And next, Syria?

[J Ed]

There seems to be a real uptick in Russian involvement over the past few days including strikes in Aleppo

 

[teqniq]

On Syria, Putin Is Catering to an Audience at Home

 

[frogwoman]

China intervening now too.

 

[J Ed]

China intervening now too.

Not yet I don't think, it's been reported on a few websites like Breitbart but the pictures are from other conflicts.

 

[elbows]

The latest China rumours seem very much to be various sites jumping on a DEBKAfile report, just as the previous flurry of reports about the carrier passing through the Suez canal all stemmed from a single piece. As such I cannot yet take it seriously.

 

[elbows]

Its been clear for many weeks now that the western stance is shifting, and it seems we are about to see this confirmed:

The French air strikes in Syria reflect the shifting emphasis in the war against the Islamic State. Before now, France said that international law prevented it from attacking targets in Syria, and it was adamant that it would do nothing to help - even indirectly - the Assad government.

But the situation has changed. France now says it has evidence that IS planned terror attacks against it from Syria - making air strikes against the militants legitimate under UN rules on self-defence.

The biggest change though is that France has swallowed hard and accepted that getting rid of Mr Assad is no longer the priority.

Paris will not ever say it too loudly - because it used to be the Syrian president's most outspoken opponent - but at the moment the fight against IS trumps everything else.

Mr Assad has a staunch ally in Russian President Vladimir Putin. In order to secure Russia's support in the fight against IS, Mr Cameron is expected to tell the annual meeting of the UN General Assembly in New York that Mr Assad could remain temporarily in power at the head of a transitional government.

European leaders gathering at the UN are intensifying calls for a diplomatic push in Syria in the wake of a massive influx of refugees heading for Europe.

And in an apparent further boost to Mr Assad's position, Iraq on Sunday announced that it had signed an agreement on security and intelligence co-operation with with Russia, Iran and Syria to help combat IS.

IS conflict: France launches air strikes in Syria - BBC News

 

[Patteran]

China intervening now too.

Most recent story was boosted by its repetition in Pravda. (I'm not in the habit of reading Pravda - the usual suspect syrian war bloggers flagged it up on twitter a couple of days ago)

 

[Casually Red]

There seems to be a real uptick in Russian involvement over the past few days including strikes in Aleppo

There's over 30 Russian fighter and bomber jets now positively identified as stationed in Latakia , with a similar number of attack helicopters . And reports of a joint operations room with Iran in Iraq now as well .
The loons of all stripes are about to a get a great deal of bad news poured on top of them .

 

[Casually Red]

On Syria, Putin Is Catering to an Audience at Home

Quite a lot of bollocks in that article . Eg, the winter Olympics . It seems to be suggesting the Russians shouldn't have paid any attention to their own bloody Olympics, and the fact Putin did means he's a czar .
Rubbish like that the whole way through it . As you'd expect . It actually makes the case that Putin only started taking a serious interest in Syria a few months ago. When the facts are that his public stance now is precisely the same as its been for years . They're only paying attention to what the Russians are saying now they're on the verge of backing it up with direct military intervention , as opposed to the previous level of assistance . Which by the way also included Russian forces on the ground providing signals intel, mobile phone interception etc . Which was going on since the beginning .

It's the British establishment mouthing their bad grace at having failed in their Syrian gamble, helped cause a massive humanitarian disaster that's engulfing Europe, having absolutely no answers to it, and now having to reluctantly accept Russia is the state that alongside Syria itself will be to the forefront of clearing the British/US/ French mess up .

As Putin pointed out to them at the UN " can you see what you've done ? " . That's not a home audience he's talking to . It's a global address . On a global issue . With the wider theme of their criminal exceptional ism, unilateralism and embedded impunity .

 

[teqniq]

Why Obama and Putin are Both Wrong on Syria

 

[teqniq]

 

[camouflage]

Putin the Fixer, once more saving Obamas administration from the mess it has made for itself in Syria. Frankly I'm starting to wonder if Obamas realist faction in the US is behind the scenes working with the Russians against the neo-con faction. Regardless, his UN speech the other day was marvellous, nice the way he underlined and emphasized and double-underlined the central importance of the UN as the correct approach to addressing these problems, and of course the primacy of working with the state as the only way to engage in political reform... rather than the dicey alternative of using mercenaries and extremists as tools for regime change. Russias approach is certainly on firmer ground than what the Exceptionalists have been up to, it's like "No, the hegemony of the United States does not get to unilaterally pronounce what is what, turning the world into a number of "de facto protectorates"- because that just makes a big mess doesn't it, frameworks of international law are the only workable system going forward.

A clear win for the non-Exceptionalist world view if you ask me.

 

[J Ed]

Looks like ground troops will follow now

I expect it to look something like this

 

[kebabking]

Looks like ground troops will follow now

I expect it to look something like this

Russ Abbot goes Airborne?

 

[teqniq]

 

[J Ed]

He's the first person I have seen claim that and since he is a neocon working for a neocon think tank I will reserve judgement until someone more credible weighs in.

