Has Putin flipped his lid? There's no way this is going to be effective enough to save Assad. If ISIS doesn't pull him down, Al Nusra and/or the FSA will.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/09/01/russia-puts-boots-on-the-ground-in-syria.html
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/syria-civil-war-russians-filmed-fighting-alongside-president-assads-forces-10483842.html
Quote from: jimmy olsen on September 02, 2015, 08:43:29 PM
Has Putin flipped his lid? There's no way this is going to be effective enough to save Assad. If ISIS doesn't pull him down, Al Nusra and/or the FSA will.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/09/01/russia-puts-boots-on-the-ground-in-syria.html
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/syria-civil-war-russians-filmed-fighting-alongside-president-assads-forces-10483842.html
Haha Russia.
I look forward to reports of 10 ISIS dudes taking out the entire 14th Guards Tank Army.
Quote from: Valmy on September 02, 2015, 09:04:10 PM
I look forward to reports of 10 ISIS dudes taking out the entire 14th Guards Tank Army.
That's why the Russians send troops instead of just weapons.
They're just on vacation in Syria. :mad:
Let's be honest. Does anyone actually have a problem with this?
Weren't they under Soviet influence during the Cold War? The more things change the more they remain the same
Quote from: DGuller on September 02, 2015, 10:30:20 PM
They're just on vacation in Syria. :mad:
This. I'm sure that the Russian ministry of defense has ensured semi-plausible deniability.
Here you go. It's all Western propaganda.
http://www.rt.com/op-edge/314151-russia-military-media-hysteria/
QuoteBogus reports as part of Western media war
The whole point of western propaganda war is just to get things out there, no matter if they can be disproven later, says Richard Spencer of AlternativeRight.com. Some media report on "facts" in a way that suits their government's foreign policy agenda.
Israeli news site Ynet News, citing unnamed Western diplomats, reported Monday that Russia began "military intervention" in Syria and deployed fighter jets and helicopters to a government airbase near Damascus to launch attacks against ISIS and rebel-aligned targets.
The Kremlin has dismissed the allegations, saying "One shouldn't believe these reports."
Earlier, a Forbes Magazine report on alleged Russian army casualties in Ukraine citing a dodgy Russian website sparked a media and Twitter storm.
READ MORE: 'What happened to standards of journalism, 'trusted' Western media?'
RT:According to the latest article, Russia is "sending jets to Syria" to fight ISIL, and moreover, Iran is cooperating with them and the US knows all about it. How do you feel about this story?
Richard Spencer: I would first point out that this Ynet story is actually the number one story on Google news when you google Russia and Syria. So this is not some alternative media blog – this is a major part of the propaganda war. In some ways it comes out of an alternative universe, and it is not coming from universe we live in. Russia, as opposed to the US, has been the power that has really stressed stability, and stressed diplomacy. Russia has prevented a war in Syria in 2013, or at least you could say that it played indispensable role in preventing what would be yet another catastrophic endless conflict in that region.
Yes, I think it's a part of a propaganda war, it is part of a certain faction in the US that wants the Shia and Sunni to be going at it endlessly, that actually wants chaos in the region, that thinks that it is good for Israel, or some other's interest. The whole point about a propaganda war is of course not that it is true, and it is not even that you can't debunk it later; the whole point of the propaganda war is to get it out there. So you have things like "weapons of mass destruction," you have things like "Vladimir Putin ordered a plane to be shut down in Ukraine," and so on, and so on. These things can be disproven; these things turn out to be bogus. But the whole point is to get them out there. They are kind of percolating throughout the media and through people's minds in the west. And that is mainly what the story was about.
RT:In many cases, like in the aforementioned story, the alleged evidence proved to be bogus. Why supposedly credible news organizations are not doing fact-checking before publication?
RS: Unfortunately, not all news organizations are really concerned about the truth and about getting it right, and about digging in. There are certainly a lot of news organizations that are simply interested in sensation for sensation sake. But also there is quite a bit of organizations that are really connected with governments and connected with specific factors or movements within governments. You can see this with the conservative media in the US – they have a very specific foreign policy agenda; they are going to report on the "facts" in a way that supports that agenda. And that agenda, of course, is more war that they think will benefit the US or Israel. But you have to think: the media is very often an arm of governments, an arm of movements within governments. And that is most likely what we're seeing today with this Ynet story.
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.
"The whole point of western propaganda war is just to get things out there, no matter if they can be disproven later" - I think they accidentally mixed up "western" and "Russian" in translation.
QuoteYes, I think it's a part of a propaganda war, it is part of a certain faction in the US that wants the Shia and Sunni to be going at it endlessly, that actually wants chaos in the region, that thinks that it is good for Israel, or some other's interest.
I love how there is this incredibly dangerous faction that is responsible for everything yet the Russians respect its privacy so will not name any names or give any details on what this faction is. I am moved by their discretion.
It is a double secret probationary faction.
Quote from: Razgovory on September 03, 2015, 12:24:50 AM
Let's be honest. Does anyone actually have a problem with this?
Well I for one would rather Assad win the war than ISIS. :hmm:
Keeps Putin busy too. Win-win.
Quote from: Caliga on September 03, 2015, 09:42:54 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on September 03, 2015, 12:24:50 AM
Let's be honest. Does anyone actually have a problem with this?
