Syria Superthread [merged]

[jollyjacktar]

Video of a Turkish Leo being taken out by Kurdish Female YPGs.  The secondaries... ouch!

https://youtu.be/YafzmkvVRiI

 

[a_majoor]

Israel finally declassifies the 2007 raid which destroyed a Syrian nuclear reactor. The long article at link describes some of the planning considerations, especially the need to destroy the reactor while limiting the ability of the Assad regime to escalate into a full scale war:

https://www.defensenews.com/global/mideast-africa/2018/03/20/just-declassified-how-an-israeli-operation-derailed-syrias-nuclear-weapons-drive/

Declassified: How an Israeli operation derailed Syria’s nuclear weapons drive
By: Barbara Opall-Rome 

TEL AVIV, Israel — Israel’s pre-emptive attack a decade ago on a plutonium reactor in the Syrian desert not only derailed Damascus’ drive for nuclear weapons, but spared the world the specter of mass destruction capabilities falling into the hands of the Islamic State group.

That’s the message behind Israel’s first-ever official account of its operation Outside the Box, the four-hour mission that began before midnight on Sep. 5, 2007, to destroy Syria’s top-secret and nearly operational al-Kibar nuclear facility just weeks before it went hot.

“Imagine if today there was a nuclear reactor in Syria, what kind of situation we would be facing,” said Israeli Air Force Commander Amikam Norkin, the man who led the planning and execution of the “precision, low-signature” strike mission when he was chief of operations.

“From an historical perspective, I think the Israeli government decision to act and destroy the reactor is one of the most important decisions that were taken here over the last 70 years,” he added.

***

“In 2007, I was very worried that the operation could trigger war with Syria,” recalled retired Israeli Air Force Maj. Gen. Amos Yadlin, who was the head of military intelligence at the time. “Our mission was to eliminate an existential threat to the state of Israel, while minimizing the risk of a broader war.”

 

[MarkOttawa]

Near end of piece:

Here Is How Russia and America Could Go to War in Syria
...
The Washington national security community has largely forgotten the Cold War concepts of nuclear deterrence and managing confrontations with a nuclear-armed rival. Over the past twenty-five years or so, Washington has become accustomed to a world where there are no great-power challengers and the only real threat comes from terrorism.'

“People have sophomoric views on great power confrontation here,” Kofman said. “In fact a lot of people don’t even understand nuclear strategy and deterrence all that well anymore and the escalatory dynamics. And you can tell by the conversations—we have been in the terrorism/counterinsurgency game for way too long and people don’t understand what they are playing with at senior levels. I hear it all the time. That’s all a recipe for a 1950-1960s  type interaction with another great power.”

Indeed, it might take a new version of the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis for the American foreign policy establishment to grasp how dangerous a confrontation with a rival nuclear-armed great power can be...
http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/here-how-russia-america-could-go-war-syria-25292?page=show

Mark
Ottawa

 

[CBH99]

Neither Russia nor the USA will go to full scale war over a shithole like Syria.

Proxy wars?  Yes.  It's already happening.  American SOF, Russian mercenaries, American conventional units now, aircraft from both sides operating in Syrian airspace (albeit in their own zones for the most part), each side supporting various factions for their own political goals.

Full scale war?  Highly highly doubtful.  Not worth it, from either side. 


We also tend to forget that as much as the western media likes to demonize the Russians, they aren't anywhere near the evil, diabolical, up to no good villains we make them out to be.  Even Russian nuclear doctrine clearly defines the use of nuclear weapons is authorized only when the very existence of the Russian state is at grave risk...

Articles like this I find sensationalize situations.  And while the situation in Syria is complicated, and not without risk to the territories surrounding it - nobody cares enough about Syria to escalate it much further than it already has been.

 

[GR66]

Who would go to war over Serbia?  Poland?  Cuba?

Unplanned and unforeseen things can happen when bullets start flying.

I agree that Russia almost certainly wouldn’t plan to go to war over Syria, but when tensions rise things can happen.

