This group is open to everyone who likes any kind of aircraft
good they also bombed the **** outa 8 ISIS bases today too so yea bout time someone actually lit a fire under those crazy lunatics ***** >_> Unlike the US coalition at least the Russian one is actually targeting ISIS instead of using it as a pretext to force regime change in Syria by bombing the **** outa Syrian civilian infrastructure as well as targeting the Syrian Arab Army who by the bore the brunt of fighting against ISIS on the ground for over 4 years now. -_-
US targeting Syrian Arab Army? Never heard about that, if they were then Assad would have accused the USA of attacking his forces. So far he hasn't said anything about that.
I am skeptical of Russia bombing ISIS, I heard that they're mainly bombing the Syrian Opposition (Rebels) and not exactly ISIS. Unless you believe the claim that "all" of the Rebels are ISIS. Perhaps to keep Assad in power (better Assad than ISIS though).
Seriously, in almost every single one of your comments regarding stuff like this involves an attack towards the US. What is wrong?
I probably made a mistake there regarding Russia targeting the opposition and not ISIS. Fortunately no civilians have been killed in their bombing campaign.
Judging by the reports, the US led Coalition is more focused on Iraq than Syria.
That argument is the mainline being used by the Western Media at the moment, but a simple examination of the situation proves otherwise. ISIS is the main threat to the Syrian Government, with Al-Nusra and Daesh coming in at a close second. ISIS will receive the brunt of these airstrikes, but Al-Nusra and Daesh will certainly not be exempt, as all extremest elements have been working together at some point or other. Simply, the secular Assad Government is the best solution to stability in Syria, and the only united bastion against ISIS in the region. Frankly, you kind of hit it on the head when you said they were all ISIS. Even though outlets such as VICE have tried humanising and creating the picture of a "moderate opposition", reality is these "moderates" have proven themselves to be just as capably atrocious as ISIS, with US dollars financing them: Al-Nusra affiliated fighters: I.imgur.com
And well, yeah this one's good: Storyleak.com
There's heaps of that stuff floating around.
The US wants/wanted Assad gone, and even with his offers of snap parliamentary elections and a change of power through democratic means, they still want him gone. So, Russia has stepped in, with China on standby, formed a coalition, and is cleaning up America's mess again, with or without them.
American foreign policy has failed, failed, and failed again, particularly in the Middle East. It's time they stepped down, starting with Syria.
I would also like to add that, yes, at some point there very well may be civilian casualties from Russian airstrikes. They have stated that they are doing their utmost to avoid this, and so far have, but the reality of an air campaign would suggest that civilian casualties can not be ruled out every time, 100% of the time.
Also, the Western Press is already making "mistakes" between RuAF strikes and SyAAF strikes (who have just received a bunch of new aircraft). The latter tends to be a bit more blasé with their bombing, partly due to their lack of precision weaponry. We can only hope that the intel being provided by Iranian and Russian drones around potential targets will keep casualties of non-combatants to a minimum.
Yeah, I know that the US wants Assad gone, which I don't think is the wisest decision considering his forces are bearing the brunt of ISIS attacks. While the bombing his Air Force has done has killed many civilians, I still think he should be retained as leader of Syria for now.
Those pictures are of Syrian Rebels right? Because I refuse to believe that the USA is "funding" ISIS. If anyone who's funding ISIS, its likely Saudi Arabia and Qatar. The whole thing going on in Syria is complicated, so really I don't know who to support in this conflict.
Its a good thing Russia has started to fight ISIS though, our Australian involvement against ISIS is in between that of the US and Russian stance. Hopefully one day ISIS will be destroyed.
Dont have too much faith in the current fascist plutocratic US Gov. they have been doing some very shady things for well over 100 years now and as a true American patriot I can not support the current US regime in good conscious let alone maintain my dignity as a human being in general by doing so.
Russia is by far no angel by the US regime has been playing this geo political game since long before Federal or even communist Russia even existed as a concept ... and yes we did train and fund ISIS to take out Asad in Syria but have since then lost control of them ... only elements within Saudi Arabia, UAE, & Qatar still directly support them due to similar extremist Wahhabi ideological beliefs.
Fair enough, considering how the US Government's foreign policy is just awful. But I don't consider you a "true" American patriot as you describe yourself as, judging by some of your comments (I won't get into any more details).