Well I for one would rather Assad win the war than ISIS. :hmm:
Agreed. It seems that this news may not be correct but I wouldn't care much if Russian troops and/or equipment did join to assist Assad. I wouldn't have thought that a few years ago but after the mess, failed terror group state Libya is turning into, plus the rise if ISIS, I figure that Syria would be the same. I'd now rather that Syria/Assad can prevail.
Just like we should have stood up Gadhafi, we should have stood up Assad, too.... and should have left Saddam Hussein in power.
Quote from: Caliga on September 03, 2015, 10:10:50 AM
Just like we should have stood up Gadhafi, we should have stood up Assad, too.... and should have left Saddam Hussein in power.
Not sure about Saddam, as him going down also had an effect of Gadhafi changing his ways. Gadhafi had become somewhat friendly to the US and West. He gave up any nuclear or WMD equipment, centrifuges, etc. I believe he was also giving intel on terrorists to the US/West, as those groups were a threat to him also. He had seemed to come around to realizing he was better off not being on the side of radicals. His sons had relations with US officials. It really seems a mistake to have taken him down.
The Euros were primarily behind the move to help oust Gadhafi right? Still it was a bad idea to get involved.
Well there was massive unemployment in Libya, and rampant corruption, and total dictatorship. When demonstrators protested, Gaddafi lost it and send in troops with guns blazing and killed hundred of people. A number of big regime players went rebel. That situation was going to hell no matter what NATO did. With no intervention maybe Gaddafi hangs on, but most likely in the same way that Assad has hung on.
Quote from: Valmy on September 03, 2015, 01:53:54 PM
The Euros were primarily behind the move to help oust Gadhafi right? Still it was a bad idea to get involved.
Yes, yes it was on both counts.
We have collectively fucked up the cradle of humanity so much we owe them thousandfold to help the refugees.
America should have tried to get rid of Gaddafi. Maybe by airstrike?
Quote from: Razgovory on September 03, 2015, 12:24:50 AM
Let's be honest. Does anyone actually have a problem with this?
Hell no.
Quote from: The Brain on September 03, 2015, 02:52:04 PM
America should have tried to get rid of Gaddafi. Maybe by airstrike?
:moon:
Perhaps because of the broken clock thing, I think Putin may have been right on the Syria issue.
Russia and even Germany acts while America snoozes.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2015/09/04/the_largest_failure_of_the_obama_era_127985.html
QuoteThe Largest Failure of the Obama Era
By Michael Gerson - September 4, 2015
WASHINGTON -- One little boy in a red T-shirt, lying face down, drowned, on a Turkish beach, is a tragedy. More than 200,000 dead in Syria, 4 million fleeing refugees and 7.6 million displaced from their homes are statistics. But they represent a collective failure of massive proportions.
For four years, the Obama administration has engaged in what Frederic Hof, former special adviser for transition in Syria, calls a "pantomime of outrage." Four years of strongly worded protests, and urgent meetings and calls for negotiation -- the whole drama a sickening substitute for useful action. People talking and talking to drown out the voice of their own conscience. And blaming. In 2013, President Obama lectured the United Nations Security Council for having "demonstrated no inclination to act at all." Psychological projection on a global stage.
Always there is Obama's weary realism. "It's not the job of the president of the United States to solve every problem in the Middle East." We must be "modest in our belief that we can remedy every evil."
But we are not dealing here with every problem or every evil; rather a discrete and unique set of circumstances: The largest humanitarian failure of the Obama era is also its largest strategic failure.
At some point, being "modest" becomes the same thing as being inured to atrocities. President Bashar al-Assad's helicopters continue to drop barrel bombs filled with shrapnel and chlorine. In recent attacks on Marea, Islamic State forces have used skin-blistering mustard gas and deployed, over a few days, perhaps 50 suicide bombers. We have seen starvation sieges, and kidnappings, and beheadings, and more than 10,000 dead children.
German Chancellor Angela Merkel has changed her country's asylum rules to welcome every Syrian refugee that arrives. Syrians have taken to calling her "Mama Merkel, Mother of the Outcasts." I wonder what they call America's president.
At many points during the last four years, even relatively small actions might have reduced the pace of civilian casualties in Syria. How hard would it have been to destroy the helicopters dropping barrel bombs on neighborhoods? A number of options well short of major intervention might have reduced the regime's destructive power and/or strengthened the capabilities of more responsible forces. All were untaken.
This was not some humanitarian problem distant from the center of American interests. It was a crisis at the heart of the Middle East that produced a vacuum of sovereignty that has attracted and empowered some of the worst people in the world. Inaction was a conscious, determined choice on the part of the Obama White House. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta and CIA Director David Petraeus advocated arming favorable proxies. Sunni friends and allies in the region asked, then begged, for U.S. leadership. All were overruled or ignored.
In the process, Syria has become the graveyard of American credibility. The chemical weapons "red line." "The tide of war is receding." "We don't do stupid [stuff]." These are global punch lines. "The analogy we use around here sometimes," said Obama of the Islamic State, "and I think is accurate, is if a JV team puts on Lakers uniforms, that doesn't make them Kobe Bryant." Now the goal to "degrade and destroy" the Islamic State looks unachievable with current strategy and resources. "The time has come for President Assad to step aside," said Obama in 2011. Yet Assad will likely outlast Obama in power.
