Syria Got Three S-300PM Battalion Sets, Including 24 Launchers And Over 300 Missiles: Russian State Media

Donate

Syria Got Three S-300PM Battalion Sets, Including 24 Launchers And Over 300 Missiles: Russian State Media

Donat Sorokin/TASS

Russia delivered three battalion sets of S-300PM missile systems, including 24 missile launchers, to the Syrian military, the Russian state-run news agency TASS reported on October 8 citing a military diplomatic source.

“On October 1, three battalion sets of S-300PM systems of eight launchers each were delivered to Syria,” TASS quoted the source as saying. “These systems were previously deployed at one of the Russian aerospace forces’ regiments which now uses the S-400 Triumf systems. The S-300 systems underwent capital repairs at Russian defense enterprises, are in good condition and are capable of performing combat tasks.”

The Syrian military also received over 300 surface-to-air missiles for the S-300PM, according to the report. The source pointed out that the systems were delivered free of charge.

Russia made a decision to supply the S-300 air defense system to Syria following the IL-20 incident in September. Moscow says that the military plane was shot down by Syrian air defense fire because of irresponsible and “hostile” actions of the Israeli military, which was delivering a strike on the Syrian province of Lattakia.

Donate

SouthFront

Do you like this content? Consider helping us!

  • MADE MAKER

    LETS HOPE THEY USE IT THE RIGHT WAY

    • HardHawk

      Yes drop down to earth who ever attack them

  • World_Eye

    oh the PM version is the ones that proceed to S-400 of course 2 more series like S-300PM Syria has it now, then comes S-300PM1, then S-300PM2 and after S-300PM2 comes S-400 Triumf. So these S-300PM is very good version, nice very good Russia, many people though Syria will get some old and bad version of the S-300 but they got the very good ones honestly. https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/d31717b1ca491138817739cf8ec284352f9ccd699b759dbb4004cf34490c1711.png

  • Hrky75

    Technically S-300PM may imply PM, PM1 or PM2. I don’t think Russian generals usually disclose all the info to it’s adversaries – just the part that makes them stop and think. Oh and BTW 24 launchers makes 2 battalions. I sincerely hope the 3rd one is well concealed from the prying eyes and ready to strike when and where the Zios don’t expect…

    • Manuel Flores Escobar

      Surely they will deploy a ring of 3 steps….PM= 90km range, PM1= 150km range, PM2= 200-250km range….

      • Tony T.

        These are ex-Russian Army versions (not export ones) which have a max effective range of 150-200km

    • BlueInGreen

      Regardless this deployment will hamper the abilities of the Isreali air force to attack with impunity.

      • vann7

        it depends Blue of the Rules of Combat.. if the Rules are… Shoot only after Israel bombs first.. then it means Israel airforce will be allowed to try to bypass Syria air defenses , which is not impossible.. something as simple as Mass Saturation attack , will always work.. you can send hundreds of kamikazi mini drones ,with the size of a hand and they can do the job on any air defense.. If you have 10 missiles.. then 10+1 drones will defeat the system. Why electronic warfare will be as important if not more than the S-300s..
        In the other hand.. if the rules are , similar to war times.. of firing at any Israel plane that is 200km away from Syria. then thats a huge difference.. night and day.. because Israel planes will be pushed far from its air to ground missiles combat range.. will need to use very slow and obsolete cruise missiles,, for distances bigger than 200km.. So the rules of combat ,needs to be taken into account.. before any evaluation of S-300 perfomance.. if long range air defenses are used for low range air interception… then they are using the system in a very limited way ,allowing the enemy to try .. Only a policy of Zero Tolerance for any other single Israel attacks on Syria , of return fire to the source , will be effective to protect Syria airspace and make it very expensive for Israel to attack Syria again.

        • hope springs eternal.

          Absolutely agree with you sir. It would be better to use the system at its max effective range, rather than waiting for the aircraft to close in. Only thing is will Russia take the initiative? I personally doubt it.
          2. A Zero tolerance policy, as you put it, would really be the game changer.