ISIS was the product of Bush's Iraq War which destabilized the region. I find it hard to believe that the US actually "funded" ISIS, considering a few things. Why would the US fund an Islamic cult that they're currently fighting? And what would the US have to gain from doing so? Makes no sense to me.
Moreover, while the CIA has been training and arming the Syrian opposition (to oust Assad), many of these armed fighters started flocking to ISIS because it was stronger. Sounds more logical to me.
So, U.S. supported a "democratic Afghani opposition" led by Bin Laden during Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, but then proclaimed him terrorist. Why would supporting islamic state against Assad now would have no sense? I don't want to offend you, but you are truly blind If you never heard of creating a so called "Ally-enemy" to do your work for you and stay away in shadow yourself. In fact, it makes even more sense that any direct invasion. There have been several times when U.S. have been paradropping an equipment to ISIS positions and each time they explained it with "Coordinates mistake". I accept that it could happen, but with all U.S. sci-fi radars and tracking systems those often made "coordinate mistakes" sound not so real.
Maybe U.S. actually fight ISIS now, but there is no confidence they didn't fund it at the beginning as it was with Bin Laden's group which later formed Al-Qaeda.
I actually believed that Russia and U.S. could be friends to keep peace together. But the more I see now, the more I understand that is the thing to never happen.
First thing, US supported the Syrian Rebels before the rise of ISIS. When ISIS appeared in Iraq and started pouring into Syria, thats when the Rebels started to leave their groups and join ISIS. The Rebels that were supplied with US arms also joined ISIS.
Second thing, I've heard about the para-dropping of supplies to the Kurds at times landed at the wrong areas and into ISIS hands. Para-dropping supplies hasn't always been 100% accurate considering the wind factor (common sense here), even with high-tech equipment stuff like this still happens.
Third thing, many of the Gulf states (which are dictatorships) have similar interests to that of ISIS and want Assad gone. For this reason they have provided financial and weapons aid to them. See the Western weapons used by ISIS? Many of the Gulf States use those weapons too not too mention ISIS also captured US weapons from the Iraqi Army which they in turn are using.
Pity the US and Russia can't be allies and only be old adversaries. But then again considering both countries governments have big egos, can we really expect something like this to happen?
apparently you and i have very different definitions of what patriotism is ... in your case its chalked up more to blind nationalistic fervor if you are unwilling to question your own regimes motives let alone examine its "very" long list of "shady" actions & out right blatant corruption going as far back as the early 1900s :/
also when it comes to the mainstream media my friend here is a tip : Only trust half of what you see and nothing of what you hear ...
"in your case its chalked up more to blind nationalistic fervor if you are unwilling to question your own regimes motives let alone examine"
Straw man fallacy, I never said anything about not questioning your own government. Your assumption on that matter regarding what "my" definition of patriotism is is incorrect. I know it means it loving your country and questioning your government.
My point before is that I haven't seen any positive comments from you about your country (maybe I'm looking in wrong places?).
Now we're starting to go off-topic, lets stick to the topic of Syria.
I could write a long topic on that theme, but I won't as U.S. doing this became routine, but still, I want to ask: By what rights U.S. and Europe are saying that Russia has no rights to intervene the Syrian civil war, while both U.S. and Europe have been doing that long time before? Either by invading, either by supplying opposition with weapons. Most notable being Lybia. All that, considering Russia had an official call for help from Syria and Iran and an official permission from Syria to commit airstrikes on it territory. And Israeli media says that Israel has nothing against Russian presence. Maybe just for now, but still.
I understand that supplies are not dropped on the 10 meter altitude and wind factor does play role. But that is not battle of Kursk where German and Soviet soldiers have been 2 meters away from each other. There is plenty of space to maneuver.
Well, I have to agree there. Middle East is some explosive business. But I doubt that Saudi Arabia precisely would like some raging terrorists at their door. Especially considering their operation in Yemen.
Sometimes I want to tell something bad about my country too, just not to sound like an All-Russian retard. But, unfortunately, comparing Russia and US peace shaking actions, I am not able to do that.
I very much agree here, the US pointing the finger at Russia saying they have "no right to intervene" in Syria is just ridiculous. Pure double standards to say the least, though most countries always seem to point the finger at their adversary without addressing their own issues, politicians can be such hypocrites.