What explains Obama's high tolerance for humiliation and mass atrocities in Syria? The Syrian regime is Iran's proxy, propped up by billions of dollars each year. And Obama wanted nothing to interfere with the prospects for a nuclear deal with Iran. He was, as Hof has said, "reluctant to offend the Iranians at this critical juncture." So the effective concession of Syria as an Iranian zone of influence is just one more cost of the president's legacy nuclear agreement.
Never mind that Iran will now have tens of billions of unfrozen assets to strengthen Assad's struggling military. And never mind that Assad's atrocities are one of the main recruiting tools for the Islamic State and other Sunni radicals. All of which is likely to extend a war that no one can win, which has incubated regional and global threats, and thrown a small body in a red T-shirt against a distant shore.
(c) 2015, Washington Post Writers Group
Quote from: alfred russel on September 03, 2015, 09:27:12 PM
Perhaps because of the broken clock thing, I think Putin may have been right on the Syria issue.
Yeah, just automatically opposing anything the West does will eventually make you right some times by default, it's not like we are always right.
Russia doesn't get what the fuss is about.
http://tass.ru/en/russia/818572
QuoteNo secret in Russian-Syrian military technical cooperation — Russian Foreign Ministry
Cooperation with Damascus in its fight against the threat of terrorism is Russia's official position
MOSCOW, September 3. /TASS/. Media reports about Russian military planes in Syria have already been disavowed by Russia's Defense Ministry and presidential administration, Russian Foreign Ministry's official spokesperson Maria Zakharova said on Thursday.
"I saw reports about Russian planes on the Syrian territory. I also saw comments on this matter by Russia's Defense Ministry and presidential administration that disavowed this information. There is nothing to add here," Zakharova said.
"Sensational statements are often made about military-technical cooperation between Russia and Syria - that it grows or decreases," she said. "We see them in different parts of the world. And it is always made to sound sensational. We say that we never tried to make a secret out of this. This is our consistent position connected with assisting official Damascus in its fight against the terrorism threat," the diplomat stressed.
Zakharova also noted that Russia "regularly raises on platforms of international organizations" issues of protecting Christians in Syria. "This is one of the most important topics in the context of the Syrian settlement," she stressed.
Russia continues military-technical cooperation with Syria in the routine mode, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said earlier on Thursday.
"Russia maintains [military-technical] cooperation with Syria and supports it. This is a consistent process," Peskov said answering a journalist's question on whether the format of military-technical cooperation between the two countries has changed.
On Wednesday, Peskov refuted media reports about possible participation of Russian Armed Forces in airstrikes against the Islamic State (IS) terrorist organization. "You should not believe these media reports," Peskov told journalists.
Several foreign media outlets reported earlier that Russian aviation may take part in carrying out airstrikes against IS positions in Syria. Reports said equipment has already been transferred to carry out the operation.
Quote from: Razgovory on September 03, 2015, 12:24:50 AM
Let's be honest. Does anyone actually have a problem with this?
This.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on September 04, 2015, 02:23:07 AM
QuoteThe Largest Failure of the Obama Era
LOL. Yes history clearly shows we should have intervened massively in Syria. What a great idea that would have been. Then instead of one dead kid on a beach we would be personally responsible for thousands we blew up ourselves...and the situation would be no better.
Quote from: Valmy on September 04, 2015, 08:11:59 AM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on September 04, 2015, 02:23:07 AM
QuoteThe Largest Failure of the Obama Era
LOL. Yes history clearly shows we should have intervened massively in Syria. What a great idea that would have been. Then instead of one dead kid on a beach we would be personally responsible for thousands we blew up ourselves...and the situation would be no better.
I don't really agree with the article per se, but your response is silly.
The argument being made is not that there should be/have been a "massive intervention". The argument being made is that Obama should have done...something.
Quote from: Berkut on September 04, 2015, 12:31:52 PM
The argument being made is that Obama should have done...something.
We did do some things and they were all disastrous failures. Doing more things seems like a poor recommendation.
Obama's greatest mistake was bluffing when it came to chemical weapons and Assad. Obama's greatest correct decision was saying "oops, you got me, I've got nothing" when Assad called.
Quote from: Berkut on September 04, 2015, 12:31:52 PM
The argument being made is not that there should be/have been a "massive intervention". The argument being made is that Obama should have done...something.
And that's about the high point of the level of specificity it reaches, except for the part about "destroying helicopters."
For a piece bashing empty rhetoric, it sure does a good job of providing a shining example.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on September 04, 2015, 01:18:36 PM
Quote from: Berkut on September 04, 2015, 12:31:52 PM
The argument being made is not that there should be/have been a "massive intervention". The argument being made is that Obama should have done...something.
And that's about the high point of the level of specificity it reaches, except for the part about "destroying helicopters."
For a piece bashing empty rhetoric, it sure does a good job of providing a shining example.
A very fair critique of the piece.
It is trivial to call for action. Pretty fucking hard to come up with action that might actually work.