Let’s say in retaliation for American strikes the Russians decide to buzz a USN ship in the Baltic and in a horrible low altitude accident the Russian fighter plows into the ship sinking it. Could that be misinterpreted as a missile attack?  Then a Russian fighter strays into Latvian airspace due to navigational error and a jittery Latvian pilot shoots it down. Does that put us closer to the line?

Made up scenarios I know, but strange and unforeseen things do happen and events can change quickly when people are under pressure.

 

[Altair]

Who would go to war over Serbia?  Poland?  Cuba?

Unplanned and unforeseen things can happen when bullets start flying.

I agree that Russia almost certainly wouldn’t plan to go to war over Syria, but when tensions rise things can happen.

Let’s say in retaliation for American strikes the Russians decide to buzz a USN ship in the Baltic and in a horrible low altitude accident the Russian fighter plows into the ship sinking it. Could that be misinterpreted as a missile attack?  Then a Russian fighter strays into Latvian airspace due to navigational error and a jittery Latvian pilot shoots it down. Does that put us closer to the line?

Made up scenarios I know, but strange and unforeseen things do happen and events can change quickly when people are under pressure.

latvia has no combat aircraft.

 

[YZT580]

latvia has no combat aircraft.

That is louse milking.  GR66 makes a valid point.  Wars have started over seemingly small incidentals.  How about Jenkins Ear?  Even  WW1 started over what in retrospect was an insignificant assassination.  However I don't believe that the use of chemical weapons in any part of the world should be ignored by the world community.  Since it is unlikely that the U.N. would ever stand up and be counted it is up to each country that is a signatory to the treaties on chemical weapons , working in concert, to condemn all such attacks.  And they should do so in such a way that there can be no obfuscation but by calling the shot:  for instance, telling the Syrians that the global community will destroy one of their squadrons used to carry out the attack and then doing it with multiple nations participating.  We shouldn't expect the Americans to go it alone nor should we sanctimoniously hide behind the U.N. security council vetoes.

 

[GR66]

latvia has no combat aircraft.

Well I DID say it was a made up scenario!  ;D

 

[Altair]

That is louse milking.  GR66 makes a valid point.  Wars have started over seemingly small incidentals.  How about Jenkins Ear?  Even  WW1 started over what in retrospect was an insignificant assassination.  However I don't believe that the use of chemical weapons in any part of the world should be ignored by the world community.  Since it is unlikely that the U.N. would ever stand up and be counted it is up to each country that is a signatory to the treaties on chemical weapons , working in concert, to condemn all such attacks.  And they should do so in such a way that there can be no obfuscation but by calling the shot:  for instance, telling the Syrians that the global community will destroy one of their squadrons used to carry out the attack and then doing it with multiple nations participating.  We shouldn't expect the Americans to go it alone nor should we sanctimoniously hide behind the U.N. security council vetoes.

did I argue his point?  No. I simply stated a fact,  latvia has no combat aircraft.  That's it,  that's all,  take it or leave it.

Chill.

 

[Altair]

Well I DID say it was a made up scenario!  ;D

I'm aware. Just thought you should know.

 

[Loachman]

Since it is unlikely that the U.N. would ever stand up and be counted it is up to each country that is a signatory to the treaties on chemical weapons , working in concert, to condemn all such attacks.  And they should do so in such a way that there can be no obfuscation but by calling the shot:  for instance, telling the Syrians that the global community will destroy one of their squadrons used to carry out the attack and then doing it with multiple nations participating.  We shouldn't expect the Americans to go it alone nor should we sanctimoniously hide behind the U.N. security council vetoes.

Not to worry - the UN and Syria have it all in hand: https://www.unwatch.org/syria-chair-un-disarmament-forum-chemical-watchdog-calls-us-eu-walk/

Peace in Our Time, Kumbaya y'all.