We also tend to forget Saudi Arabia's operation in Yemen, I still scratch my head as to why they want to get bogged down in Yemen and not try to help defeat some terrorist group that has nothing to loose. Also Turkey is doing nothing to help the Kurds and almost is letting ISIS kill them (possibly due to their hostility with the PKK). Very suspicious...
The US-led coalition can't defeat ISIS with air strikes alone, the Iraqi Army is lacking the will to fight and is basically letting ISIS take their territory. The Peshmerga seems to be the only effective fighting force in the area fighting ISIS with possible intervention from Iran.
It seems the Russian strategy is working better because Russian air strikes in combination with the Syrian Army (which is putting up a good fight) should be able to push back ISIS and defeat the Rebels. If Syria called for Russian help, then Russia should be able help them.
TypicalRussianIvan, I admire your educated approach to these issues and its always good to talk to someone who is rational and somewhat independent. I wish I could see more of this from people nowadays.
The SAA is a disastrously bad fighting demoralized force at, and often even below militia level by now and besides some minor successes has only suffered defeats this year, including major ones in Idlib and Palmyra. Using them as a ground force won't work unless Iran sends in even more IRGC and Hezbollah units which seems unlikely. Additionally, the majority of the Russian strikes have been against the rebels in the north of the country who threaten Latakia and not ISIS despite the rhetoric. Which makes me scratch my head about the reasons for the Russian intervention at this point even more, just like the Saudi one in Jemen. At least in the beginning I though it would be some kind of "sanctions lift and forget Ukraine for our cooperation" type of deal, but simply propping Assad now, four years into the war when he is simply holding on to what he has and lost offensive capability is simply stupid, and will be nothing but a huge mess for Russian lives and logistics.
The only force actually being successful against ISIS are the Kurds who are competent ground troops and have good airstrike integration. Stupid conspiracy crap about "US destroying Syrian infrastructure" to legitimize Assad while he keeps barrel-bombing any are he lost into the ground are laughable. At least even the northern rebels have stalled an ISIS assault this year in northern Aleppo while all the SAA has done in Palmyra is a **** show of running away and then failing to recapture any land while announcing dozens of "counter-offensives". Only thing they have to show against Daesh (which is the same as ISIS BTW) is still holding on to Deir-ez-Zor.
I want to explain just only about Anti-opposition strikes. It has one logical explanation. Except the fact that small numbers of them sometimes run to ISIS camp they are also located in different groups, "blanks", controlling several territories. Not a plain connected territory like ISIS. To fight ISIS Syria, which is pretty much weakened already, needs all the resources and this is the place when these groups become obstacles. Sure they don't do as much damage to SAA as ISIS does, but still, to hold those groups controlled from attacking other Syrian battlegroups they need to send people to surround them. Each of these enclaves may require hundred soldiers to hold it(counting crew, field engineers and etc).
And taking control of these groups really puts SAA short on supplies with ISIS. If this opposition was removed, there wouldn't be any problems to use whole Syrian Army (As far as it can get). Besides you don't need to destroy all of them. Some of them are either low-rank mercenaries, or just ravagers. Killing their coordinators and commanders will cause the others either to flee by themselves, either to swap sides. Because there is nothing for them to lose their lives for under bombardments.
Well, that's just my opinion.
It's much simpler - JaF has on the one hand dealt the biggest blow to the SAA this year by taking Idlib and then pressing on to Jisr-al-Shugur and the Ghab Plain which has put them at the gates of Latakia which is Alawite, and by extension regime heartland. They are more dangerous to the regime now then ISIS which is being bombed by over 60 countries and has been in dire straits on other fronts, even though the have made creeping advances against the SAA threatening Homs and therefore the Damascus-Aleppo lifeline as late as this August. The northern rebels are far beyond simple "raiders", especially after they have organized in a single operations room and this has shown in the swift and cohesive operation (something rarely seen in the region) which has documented over 300 regime tank and armoured vehicle losses due to ATGMs on video alone. Since Russia's intervention seems really to be about saving Assad (outside the rhetoric) they need to deal with that. Secondly, one of Assad's and now by extension Russia's goals has been the elimination of rebel groups so he can present himself as a " moderate secularist" fighting valiantly against ISIS. That's the only way he can survive, and his propaganda has been full of that since day one, calling all his enemies "terrorists". Russian media is now suddenly full of that as well, while Ukraine has miraculously disappeared from the front pages. And what they're doing now is simply trying to make that propaganda a reality.