You know, if we elect Trump he can semi-solve this problem. He can make the Syrians build a wall around their own country. The required labor will keep the people there busy, and the ones not working on the wall will be cut off from the rest of the World.
Quote from: Valmy on September 04, 2015, 08:11:59 AM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on September 04, 2015, 02:23:07 AM
QuoteThe Largest Failure of the Obama Era
LOL. Yes history clearly shows we should have intervened massively in Syria. What a great idea that would have been. Then instead of one dead kid on a beach we would be personally responsible for thousands we blew up ourselves...and the situation would be no better.
What a silly sad comment. :wacko:
Quote from: citizen k on September 04, 2015, 02:40:33 PM
What a silly sad comment. :wacko:
What could we possibly have done here? There are two options: back Assad or back the rebels. Either way we are directly responsible for what they do in their victory. Or at least that seems to be how it goes.
Why is that silly and sad? That is exactly what we have going on in Libya. We would be responsible for the outcome.
I am wiling to be convinced. What would be a non-silly and non-sad way to handle it?
I thought Minsky said it very well. Now I would like to see much more active role in taking care of the refugees but in the actual conflict? It is not our fight.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on September 04, 2015, 01:18:36 PM
Quote from: Berkut on September 04, 2015, 12:31:52 PM
The argument being made is not that there should be/have been a "massive intervention". The argument being made is that Obama should have done...something.
And that's about the high point of the level of specificity it reaches, except for the part about "destroying helicopters."
For a piece bashing empty rhetoric, it sure does a good job of providing a shining example.
Taking out Assad's air force could be done without that much risk to American forces.
Why would we do that when ISIS is doing it for us?
I thought the idea was to not hand everything to ISIS on a platter.
I see use in further weakening Assad.
So ISIS can take over the rest of Syria? Not sure that's a great idea. :hmm:
I forgot to put the negative in that sentence. It should have read "I see no use in further weakening Assad." Assad is not a nice man, and his is not a nice government, but he isn't setting up slave markets. He was once our ally. I doubt he will be again, but don't need to antagonize him anymore.
Are all Arab societies like Iraq, Libya and Syria? As soon as the government falls they immediately try to eat one another?
I think that goes for most human societies.
Looks like this is really happening. I wonder how many troops and how many war crimes they would have to commit to win the war for Assad? :hmm:
http://news.yahoo.com/russia-says-no-secret-military-specialists-syria-112828419.html
Quote
Russia said to get Iran's clearance for Syria-bound flights
Associated Press
By LYNN BERRY and VLADIMIR ISACHENKOV
5 hours ago
MOSCOW (AP) — Iran has granted permission for Russian planes to fly over its territory en route to Syria, Russian news agencies said Wednesday, a bypass needed after Bulgaria refused overflights amid signs of a Russian military buildup in Syria that has concerned the U.S. and NATO.
The news agencies quoted Maxim Suslov, spokesman for the Russian Embassy in Tehran, as saying it has received Iranian permission for Syria-bound flights. After Bulgaria rejected Moscow's overflight request for Sept. 1-24, a path via Iran and Iraq appeared to be the only one left, as Russia apparently sought to avoid flying over Turkey, which in 2012 grounded a Syria-bound plane carrying radar parts from Moscow.
There was no immediate confirmation from Iran.
The controversy over the Russian flights comes amid signs of increased Russian military presence in Syria. Moscow, which has backed Syrian President Bashar Assad throughout the nation's 4½-year civil war, said its military experts are in the country to train its military to use Russian weapons.
Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova accused the West of creating "strange hysteria" over Russian activities in Syria, saying that Moscow has been openly supplying weapons and sending military specialists there for a long time.
"Russia has never made a secret of its military-technical cooperation with Syria," she said, adding she could "confirm and repeat once again that Russian military specialists are in Syria to help them master the weapons being supplied."
President Vladimir Putin and other Russian officials have sought to cast arms supplies to Assad's regime as part of international efforts to combat the Islamic State group and other militant organizations in Syria.
Putin hasn't ruled out a bigger role. Asked Friday if Russia could deploy its troops to Syria to help fight IS, he said "we are looking at various options."
By playing with the idea of joining the U.S.-led coalition fighting IS, Putin may hope to reset ties with the West, which have been shattered by the Ukrainian crisis, and also protect Moscow's influence in Syria, where it has a navy base. But the U.S. and its allies have seen Assad as the cause of the Syrian crisis, and Washington has warned Moscow against beefing up its presence.
U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry spoke to Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov on Wednesday for a second time in five days. U.S. State Department spokesman John Kirby said Kerry "reiterated our concern about these reports of Russia military buildup," adding if they are true, it could lead "lead to greater violence and even more instability" in Syria.
Indicating a continuing rift, the Russian Foreign Ministry said that Lavrov on the call emphasized Syrian government troops' role in confronting extremist groups and the need to take consolidated action.
On Wednesday, NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg also said the alliance is concerned about reports about Russia's increased military presence in Syria. He didn't offer details.
A U.S. defense official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he wasn't authorized to publicly discuss the issue, said the U.S. has seen the Russians fly a variety of military assets into the airfield south of the Syrian city of Latakia, including troops capable of protecting Russian forces there and modular housing units. He said it indicated that the Russians are preparing for some sort of air operations. The official said he was unaware of any evidence that Russian forces have conducted any offensive military operations in Syria.
