Syria Superthread [merged]

[AmmoTech90]

With the western world dependent on middle east oil because the oil sands are the climate target du jour, the US abandoning the region would cause massive global economic instability for oil prices and hurt us more than help.

Drive up oil prices, make the oil sands viable again.  Alberta would be behind that.

 

[CougarKing]

The US-allied coalition to intensify soon...without the help of Canada's F18s which are to be withdrawn by our newly-elected Prime Minister Trudeau?

Defense News

USAF General: Syrian Strikes to Increase in Coming Weeks
Aaron Mehta 9:19 a.m. EST November 7, 2015

DUBAI — The US-led coalition against the Islamic State group plans to increase the number of airstrikes in Syria in the near future, a top US general said Saturday.

Lt. Gen Charles Brown Jr., commander of AFCENT, said strikes should increase in a matter of "weeks" as conditions on the ground evolve.

"Oh yeah," Brown said in response to a question of if the strike numbers will begin going up, before pushing back somewhat at the narrative that strikes had dropped in the last two months.

(...SNIPPED)

 

[jollyjacktar]

Russia appears to have brought the SA21 Growler to the table.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3316195/Vladimir-Putin-deploys-advanced-Growler-anti-aircraft-missile-Syria-able-hit-jets-altitude-90-000-feet-far-away-Tel-Aviv.html

 

[YZT580]

very useful.  Should keep ISIL aircraft at bay.  Makes one wonder what Putin's long term strategy really is.

 

[tomahawk6]

Jihadi John was killed in a drone strike overnight.It was the culmination of efforts by MI6/GCHQ to locate and kill Emwazi.Great teamwork and a truely ruthless killer has been eliminated.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/islamic-state/11993569/How-the-US-and-UK-tracked-down-and-killed-Jihadi-John.html

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

BIG BRAVO ZULU to all involved.

 

[McG]

His death is still pending confirmation. 

http://news.nationalpost.com/news/world/israel-middle-east/jihadi-john-dead-u-s-drone-blows-up-vehicle-believed-to-be-transporting-infamous-isil-terrorist

 

[Kilo_302]

No one is going to mourn his death, but it might have been better if he had been taken alive. Putting him on trial and showing the world how truly pathetic he is would do far more in terms of hearts and minds than blowing him up. Now, capturing him is likely not possible given the situation on the ground, but we should keep in mind that we've killed hundreds of leadership figures and propaganda symbols with little effect. It might also have been preferable to simply kill him and not announce it.

There's also the questionable legality of extra-judicial targeted killings. Jihadi John is guilty of murder, and perhaps terrorism (how different countries define this is also problematic). Conducting strikes that are solely meant to kill an individual (versus a strike intended to disrupt a military operation) is illegal, and by definition, vengeance isn't justice.

His martyrdom will only serve to draw more recruits, and someone will no doubt replace him in his role of "radicalized Westerner mouthpiece." Whack-a-mole isn't a viable long term strategy, and the "he got the justice he deserved" argument doesn't hold up when one considers what his victims' families are saying.

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/jeremy-corbyn-was-right-about-jihadi-john-if-you-listened-to-his-victims-families-youd-know-that-a6733611.html

 

[opcougar]

Here we go again...don't expect to see the body

U.S. 'reasonably certain' that British Islamic State militant Jihadi John killed in strike
Read more at Reutershttp://www.reuters.com/article/2015/11/14/us-mideast-crisis-syria-islamic-state-idUSKCN0T20RT20151114#DQshwLqKCIklsyMm.99

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/11/14/us-mideast-crisis-syria-islamic-state-idUSKCN0T20RT20151114

 

[a_majoor]

Rot in Hell.

 

[tomahawk6]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3316195/Vladimir-Putin-deploys-advanced-Growler-anti-aircraft-missile-Syria-able-hit-jets-altitude-90-000-feet-far-away-Tel-Aviv.html#i-d6e52edfd65a00d8

The picture shows radar claiming to be part of the S400 system.It is known that latakia air base is guarded by the Panstir-S point defense system.The radar shown are the Kasta 2E1 radar and a hight finder radar called Thin Skin.No S300 nor S400.The air threat to Russian forces doesnt justify either of those systems.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Here we go again...don't expect to see the body

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/11/14/us-mideast-crisis-syria-islamic-state-idUSKCN0T20RT20151114

Chemtrails.

