation. There are Kurds.
    Arm, train and ....
    In Turkey alone, 15 million Kurds
    And in addition to the Syrian Kurds, there are Iraqi and Iranian.
    And Turkey also borders on Iraq and Iran.
    They have already entered Iraq.
    It is necessary to play this card, and not to trust with the "last word of the king" (TNW)