Another U.S. official briefed on the latest intelligence declined to confirm or deny whether Russian troops have participated in military operations in Syria. However, he said, U.S. intelligence agencies have assessed that Russia's deployment of military personnel and weapons to Syria reflect growing concern about Assad's ability to weather opposition gains — and it suggests that Moscow may be willing to intervene directly on Assad's behalf.
Russia's military involvement raises a number of concerns, the U.S. official said, especially because it does not appear to be coordinated with the other countries operating in the area. It is not clear what Russia intends to actually do, he said.
One Lebanese politician said on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue that some Russian forces already have taken part in some small-scale operations in Syria, possibly paving way for broader military action against IS, including airstrikes, in the future. He provided no details, and other Lebanese politicians contested the claim, saying the Russians haven't joined the fray yet.
Another Lebanese politician familiar with the issue, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he wasn't in a position to publicly discuss the subject, said there are Russian experts and, possibly, pilots, in Syria, but no full-fledged fighting force yet.
"There are experts and there are also crews for advanced equipment," he said. "They have no fighting forces on the ground."
"Russia is a partner in the war," the politician added. "Russia from the beginning told several officials, including Lebanese, that defending Damascus is like defending Moscow. It will do what is needed."
Hisham Jaber, a retired Lebanese army general familiar with the Syrian military, also said Russian military experts have been in Syria for a long time.
"Every time Syria gets new weapons, Russian experts come to train them (Syrians) on these weapons," Jaber said. "Because of current situation in Syria, these experts need protection and special forces are in Syria to protect advanced weapons and to protect the Russian experts who train Syrians. There are plans to build a military air base in the coastal town of Jable."
Jaber said the Syrian coast is a "red line for the regime and the Russians," and it's threatened now after the fall of the northwestern town of Jisr al-Shughour earlier this year into the hands of al-Qaida fighters and their allies. Over the past weeks, militants have shelled the coastal city of Latakia. Jisr al-Shughour is only 50 kilometers (30 miles) away.
"The Russians will not allow the fall of the Syrian coast because of the naval base and the planned air base," Jaber said.
"Until this moment, there are no Russian forces fighting on the ground," he added. "There are experts everywhere, who sometimes give advice in operations rooms to Syrian forces."
Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov criticized Washington for refusing to cooperate with the Syrian government in the fight against the IS.
"The basis for action of the U.S.-led anti-IS coalition is flawed, because it should at the very least involve cooperation with the countries on whose turf this battle is being fought," he said, according to Russian news agencies. "When our American colleagues manage to understand that there are global problems that can't be solved without Russia, we will be able to cooperate."
__
AP National Security Writer Robert Burns, AP Diplomatic Writer Matthew Lee and AP Intelligence Writer Ken Dilanian in Washington, Zeina Karam and Bassem Mroue in Beirut, Elena Becatoros in Athens and Karel Janicek in Prague contributed to this report.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/09/09/us-mideast-crisis-syria-exclusive-idUSKCN0R91H720150909
Quote
Exclusive: Russian troops join combat in Syria - sources
MOSCOW/BEIRUT/WASHINGTON | By Gabriela Baczynska, Tom Perry, Laila Bassam and Phil Stewart
Russian forces have begun participating in military operations in Syria in support of government troops, three Lebanese sources familiar with the political and military situation there said on Wednesday.
The sources, speaking to Reuters on condition they not be identified, gave the most forthright account yet from the region of what the United States fears is a deepening Russian military role in Syria's civil war, though one of the Lebanese sources said the number of Russians involved so far was small.
U.S. officials said Russia sent two tank landing ships and additional cargo aircraft to Syria in the past day or so and deployed a small number of naval infantry forces.
The U.S. officials, who also spoke on condition of anonymity, said the intent of Russia's military moves in Syria was unclear. One suggested the focus may be on preparing an airfield near the port city of Latakia, a stronghold of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.
U.S. officials have not ruled out the possibility that Russia may want to use the airfield for air combat missions.
U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry spoke to his Russian counterpart for the second time in four days to express concern over reports of Russian military activities in Syria, warning that it could fan more violence.
The White House said it was closely monitoring the situation.
Russia says the Syrian government must be incorporated into a shared global fight against Islamic State, the Islamist group that has taken over large parts of Syria and Iraq. The United States and Assad's regional foes see him as part of the problem.
"We would welcome constructive Russian contributions to the counter-ISIL effort, but we've been clear that it would be unconscionable for any party, including the Russians, to provide any support to the Assad regime," White House spokesman Eric Schultz said, using an acronym for Islamic State.
SYRIAN TROOPS PULLING BACK
Assad's forces have faced big setbacks on the battlefield in a four-year-old multi-sided civil war that has killed 250,000 people and driven half of Syria's 23 million people from their homes.
Syrian troops pulled out of a major air base last Wednesday, and a monitoring group said this meant government soldiers were no longer present at all in Idlib province, most of which slipped from government control earlier this year.
Moscow confirmed it had "experts" on the ground in Syria, its long-time ally in the Middle East.
But Russia has declined to comment on the scale and scope of its military presence. Damascus denied Russians were involved in combat, but a Syrian official said the presence of experts had increased in the past year.