 

[jollyjacktar]

Chemtrails.

I think I can come up with some spare tin foil for him.  :Tin-Foil-Hat:

 

[dimsum]

Here we go again...don't expect to see the body

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/11/14/us-mideast-crisis-syria-islamic-state-idUSKCN0T20RT20151114

Of course not.  It is OPSEC because of the procedures used to strike the vehicle. [not sarcastic]

If he wasn't killed, ISIS would have immediately put up tons of media to the effect of "look, you missed!"  The Info Ops war goes both ways.

 

[CougarKing]

Info on the Russian S-400 batteries deployed to Syria:

Aviationist

This Infographic Provides Lots of Details about Russia’s S-400 Advanced Air Defense Systems allegedly deployed to Syria
Nov 13 2015 -

By David Cenciotti
S-400 Triumph explained.

Some photographs published by Russia’s Ministry of Defense seem to suggest Moscow has just deployed at least one S-400 missile battery to Latakia, to protect the Russian air contingent deployed there.

Although the reports that the next-generation anti-aircraft weapon system was deployed to Syria were denied by the Russian MoD, whether the Russians have really deployed the system to protect their assets at Latakia or not is still subject to debate.

The Russian MoD image shows what looks like a 96L6 radar. However, according to Air Power Australia’s Dr Carlo Kopp “The 96L6 is the standard battery acquisition radar in the S-400 / SA-21 system, and is available as a retrofit for the S-300PM/PMU/PMU1 and S-300PMU2 Favorit / SA-20 Gargoyle as a substitute for the legacy acquisition radars.”

(...SNIPPED)

 

[PuckChaser]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3316195/Vladimir-Putin-deploys-advanced-Growler-anti-aircraft-missile-Syria-able-hit-jets-altitude-90-000-feet-far-away-Tel-Aviv.html#i-d6e52edfd65a00d8

The picture shows radar claiming to be part of the S400 system.It is known that latakia air base is guarded by the Panstir-S point defense system.The radar shown are the Kasta 2E1 radar and a hight finder radar called Thin Skin.No S300 nor S400.The air threat to Russian forces doesnt justify either of those systems.

You're right, it doesn't justify it. What Russia is doing is making a no-fly zone more and more difficult to establish for NATO. We had our chance, and pooched it due to weak world leaders.

 

[tomahawk6]

Kasta radar.

https://search.yahoo.com/search;_ylt=AjxSUhRqXQtg5Neyj4Dkf4.bvZx4?p=Kasta+2E1+&toggle=1&cop=mss&ei=UTF-8&fr=yfp-t-901&fp=1


PRV-9 Thin Skin

https://search.yahoo.com/search;_ylt=A0LEV1JnbUdWKk4AIuNXNyoA;_ylc=X1MDMjc2NjY3OQRfcgMyBGZyA2JlZmhwLXMEZ3ByaWQDbWZfb25hUjlRcDZ4aEJZRV9XYU5RQQRuX3JzbHQDMARuX3N1Z2cDMTAEb3JpZ2luA3NlYXJjaC55YWhvby5jb20EcG9zAzAEcHFzdHIDBHBxc3RybAMEcXN0cmwDMTYEcXVlcnkDUFJWLTkgVGhpbiBTa2luIAR0X3N0bXADMTQ0NzUyMTY5NQ--?p=PRV-9+Thin+Skin+&fr2=sb-top-search&fr=befhp-s&type=iehp-3.19-1506&fp=1

 

[a_majoor]

Some observers have described the ongoing escalation in Syria as a "proxy war" between the United States and Russia since the end of Cold War, however , the so called "cold war" had never ended, rather it was diminished to some extent...apparently it still seems very "hot war"  because the present day ISIS in Levant is an offshoot of Al Qaeda; and Al Qaeda is an offshoot of Afghan Mujahedeen (and we all know whose brainchild the Afghan Mujahedeen was). Therefore what happened in 9/11 and the subsequent war on terror that began again (back to square one) in Afghanistan, Iraq invasion and such are interconnected and byproduct of cold war era protracted proxy wars, in my opinion.