        • Naija Lolade

          ‘you can send hundreds of kamikazi mini drones ,’

          Do you know if Russia already delivered the military adware they showed but concealed the use, I am talking about the one that uses laser. The laser is surely enough to shoot down those tiny drones instead of wasting a more expensive panstir weapon or even that of S-300 to try to shoot them dwn.
          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/ba50409624348306624883b76a43fe190faf5352826f71e0d37cdfd40f9a1bca.jpg

          The laser would do just fine. Russia delivered 49 Air-defense systems. The question is, is laser also delivered ? That for sure that would take care of those tiny drones.

          A saturation attack is also possible but this will make U.S to make use of all its bases in Middle east together with Israel. From my Calculation, Russia’s S-400 and S-300 will be employed to try to stop the attacks (Dont forget the same satration attack took place but Syria managed to stop 70% of it, first tme in history).. The integraated anti-missile defene system in Syria will have to respond and Russia already said, it will attack and destory the launchers.

          So in the event of a saturated attack which will be indiscriminative, expect Syria and Russia to respond with a more capable Kalibr cruise missiles and Russia already displayed how it can destroy all the bases in the Middle east. So Centom and 3rd world war may be over over within days if not nuclear.

          If nuclear then expect another scenario .

    • 8 lounchers make 1 battalion. And as far as the previus reports goes, they were clearly talking about the s-300PM2 versions and the 250 km range, so I don’t think they will go with the older versions at all.

      • Hrky75

        You’re correct – a battalion has 6 to 8 TELs with supporting radar. EW and comm. equipment. So 24 TELs makes 3 very strong battalions…

        • Vas

          Sorry as far I know, one battery has 6-8 TELs, how many batteries consists a battalion(3-4?) and how many battalions makes a regiment?

          • Hrky75

            …A typical S-300V battalion is made up out of a target detection and designation unit, a guidance radar and up to 6 TELARs. The detection and designation unit consists of the 9S457-1 command post, a 9S15MV or 9S15MT BILL BOARD all-round surveillance radar and 9S19M2 HIGH SCREEN sector surveillance radar.[22] The S-300V uses the 9S32-1 GRILL PAN multi-channel guidance radar. Four types of missile-launcher vehicles can be used with the system…

          • Sinbad2

            Usually 2.

          • Hrky75
          • Tony T.

            A battery consists of 4 TELs. A battalion (divizion) is 2 batteries with associated radars and HQ
            see S-300 battery below
            https://glav.su/files/messages/2018/10/02/5041843_6ebd0a572198f63e767a2fd49f25dff1.jpg

          • Jesus

            A battery has 4 TELs, its a half battalion.

          • putinbeater

            and jesus has 2 s, therefore he is SS-guy

          • Quiet down, Peanut Butter.

      • Willing Conscience (The Truths

        These systems are the ones actually used to protect Russia so they won’t be second class, target acquisition radar 300km range, tracking radar 200km range.

      • Sinbad2

        Launchers do not make a batallion, a battalion consists of a control centre, radars and how ever many launchers are deemed appropriate.

      • PZIVJ

        If this equipment was retired from a Russian AD regiment, it could be S-300PM, not PM1 or PM2. I think this is more likely the case.
        But good to keep the Israeli rats guessing. :)

    • Willing Conscience (The Truths

      Command vehicle, 2 radar vehicles, 12 launch vehicles each with 4 missile launch tubes = 1 full battalion. The 3 battalions sent to Syria may not be full battalions, they may only have 8 launch vehicles instead of the max 12 each.

    • Jesus

      In May before they changed their mind, they were thinking of the PM2 Favorite, or it could be russian stocks that are more advanced. 24 launcher vehicles (TELs) would deploy 24×4 96 launchers with 96 missiles ready to be fired.
      If two missiles are fired against each high value target, 48 targets can be engaged before reloads.

      • Sinbad2

        The US needs to fire 2 Patriots against a target to get an 80% kill rate, the S300 achieves an 85% kill rate with one missile.

        • Jesus

          I am not so sure about the Patriot accuracy figure you provided, normally the Russians fire two missiles to ensure complete destruction of the target
          Similar to BVR engagements where a salvo of several missiles are fired with different homing heads.