Reflecting Western concern, Germany's foreign minister warned Russia against increased military intervention, saying the Iran nuclear deal and new U.N. initiatives offered a starting point for a political solution to the conflict.
NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said reports of growing Russian military activity in Syria were a cause for concern, while France said it made finding a political solution to the crisis more complicated.
Two of the Lebanese sources said the Russians were establishing two bases in Syria, one near the coast and one further inland which would be an operations base.
"The Russians are no longer just advisors," one of the sources said. "The Russians have decided to join the war against terrorism."
RUSSIAN NAVAL BASE
Moscow's only naval base in the Mediterranean is at Tartous on the Syrian coast in territory held by Assad, and keeping it secure would be an important strategic objective for the Kremlin.
Another of the Lebanese sources said that so far any Russian combat role was still small: "They have started in small numbers, but the bigger force did not yet take part ... There are numbers of Russians taking part in Syria but they did not yet join the fight against terrorism strongly."
The Syrian official said: "Russian experts are always present but in the last year they have been present to a greater degree."
Officials in the United States, which is fighting an air war against the Islamist militant group Islamic State in Syria and also opposes Assad's government, have said in recent days that they suspect Russia is reinforcing to aid Assad.
Washington has put pressure on countries nearby to deny their air space to Russian flights, a move Moscow denounced on Wednesday as "international boorishness".
Russia has set out the case for supporting Assad in the most forthright terms yet in the past few days, likening the Western approach to Syria to failures in Iraq and Libya.
Part of the diplomatic quarrel has centered around use of air space for flights, which Moscow says bring humanitarian aid but U.S. officials say may be bringing military supplies.
U.S. officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, told Reuters on Wednesday that multiple Russian flights have passed over the airspace of Iran and Iraq to reach Syria.
RUSSIAN OVERFLIGHTS
The State Department said Russian use of Iranian airspace would not be surprising, given Tehran's past support for Assad.
Spokesman John Kirby said the United States had advised "partners and our friends to ask the Russians tough questions about" overflight requests. He did not elaborate, saying only: "I'm not gonna detail diplomatic conversations."
To avoid flying over Turkey, one of Assad's main enemies, Russia has sought to fly planes over Balkan states, but Washington has urged them to deny Moscow permission.
On Tuesday, Bulgaria refused a Russian request to use its airspace citing doubts about the cargo on board. It said on Wednesday it would allow Russian supply flights to Syria to use its airspace only if Moscow agreed to checks of their cargo at a Bulgarian airport.
Turkey has not officially confirmed a ban on Russian flights to Syria but says it considers any requests to fly over its air space to Syria on a case by case basis.
Thus far in the war, Iran and its Lebanese ally Hezbollah have been Assad's main sources of military support. The momentum turned against Assad earlier this year.
In the latest setback, state television reported government troops had surrendered an air base in northwestern Syria to a rebel alliance after nearly two years under siege.
This meant the last government troops had withdrawn from central Idlib province, according to the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, a UK-based group that monitors the conflict.
(Additional reporting by Suleiman al-Khalidi in Amman; Mark Hosenball and Lesley Wroughton in Washington; Writing by Tom Perry, Sylvia Westall, Peter Graff and Phil Stewart; Editing by Giles Elgood, David Storey, Grant McCool)
Quote from: Tonitrus on September 04, 2015, 10:40:35 PM
I think that goes for most human societies.
I wouldn't eat you Toni, too skinny.
Have you ever played a game of EU and invested in all the land techs, and built conscription centers and nice forts and had a strong army under a great leader and, without any justification, just declared war to play with your army men? I think that is what Putin has done, except he is in eastern tech group so all his crap sucks and is rusty.
http://www.themoscowtimes.com/news/article/russian-troops-join-combat-in-syria/529831.html
QuoteRussian Troops Join Combat in Syria
MOSCOW / BEIRUT / WASHINGTON — Russian forces have begun participating in military operations in Syria in support of government troops, three Lebanese sources familiar with the political and military situation there said on Wednesday.
The sources, speaking to Reuters on condition they not be identified, gave the most forthright account yet from the region of what U.S. officials say appears to be a new military buildup by Moscow, one of President Bashar Assad's main allies, though one of the sources said the numbers of Russians involved so far were small.
Two U.S. officials said Russia has sent two tank landing ships and additional aircraft to Syria in the past day or so and has deployed a small number of naval infantry forces.
The U.S. officials, who also spoke on condition of anonymity, said the intent of Russia's military moves in Syria remained unclear. One of the officials said initial indications suggested the focus was on preparing an airfield near the port city of Latakia, an Assad stronghold.
The moves come at a time when forces of Assad's government have faced major setbacks on the battlefield in a four-year-old multi-sided civil war that has killed 250,000 people and driven half of Syria's 23 million people from their homes.
Syrian troops pulled out of a major air base on Wednesday, and a monitoring group said this meant government soldiers were no longer present at all in Idlib province, most of which slipped from government control earlier this year.
Moscow confirmed it had "experts" on the ground.
But Russia has declined to comment on the exact scale and scope of its military presence in Syria. Damascus denied Russians were involved in combat, but a Syrian official said the presence of experts had increased in the past year.