 

[J Ed]

WTF

 

[DotCommunist]

if anyone in the region seems more keen to bomb non daesh targets it seems to be Turkey.

 

[teqniq]

He's the first person I have seen claim that and since he is a neocon working for a neocon think tank I will reserve judgement until someone more credible weighs in.

Ta for that. I was just grabbing stuff off Twitter as it popped up. Perhaps this is more accurate

 

[J Ed]

I'm not saying it isn't true, I'm sure they will hit civilians just as NATO have, and other groups too. It will be hard to avoid non-ISIS and non-Jahbat al-Nusra fighters since most of the opposition is in bed with Jahbat al-Nusra anyway and small numbers are with ISIS too.

 

[laptop]

if anyone in the region seems more keen to bomb non daesh targets it seems to be Turkey.

How are things between Russia and Turkey then?

OtToMH, they'd be clashing over the Turkic 'Stans...

 

[teqniq]

I'm not saying it isn't true, I'm sure they will hit civilians just as NATO have, and other groups too. It will be hard to avoid non-ISIS and non-Jahbat al-Nusra fighters since most of the opposition is in bed with Jahbat al-Nusra anyway and small numbers are with ISIS too.

If as you say he's a neocon then he's definitely going to be working to a certain agenda rather that providing unbiased info, but yes there will be civilian casualties. There always are.

 

[elbows]

Looks like ground troops will follow now

Actually they keep saying it won't involve ground troops.

Mr Ivanov ruled out the use of ground troops and said the step involved only the use of the air force.

(from Russia parliament approves military move in Syria - BBC News )

Obviously there will be some people on the ground providing support, but I've not seen anything that really indicates they plan to fight on the ground with any sort of conventional army.

 

[camouflage]

Actually they keep saying it won't involve ground troops.



(from Russia parliament approves military move in Syria - BBC News )

Obviously there will be some people on the ground providing support, but I've not seen anything that really indicates they plan to fight on the ground with any sort of conventional army.

I think part of the Russian position is that like it or not- only the SAA can be effective boots on the ground against the Daesh. Furthermore the SAA have shown that they can actually defeat Daesh, but we've seen that they only stay defeated if the Daesh's sources of cross-border support can also be cut off. We'll see what the US etc, Turkey and the GCC have to say about that going forward.

 

[Geri]

I thought there were already some Russian ground troops in Syria?

From a friend on Facebook:

Local Coordination Committees in Syria 1 hour
‪#‎Homs‬ with their modern warplanes, Russian pilots started this morning targeting the liberated area in the suburbs of #Homs and ‪#‎Hama‬ after the Russian Parliament’s agreement for using the forces outside the Russian borders. The locals noticed the intensity of the explosions and the sudden qualitative development of the airstrikes. Rebels' observatories spotted dialogues in Russian language among the pilots and the base. Activists stated that none of the targeted area is for ISIS and that the attack left dozens of civilian casualties

 

[J Ed]

Moderate opposition

 

[bendeus]

Out of interest can any of our military experts comment on the effectiveness of Russian ground troops were it to come to that. I'm assuming they'd be using their Airborne Divisions rather than your spotty conscripts. How good are these guys and how effective would the be in prosecuting any form of assymetric warfare against an enemy that is well-armed, prepared and to some degree or other battle-hardened?

 

[J Ed]

Looks like Russia has been bombing US vetted opposition groups.

 

[kebabking]

Out of interest can any of our military experts comment on the effectiveness of Russian ground troops were it to come to that. I'm assuming they'd be using their Airborne Divisions rather than your spotty conscripts. How good are these guys and how effective would the be in prosecuting any form of assymetric warfare against an enemy that is well-armed, prepared and to some degree or other battle-hardened?

phyically fit, well trained, fairly well equipped (their issues are to do with the extent to which they are 'networked' as individuals or small units, into the wider picture - so their ability to watch live feed from overhead aircraft, have everyone know where everyone else is etc..).

their ROE will be, errmmm.... robust, and people who complain about the amount of damage western militaries do to things/people they aren't actually fighting are about to get a shock. how motivated they are is an unknown, but i suspect that the people they send will be well motivated, and knowledge of what IS will do to them if they get captured will give them any further motivation they need. as for experience, the formations they send would be formations that have been to Ukraine (on leave, obviously ...).

i think Russian forces used in such an operation would be pretty effective at helping the SAA establish defensive lines within which Assad can retain power. i also think they would use such force in doing so that it would make Assad even less popular outside his current circle than he currently is.

personally i'm unsure that Russia has the ability to do Syria and Ukraine at the same time - the Russian military has a thin crust of well motivated, well trained, well equipped formations floating on a sea of badly trained, badly equipped, barely-fed shit. possibly between 10 and 20% of the vast numbers of the Russian Army fit into the 'useable' catagory, and a much smaller proportion of its vaunted reserves do so.

 

[TomUS]

American gov & political commentators are saying Ruskies bombing rebels will increase Islmao militant recruitment from outside Syria.....cries of 'Remember Chechnya' etc.