  • Vitex

    That should shut Jens Holm and co up for about 30 seconds

    • Rob

      This is a very very great news early this morning. SAA also needs Pantsir-S1 Pantsir-S2 to defend the nation from drone attacks. If these S-300 SAM would provided four years ago then US and Co would be not there in Syria and so many casualty would never happened to servicemen from Syria, Russia and of their allies. Benjanyahu the child butcher will never give good advise to any one.

  • Tommy Jensen

    Meaning 6 trucks + Radars.
    As all Instruction books are in the Russian language and military classified, it may take 3-6 mth training of SAA, before Assad can put his eager fever finger on the buttons.
    But now Israel know they are there as a signal, a very very powerful signal. The photos have been presented to Israel so they can see Russia´s signal and take notes of what they see!
    NOW Israel will talk about it and talk it over!!

    • Sephy

      No, 24 launch trucks with with 4 missiles each.

      • Tommy Jensen

        Sure? 1 launch vehicle with 4 launchers = 6 trucks.x 4 launchers = 24 launchers x 12 missiles = 300 missiles.
        Your suggestion gives only loading 2 times, then they are finished in a battle. A bit waste of excellent equipment?

        • Hrky75

          1 TEL is 1 truck holding up to 4 missiles. They got 24 TELs with 12 missiles per TEL (1 set of 4 on the truck plus 2 spare sets). 6 trucks make one battery and not 3 battalions…

        • HardHawk

          you think your masters can afford to lose so many planes? Because if is missiles they fire then s200 will take care of them, as they have since now. Also in case is a massive attack let us not forget the Russian missiles that is not only on the ground but also in their navy around Syria, not to mention Iranian missiles and Hez ones.

          Now I am positive you are low IQ and a 2 sec thinking span.

          • Miroslav Beran

            You arrogant abuser, go to the rabble discussion on other web for rabble

          • HardHawk

            arrogant`s is the ones who underestimate the intelligence of the posters here and judge them base on their pitiful selves. Only fools and idiots answer for other`s unless of course you exchange fluid between you and I hurt the feelings of your boyfriend?

          • Sinbad2

            Actually the IDF doesn’t have 300 combat aircraft, but I’m sure little Israel(USA) will give them more planes and of course pilots.

          • S Melanson

            Well obviously you did not hear the news. Poor Tommy failed his performance review again and his position as an Assistant Keyboard Slave was terminated by his none too happy masters. Now he is seeking new masters.

            I know it is against your nature but go easy on the poor bloke, he has had a bad week. Perhaps you can help him find new masters.

          • Tommy Jensen

            Just asking Sephy. So its forbidden ok ok ok.

        • Sephy

          Not actually. 1 launch vehicles has 4 missile tubes. So 24 launch vehicle means 120 missiles.

          • Tommy Jensen

            In another way, you are NOT sure. Because 24 launch vehicles x 4 missile tubes is 96 missiles and not 120 missiles.
            Im calculating from the article´s 300 missiles, admitting I dont know how many a battalion is.

          • PZIVJ

            Is this a math test Tommy?
            ( (4 x 2 x 3 = 24) x 4 = 96 ) x 3 = 288

          • hope springs eternal.

            I need to go back to school. This maths stuff is confusing like hell. Are we counting the spare tires as well!!!?

          • Sephy

            Oh sorry, I’ve almost forgotten basic maths. Lol

    • FlorianGeyer

      Those of us in the English speaking world we are inherently lazy when it comes to speaking other languages. Our idea of communicating with a ‘foreigner ‘ is all too often the technique of ‘speaking loudly’ in English to help them understand :)

      • HardHawk

        yes but the unthinking or intentionally playing stupid you answering to, seem to forget that all Syrian weapons are in Russian. 2 sec thinking span is all he is able to achieve from the looks of it.

        • FlorianGeyer

          Yes, and the ‘unthinking’ also choose to forget that Russian military equipment is sold to many nations with different languages , so it stands to reason that data for weapons is translated . The Arab world has been buying Russian equipment for decades :)

      • Davki

        Bull, as if all people were the same just because they speak a certain language. There are native speakers that are quite eager to learn and speak other languages. “Inherently lazy”… what utter rubbish.