Officials in the United States, which is fighting an air war against the Islamist militant group the Islamic State in Syria and also opposes Assad's government, have said in recent days that they suspect Russia is reinforcing to aid Assad.
Washington has put pressure on countries nearby to deny their air space to Russian flights, a move Moscow denounced on Wednesday as "international boorishness."
Moscow's only naval base in the Mediterranean is at Tartus on the Syrian coast in territory held by Assad, and keeping it secure would be an important strategic objective for the Kremlin.
Two of the Lebanese sources said the Russians were establishing two bases in Syria, one near the coast and one further inland which would be an operations base.
"The Russians are no longer just advisers," one of them said. "The Russians have decided to join the war against terrorism."
Another of the Lebanese sources said that so far any Russian combat role was still small: "They have started in small numbers, but the bigger force did not yet take part ... There are numbers of Russians taking part in Syria but they did not yet join the fight against terrorism strongly."
The Syrian official said: "Russian experts are always present but in the last year they have been present to a greater degree."
Reflecting Western concern, Germany's foreign minister warned Russia against increased military intervention in Syria, saying the Iran nuclear deal and new U.N. initiatives offered a starting point for a political solution to the conflict.
NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said reports of growing Russian military activity in Syria were a cause for concern, while France said it made finding a political solution to the crisis more complicated.
Thus far in the war, Iran and its Lebanese ally Hezbollah have the main sources of military support for Assad, but momentum turned against him earlier this year.
In the latest major battlefield setback, state television reported government troops had surrendered an air base in northwestern Syria to a rebel alliance after nearly two years under siege.
The loss of the base meant the last government troops had now withdrawn altogether from central Idlib province, according to the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, a Britain-based group that monitors the conflict.
Coalitions of rebels, who range from hardline Sunni Islamists like al-Qaida's Syrian affiliate the Nusra Front to more secular nationalists, have made gains in the northwest and southwest of the country. They often fight against both the government and Islamic State fighters who control much of the east of Syria as well as northern Iraq.
Russia says the Syrian government must be incorporated into a shared global fight against Islamic State. The United States and Assad's regional foes see him as part of the problem.
Russia's Foreign Ministry said Moscow would consider additional military measures needed for fighting terrorism in Syria if it deemed them necessary.
'Worrisome'
A senior U.S. official said on Saturday Washington had detected "worrisome preparatory steps," including transport of prefabricated housing units for hundreds of people to a Syrian airfield, that could signal that Russia is readying deployment of heavy military assets there.
Russia has in recent days set out the case for supporting Assad in the most forthright terms yet, likening the Western approach to Syria to failures in Iraq and Libya.
Part of the diplomatic quarrel has centred around use of air space for flights, which Moscow says bring humanitarian aid but U.S. officials say may be bringing military supplies.
To avoid flying over Turkey, one of Assad's main enemies, Russia has sought to fly planes over Balkan states, but Washington has urged them to deny Moscow permission.
On Tuesday Bulgaria refused a Russian request to use its airspace for flights due to doubts about the cargo on board. It said on Wednesday it would allow Russian supply flights to Syria to use its airspace only if Moscow agreed to checks of their cargo at a Bulgarian airport.
Turkey has not officially confirmed a ban on Russian flights to Syria but says it considers any requests to fly over its air space to Syria on a case by case basis.
Fallen Base
On Wednesday the Syrian army withdrew completely from Idlib province after insurgents captured the Abu al-Duhur military airport there, said Rami Abdulrahman, head of the Syrian Observatory. Members of a local pro-government militia remained in just two Shiite villages in the province, he said.
Rebel sources said the Nusra Front had played a leading role in the capture of the airport. Nusra is part of a coalition of Islamist groups called the Army of Conquest which has seized most of Idlib province this year.
Syrian state television said in a news flash that the army garrison that had defended the military airport had evacuated.
Another major base east of Aleppo, Kweiris, is currently besieged by ultra-hardline Islamic State militants.
Nusra Front made gains in northwestern Syria alongside other insurgent groups since May, seizing the city of Idlib, the town of Jisr al-Shughour and moving closer to coastal areas vital to government control of western Syria.
http://www.themoscowtimes.com/news/article/lavrov-warns-of-incidents-between-us-and-russian-military-in-syria/529992.html
QuoteLavrov Warns of 'Incidents' Between U.S. and Russian Military in Syria
Russia called on Friday for Washington to restart direct military-to-military cooperation to avert "unintended incidents" near Syria, at a time when U.S. officials say Moscow is building up forces to protect President Bashar Assad's government.
The United States is leading a campaign of air strikes against Islamic State fighters in Syrian air space, and a greater Russian presence would raise the prospect of the Cold War superpower foes encountering each other on the battlefield.
Both Moscow and Washington say their enemy is Islamic State. But Russia supports the government of Assad, while the United States says his presence makes the situation worse.
In recent days, U.S. officials have described what they say is a buildup of Russian equipment and manpower.
Lebanese sources said at least some Russian troops were now engaged in combat operations in support of Assad's government. Moscow has declined to comment on those reports.
At a news conference, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said Russia was sending equipment to help Assad fight Islamic State. Russian servicemen were in Syria, he said, primarily to help service that equipment and teach Syrian soldiers how to use it.