No to be offensive, but I get surprised how it's all about Syria, Russia, propaganda in your messages. Yes, propaganda takes place. It takes place in ANY country right now. Russia covering it's opposition strikes and U.S. calling the bombardment of the hospital a 'possible mistake' are both worth each other. But, as National Guard corrected me above, you are forgetting about the whole other region. Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Taliban, that heavily oppose Russian operation. Iran, Iraq, Hezbollah that support Russia. Israel that stays far for now. I just mean that If you think that Syrian anti-terrorist coalition is just all about wiping Ukraine out of TV then you are bringing Ukraine too much honor. I mean, yes, it sounds logical with Russia, but Middle Eastern countries don't wanna do anything with that, they have their own goals. And I should remind that Russian presence in Syria wasn't just Russia's decision, but Syrian and Iranian initiative as well.
As coming to Assad proclaiming his enemies terrorists, I won't speak for anyone else but myself. In my opinion you can call someone an "opposition" all the time you want, but If they behead people or eat their hearts, they are terrorists, no matter how you call them, and should be done with.
Well we're talking about the Russian intervention in Syria here right, so Russia is kinda relevant to the topic. And please don't try to tell me the level of propaganda encountered in Assad's Syria is normal or commonplace in any country, derailing relativism like that tends to kill any discussion. Same applies to the Russian media sphere where all of the sudden all state-funded news channels are 24/7 about Syria and the European refugee crisis being the end of the West. That's a whole different ballpark from the US government trying an embarrassing cover-up of a failed bombing which then gets picked up by their own Western MSM. However, that was not the actual point of the argumentation, but rather the simple fact that Assad's propaganda narrative of "me secular and moderate vs Islamist terrorists" is vital to his own survival.
As to the geopolitical fact, yes it's totally correct that Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Turkey are active in the region and support some opposition groups to various degrees. But I fail to see why that is relevant to my post about why the SAA and Russia are and will be mainly targeting rebels and not ISIS for the near future and the Russian intervention in general. As it stands, it's nothing else but Putin's own decision (of course Iran is surely glad he's here now but they cannot change Putin's mind) and he surely had some motivation for that. And originally I thought that would be getting his economy going again and improving relations with the West by wiping off Ukraine (since there's simultaneously suddenly a working ceasefire there suddenly). In light of recent event as I said I agree that's not the case, which unfortunately leaves my wondering what the point is at all, and why now and not earlier. After all I doubt Assad's rump state is worth more than Erdogan's cooperation - after all it was him who was hailed as "Russia's next big friend" for the past year or so and now complains about Russian invasions into his airspace.
As to Assad's "terrorist" definition, sorry but it's just narrative. Sure, you can dig enough dirt on just about any faction after four years of civil war, and JaN and ISIS are indeed Islamist scumbags, but the Assad regime lost any claim to being the legitimate Syrian government and certainly any claim of being "moderate and nonsectarian" with things like these being regular: http://m.liveleak.com/view?i=a8c_1356675683 , https://www.google.se/search?q=barrel+bomb+aftermath&oq=barrel+bomb+aftermath&aqs=chrome..69i57.6364j0j4&client=ms-android-oneplus&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8,https://www.google.se/search?q=syria+chemical+attack+aftermath&oq=syria+chemical+attack+af&aqs=chrome.1.69i57j0l3.6906j0j4&client=ms-android-oneplus&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8 and Alawites running a crony minority dictatorship. People fighting that have a legitimate cause and have all the rights to be called an "opposition".
I find puzzling that Russia decided now to send in their air regiments.
The Syrian gov. Russia's long time business partner and ally gave them an official invitation that's why
and here is an independent source to lay some facts down to end this argument once and for all >_>
WWIII - Syria, Russia & Iran - The New Equation
You are not logged in, your comment will be anonymous unless you join the community today (totally free - or sign in with your social account on the right) which we encourage all contributors to do.
2000 characters limit; HTML formatting and smileys are not supported - text only
Russia hand deployed over 30 combat planes in the last two months to help the loyalist.