        • FlorianGeyer

          Anglo Saxons in the US,UK,Australia, New Zealand do not have the same % language skills as citizens of Holland for example. Many people in eastern Europe also speak Russian for example.

          • neil barron

            Because the base is Slavic my grand mother explained to me when I asked her if she understood the Polish woman next door she was talking to, her answer because she was Slovak not all the words but enough that they both spoke their language when speaking to each other from porch to porch.

    • HardHawk

      You know if you keep assuming rather than thinking it only make an ass of you dont you.

    • John Whitehot

      “As all Instruction books are in the Russian language and military classified”

      you gotta keep these pearls coming because i’m having a blast.

      you seem to think that putting SAMs in operation is something akin to mounting ikea furnishing while watching the instruction manual.

      • S Melanson

        Tell Tommy that it does not matter it is in Russian.

        The instruction manual is primarily a connect the dots by number and easy to learn a few numbers in Russian. By completing connecting the dots the operator creates a schematic of the S-300 system including the C2 P90 Space Modulator personally operated by Marvin the Martian.

        The advanced manual, which is classified, is the basic connect the dots schematic but with the added feature of paint by numbers to give a more in-depth understanding of the systems operation.

    • Sinbad2

      As a Russian spokesman has said, Syrian operators have been receiving training in Russia, for some time.

  • Balázs Jávorszky

    This is bold. They delivered the non-export version.

    • Ivan Freely

      Likely manned, or closely monitored, by the Russians.

      • Rakean Jaya

        Not likely Ivan, According to ‘secret and know everything ‘ DEBKA sources, it will be manned by Iranian, so according to DEBKA(disinfo Mossad channel) , Israel will feel free to destroy S-300, without fear that it’s attack would harm Russian. Just giving information about zionist criminals feels right now. :)

        • Promitheas Apollonious

          the question is how they do that. An inter graded system stand to reason and common sense, to react as one according to from where the danger comes from and the corresponding system.

          Is not only the radars is the missile battery’s as well. The only way for the israelis to hit it is either with tomahawks, missiles from their submarines, or ground missiles unless they want to lose their airforce and pilots since the airplanes is free of charge to them.

          • vann7

            They could try kamikazi drones , in the hundreds ,just like they destroyed the Pantsir of Syria that was waiting for refill.. Also an attack of Israel could come after NATO launch 200 to 300 missiles to Syria first.. to take advantage of the many Syrian S-300 launchers will be empty after such attack.. if they use such tactic however it will teach Russia , how a mass scale attack of NATO will look like ,in case of a world war 3…so effectively helping Russia to better defend their nation from NATO.

          • Sinbad2

            How many times does Russia have to make NATO missiles fall into the sea electronically, before it sinks into peoples heads, that NATO missiles are useless against Russia. The S300’s are to shoot down planes.

          • Promitheas Apollonious

            Yes then thinking this scenario why you dont also think a massive retaliation against Israel and the navy that will do that, or the ground platforms?

          • Rakean Jaya

            Other option from Haaretz, the IDF will doing commando raid(stupid and arrogant suggestion) . I’m expecting this scenario very much Prom. Let the IDF fight with equal opponent, they seem forgetting their last experience at 2006 war, all of their commandos raid have failed miserably.

    • Njegos Maljevic

      They had to if they want to integrate those bateries into one system.

  • Miroslav Beran

    Khazarian F-15, F-16 and F-35 may drop SDB glide bombs at distance 110 km from targets and these S-300PM have range 90 km. So these war crimes may continue with 205th count.

    • gustavo

      S-300PMU missiles can have a range of 200-250 Km.

    • Vas

      We don’t really know if its really the PM version, perhaps they were speaking generally of the PM family which consists PM, PM1 or PM2.

      • Sinbad2

        And lets not forget we are talking about journalists, people who are loose with the facts.

    • HardHawk

      before you post get educated to what you talking about. in some gases google is the best friend of the ignorant.

      New missiles were developed for the S-300PM system, the Fakel 48N6 and the 48N6E. Missile guidance was changed to the Track-Via-Missile (TVM) radar type using modified `Flap Lid’ engagement radar for control. A new rocket motor was used to increase the effective missile engagement range to a more acceptable 150 km. The missile speed peaks at 2,100 metres/sec or cca Mach 6. The missiles can be fired at 3 second intervals, and Russian sources claim a single shot kill probability of 80% to 93% for aerial targets, 40% to 85% for cruise missiles and 50% to
      77% for TBMs.