 

[jollyjacktar]

Looks like the Harry S Truman Carrier BG group is heading towards Syria.  http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5611419/Trumps-armada-Huge-task-force-12-warships-sets-sail-Syria.html

 

[Jarnhamar]

But at least Assad killed a few dozen civilians. Strategic win for Syria, especially after Commander of US Central Command admitted that Syrian government forces are prevailing in the war in Syria.

 

[Rifleman62]

Just on TV here in the US, that POTUS will speak to the country.

Also reported the US will strike and the UK will be using Submarines.

Updated: US, UK and France have hit Syria.

 

[Cloud Cover]

RAF Tornado have conducted at least one attack in Syrian airspace using standoff weapons according to CNN and BBC reports 4 aircraft were used.

 

[jollyjacktar]

Not that this will shut Assad down or deter him in any way.

 

[brihard]

B1s out of Qatar apparently also participated, presumably in a standoff role.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

Until they take out all the ground-based AD stuff (and there's lots...) I doubt anyone went up close and personal.  And I don't think you'll see them take out all the ground based AD stuff either. 

 

[Journeyman]

Forgive me if I don't get too  excited at this latest episode in the theatre of the absurd.  After all:

- 2013: "hundreds of civilians" killed in a probable sarin attack against rebel-held areas of Damascus.  International condemnation caused Syria to sign onto the Chemical Weapons Convention in October.  :
Result:  no change

- 2015: chlorine gas attacks from Syrian army helicopters against Idlib (60km from Aleppo).  Russia and China veto any UN sanctions against Syria.
Result:  no change

- 2017: almost exactly a year ago, 59 killed in suspected nerve gas attack on the town of Khan Sheikhoun, again in rebel-held Idlib province by either Russian or Syrian, probable Su-24, jets. This time, the US fires about 60 Tomahawk cruise missiles into Shayrat SAF Base.
Result:  no change

- Yesterday... well, you're reading the news (if interested); US, UK, and France launch cruise missile strikes against three sites in Syria in retaliation for alleged chemical weapons attack in the Damascus enclave of Douma.
Result:  too soon to say, but some have noted that repeating actions while expecting differing results is crazy.


Mind you, not even a week ago (and after the latest chemical weapon attack), the UN stepped up to appoint Syria as head of the Conference on Chemical and Nuclear Weapons Disarmament.  As noted by the Director of the NGO 'UN Watch,' "having the Syrian regime of Bashar al-Assad preside over global chemical and nuclear weapons disarmament will be like putting a serial rapist in charge of a women’s shelter.”
        :not-again:



Cynical aside: initial statements of over 100 missiles launched, with counter-claims that "most were shot down" by Russian GBAD systems. The estimated cost of a Tomahawk is $1.4 million; the UK Storm Shadow/French SCALP EG has a unit cost of €2.48m (~US$3.3m).

 

[Rifleman62]

https://theaviationist.com/2018/04/14/everything-we-know-and-no-one-has-said-so-far-about-the-first-waves-of-air-strikes-on-syria/

Everything We Know (And No One Has Said So Far) About The First Waves Of Air Strikes On Syria.
Read more at https://theaviationist.com/2018/04/14/everything-we-know-and-no-one-has-said-so-far-about-the-first-waves-of-air-strikes-on-syria/#BojxDqrvtm54WWIE.99

Interesting to note:

Another interesting aircraft tracked online in the aftermath of the raid, is a Bombardier E-11A 11-9358 from 430th EECS stationed at Kandahar Afghanistan. The aircraft is a BACN (battlefield airborne communications) asset: BACN is technological “gateway” system that allows aircraft with incompatible radio systems and datalinks to exchange tactical information and communicate. By orbiting at high-altitude, BACN equipped air assets provide a communications link between allies, regardless of the type of the supporting aircraft and in a non-line-of-sight (LOS) environment. The BACN system is also deployed onboard EQ-4B Global Hawk UAVs. Although we can’t be completely sure, it is quite likely that the aircraft was involved in the air strikes as well, providing data-bridging among the involved parties