Syria conflict: Russia's scars from Afghanistan
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-34619068

The Mujahedeen were a home grown response to the Communist regime in Kabul after the coup and civil war that overthrew the Royalist government, and then grew in size and power after the Soviet Union invaded. The United States provided support to the Mujahedeen since this was a convenient way to get at the USSR, but so did a lot of other nations (including Saudi Arabia). The biggest mistake the Americans made was allowing the Pakistani ISI to pick and choose which Mujahedeen groups were getting the aid, followed closely by declaring victory and leaving once the USSR withdrew from Afghanistan.

Al Qaeda is an entirely separate and different organization, formed as a response to Saudi foreign policy and in particular catalyzed by Saudi Arabia inviting the United States in to defend the Sauds and Saudi territory when Iraq invaded Kuwait. And before you go on, the Taliban are an equally separate group, fostered by the ISI and getting into power in Afghanistan by offering to end the conflict between the squabbling Mujahedeen warlords who were fighting to control Afghanistan after the Soviets left. The people enthusiastically supported the Taliban (much like the French supported the "Man on the White Horse" who also offered to end the turmoil of the French Revolution and restore stability), not perhaps realizing just what sort of bargain they had made.

It would be nice if people studied real history rather than repeating whatever tropes have been concocted to support the "narrative".

 

[GR66]

The Russian AA system has nothing to do with defending against IS** or any other anti-Syrian government groups.  It's totally about preserving the Assad regime.

While Assad may have lost the moral right to govern Syria due to his attacks against his own people, his legal right is much less clear.  The coalition is choosing to ignore Syrian sovereignty in attacking IS** targets in Syria.  There is (in my understanding) legal basis for this as this territory has been used to launch military attacks against another state (Iraq).  The coalition is also supporting (through training and equipment) anti-government groups fighting in Syria (both against IS** and the Assad regime). 

This is where I think that the legal ground is much murkier.  The US led coalition says the Assad regime is illegitimate and is supporting opposition groups.  The Russians say that Assad is still the legitimate leader of Syria and is supporting him. 

All is relatively fine while the Russians support Assad against IS** in their areas of control and the coalition supports the Kurds, Iraqis and Syrian opposition groups in the areas that they control.  But what happens when those areas start to overlap?  As Kurdish/anti-Assad groups defeat IS** forces on their side of the line inside Syrian territory, and Russian backed Syrian forces defeat them on their side of the line, what happens when those lines meet?

What is the legal authority for (Iraqi) Kurds to hold on to Syrian territory in the absence of a threat from IS** to launch attacks into the Kurdish areas of Iraq?  If a Russian-backed Syrian government orders foreign troops out of occupied Syrian territory, will the US led coalition support military resistance to Syrian attempts to re-take that territory by force?  Will it challenge a Russian backed no fly zone in those areas?  Will it risk bombing Russian military forces advancing in support of Syrian government forces?

The whole situation there is very messy in terms of the end game.  What risks are we willing to take in terms of military conflict with Russia in defence of an expanded Kurdish non-State?  What risks are we willing to take in terms of a potential split of NATO due to Turkey's unwillingness to accept such an expansion? 

This is why I tend to agree with ER Campbell's recommendation that we should simply pull out of the area and not get sucked in ourselves.  The Prime Minister is right (but not for the right reasons) to pull out the CF-18's in my opinion.  He's also very wrong in his plan to relocate 25,000 refugees to Canada.  Provide support to refugees in place.  Give enough to make sure their presence does not destabilize the states (Jordan, Turkey, etc.) where they are located.  Accept qualified and properly vetted immigrants from the region that meet Canada's economic needs.  Even provide support to those groups that represent the type of governments we'd LIKE to see in the region, but don't have our boots on the ground doing the fighting, or our aircraft dropping the bombs on enemy targets.  Have the locals decide their fate.

 

[The Bread Guy]

A bit of infographic fuel to keep the debate going (source) ....