      • Miroslav Beran

        You must take education, You abuser.
        We all here are studying weapons systems since 1976. Your 48N6 was introduced for S-300PMU1 system. In TASS mentioned S-300PM use 5V55R/KD missiles with range 75-90 km.

        • HardHawk

          PM have a lot of variations ignorant low level.

        • Tony T.

          You’re talking about the first versions (S-300P / S-300PT)….the PM has a range of 150-200km

        • vann7

          wikipedia only reports are largely about export versions of Russian defenses.
          The domestic versions of S-300s have larger range than the one you will see in wikipedia..this is even was hinted by the Russian commander of syrian operations.
          That told american amateurs generals will be surprised by the interception range S-400s can achieve.. and that any American general who believe that there is such a thing like invisible planes ,that can’t be hit , will be awakened to a hard cold reality.. it remains to be seen ,what kind of defenses Syria will get.. if they get domestic ones.. then at very least.. the missiles will have 150km.. range.. this is about the distance between Damascus and Telaviv.. so depending where S-300s are deployed ,syria air defenses will be able to shoot Israeli planes on half of its airspace.. but Russia will likely want to have the option to have missiles with much farther range.. for Syria.. from 300km to 400km.. because they will like to have the tools at hand ,in case Israel goes out of control.. after losing a few planes and start attacking Russian base..

      • Promitheas Apollonious

        Αρχηγε, εδω δεν ειναι οπως τα Ελληνικα σιτες ο κοσμος ειναι πολυ καλος με εξαιρεση φυσικα τα λαμογια τους εβραιοαμερικανους. Εχουμαι επισης πολυ καλα παιδια απο την ολλανδια και αρκετους πατριωτες απο αγγλια. Μην διδεις σημασια στα λαμογια. Δεν ειμαστε πολλοι Ελληνες εδω να δωσουμαι λαθος εικονα για τους Ελληνες δεν γινεται σωστα?

        • HardHawk

          Ευχαρηστω για την προειδοποιηση αδελφε μου, να το ριξω ενα τονο κατω τοτε.

    • “Khazarian F-15, F-16 and F-35 may drop SDB glide bombs at distance 110 km” … Yes, but in reality , Israeli jets was always approaching in low altitude, so they can dare go even 50 km from the target undetected, then climb, throw away bomb and return to safety of low altitude so even if S300 will be fired immediately, they will still have time to cover and return to Israeli airspace without problems.

  • gustavo

    Everybody wants now not to see the action S-300 vs F35. I hope Israel gives us the opportunity to see this.

  • alejoeisabel

    The Syrian government has the right to attack and Israeli facility where the aggression initiated from. That means that any airbase or military base becomes a legal target for Syrian retaliation.

  • HardHawk

    Why is almost every one who post here assume that Syria will not defend itself and shot where the attack is originated from or the Iranians or Hezbollah. The ones who control SAA strategy have proven in many ways that are very intelligent thinking tank and have defused with out the need of a total war all the attacks of the idiotic western allies and their minions.

  • Sinbad2

    300, that’s enough to shoot down all of Israel’s F-15, F-16, and F35’s.
    Good show.

  • AstroFascist

    Not going to deter the Israelis from conducting more strikes. Operational capability is limited – only four transporters – and will take months to train Syrians how to use it. And we also know that neither Syria or Russia would ever dare directly target Israeli targets and all aggressive actions by the US and Israel will continue to go unanswered.

    • Vas

      What 4 transporters bob you mean, haven’t you read the article? It’s 3 battalions for a total 24 launchers.

    • Tony T.

      It’s already seems to be detering them….there’s been no airstrikes for over 2 weeks.

    • Promitheas Apollonious

      Now you told us your inner fears, I bet the israeli pilots, are shitting ice cubes.

    • Sinbad2

      Yes Bibi the BS thought like you, until Russia struck an ISIS C&C centre killing 12 Israelis.