Russia was also conducting naval exercises in the eastern Mediterranean, he said, describing the drills as long-planned and staged in accordance with international law.
Lavrov blamed Washington for cutting off direct military-to-military communications between Russia and NATO over the Ukraine crisis, saying such contacts were "important for the avoidance of undesired, unintended incidents."
"We are always in favor of military people talking to each other in a professional way. They understand each other very well," Lavrov said. "If, as [U.S. Secretary of State] John Kerry has said many times, the United States wants those channels frozen, then be our guest."
U.S. officials say they do not know what Moscow's intentions are in Syria. The reports of a Russian buildup come at a time when momentum has shifted against Assad's government in Syria's 4-year-old civil war, with Damascus suffering battlefield setbacks this year at the hands of an array of insurgent groups.
Moscow, Assad's ally since the Cold War, maintains its only Mediterranean naval base at Tartous on the Syrian coast, a strategic objective.
In recent months NATO-member Turkey has also raised the prospect of outside powers playing a greater role in Syria by proposing a "safe zone" near its border, kept free of both Islamic State and government troops.
Common Enemy
The four-year-old multi-sided civil war in Syria has killed around 250,000 people and driven half of Syria's 23 million people from their homes. Some have traveled to European Union countries, creating a refugee crisis there.
Differences over Assad's future have made it impossible for Moscow and the West to take joint action against Islamic State, even though they say the group, which rules a self-proclaimed caliphate on swathes of Syria and Iraq, is their common enemy.
French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius said on Friday that it was too early to judge what exactly Russia's motivations at present were in Syria, but that "adding war to war" would not help resolve the Syrian conflict.
"If it's about defending the base in Tartous why not? But if it's to enter the conflict ...." he said, without finishing the thought.
Bargaining Power
Diplomats in Moscow say the Kremlin is happy for the West to believe it is building up its military in Syria, calculating that this will give it more bargaining power in any international talks about whether Assad stays in power.
Western and Arab countries have backed demands from the Syrian opposition that Assad must give way under any negotiated settlement to the war. Assad refuses to go and so far his enemies have lacked the capability to force him out, leaving the war grinding on for years. All diplomatic efforts at a solution have collapsed.
Assad's supporters have taken encouragement this week from an apparent shift in tone from some European states that suggests a softening of demands he leave power.
Britain, one of Assad's staunchest Western opponents, said this week it could accept him staying in place for a transition period if it helped resolve the conflict.
France, another fierce Assad opponent, said on Monday that he must leave power "at some point or another." Smaller countries went further, with Austria saying Assad must be involved in the fight against Islamic State and Spain saying negotiations with him were necessary to end the war.
The pro-Syrian government newspaper al-Watan saw Britain's position as "a new sign of the changes in Western positions that started with Madrid and Austria."
We are just fighting ISIS right? Might as well make sure we do not accidentally blow up Russians.
As hilarious as it would be to blow some up, yeah I mostly agree.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on September 02, 2015, 08:43:29 PM
Has Putin flipped his lid? There's no way this is going to be effective enough to save Assad. If ISIS doesn't pull him down, Al Nusra and/or the FSA will.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/09/01/russia-puts-boots-on-the-ground-in-syria.html
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/syria-civil-war-russians-filmed-fighting-alongside-president-assads-forces-10483842.html
Tim, I think you called that wrong?
https://www.polygraph.info/a/us-wagner-russia-syria-scores-killed/29044339.html
QuoteBelow is an English transcript of the audio recordings and the actual audio clips in Russian with English captions:
The first audio clip:
"The reports that are on TV about ... well, you know, about Syria and the 25 people that are wounded there from the Syrian f*** Army and -- well ... to make it short, we've had our asses f*** kicked. So, one squadron f**** lost 200 people ...right away, another one lost 10 people... and I don't know about the third squadron but it got torn up pretty badly, too... So three squadrons took a beating... The Yankees attacked... first they blasted the f*** out of us by artillery and then they took four helicopters up and pushed us in a f*** merry-go-round with heavy caliber machine guns....They were all shelling the holy f*** out of it and our guys didn't have anything besides the assault rifles... nothing at all, not even mentioning shoulder-fired SAMs or anything like that...So they tore us to pieces for sure, put us through hell, and the Yankees knew for sure that the Russians were coming, that it was us, f*** Russians... Our guys were going to commandeer an oil refinery and the Yankees were holding it... We got our f**** asses beat rough, my men called me... They're there drinking now... many have gone missing... it's a total f***-up, it sucks, another takedown....Everybody, you know, treats us like pieces of sh*** ... They beat our asses like we were little pieces of sh***... but our f*** government will go in reverse now and nobody will respond or anything and nobody will punish anyone for this... So these are our casualties...
The rebellion was tainted. :(
As if it wasn't already messy enough, now it looks like actual combat between Russians and Americans. Or at least Russian soldiers against US backed fighters. And who are these fighters the US is backing anyway? Then Turks in northern Syria fighting against Kurdish groups which may be US backed, or at the least other Kurdish groups are backed by the US. Though Kurds aren't getting the supplies and weapons and probably never were as the US tried to work with Iraqi govt. to give supplies to Kurds. And of course that didn't work so well.