    • vann7

      Syria shoot down an F-16I ,the most advanced planes they have after F-35.. using S-200s
      when it was returning from an attack on Syria and flying over israel airspace.. What makes you believe that now Syria with better air defenses and stronger support from Russia will not fire now at Israel planes if attacked?

    • Criticalthinker101

      Unanswered or unreported?

  • Luutzen

    Finally some Russian deliveries s-300 PMUx, that improve Syrian air defense.

    When are the accompanying Pantsir SM’s delivered?

  • alejandro casalegno

    Many talk about the syrians will need training to operate the S-300, most forgot than Iran have trained operators and the russians are there……if you are a iranian or russian AD official, you will lost the chance to use the S-300 in real combat??????????????????????

    • vann7

      they will receive training in the use of S-300.. but until that until end of year….Russians will operate S-300s.. this is what could happen..

      • Promitheas Apollonious

        you are not correct in that assumption.

    • Sinbad2

      It seems that Syrians have been receiving training in Russia since 2013, when the supply of S300’s was first suggested.

      • Jim Bim

        Actually, there was a contract and Syria had payed 400 million. Because of US/Israeli pressure/demands, Russia broke the contract with its ally and friend.

      • hope springs eternal.

        2013 was 5 years ago!
        Lots would have changed since. The Syrian servicemen may have retired and the systems have undergone technology updates. They’ve have to start training afresh.

  • Manuel Flores Escobar

    The question is that Israel will have to attack Iranian assets…otherwise israel lose and everybody will think that israel in spite of F-35 fear S-300…..thats why Russia supply 24 launchers…to shot down israeli jets and incoming Delilah, Popeye and GBU 39…

    • Sinbad2

      Yes no maybe.
      As you say if Israel does not attack, they look weak, if they attack and are defeated, they look weaker.

      So far it seems that Israel plans to attack Gaza and Lebanon as a way of hiding their weakness, but only time will tell.

    • Criticalthinker101

      That’s not a question, it’s a statement! To make it a question you need to swap israel will to will israel. Also a question mark needs to put at the end on of the sentance. Your second sentance is even more incoherent!

      • Manuel Flores Escobar

        I only say that Israel are trapped…if they attack..surely jets will be shot down…if they dont attack…they look weak and fear S-300….

  • Sinbad2

    The simple way to tell if this action is important, is to observe the reaction of Israel and the US.
    The US media is full of Russian “escalation”.
    The Israeli PM is running off to Russia, and the Hasbara trolls have flooded the blogs.

    • vann7

      the best signal ,they preparing for a major attack on Syria , will be CNN ,New York Times and Washington Post.. if they start reporting of new “intelligence reports” shows Assad is preparing a new chemical attack.. or that now is using barrel bombs on a mass scale. then is a signal that the mass lying american media is preparing american public for propaganda for a new round of illegal
      attacks on Syria.. also false flags ,with civilian planes , as happened in Ukraine ,could be blamed on Russia(or Assad. ) and use it as justification for another attack.

      • Sinbad2

        You are correct about a FUKUS attack, but the Israelis don’t bother trying to justify their actions.

    • R Q

      Wait let me get this straight, you retards have claimed to shot down multiple Israeli planes and over 60 state of the art modern cruise misslies and now you are celebrating the delivery of the shit-300? Really? I thought old outdated Soviet equipment was enough? What will you retards say next? “Duhhhhh naow wi cen shot don 1000000% of Zionist American missiles and planes “. You people have to be some of the most brainwashed people on the internet or you are just wilfully stupid.ff

      • Sinbad2

        There are some herbs that help with PMT.

      • Nod

        what on earth are you babbling about ?

  • putinbeater

    300 missiles. always shoot 2
    150 targets. IL has 400+ airplanes. easy to take out all launchers, and maybe lose 10 planes. maybe.

    • PZIVJ

      You seem to forget layered AD and EW.
      So Israel wiling to risk 100+ lost aircraft to continue the war in Syria ?
      Tiger Spam :D
      https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/a3d2c0e48c9c1ee5bfdb12b30df04a9226016649f3d09fa6f16c6984267ec197.jpg

      • Tommy Jensen

        Israel just hide behind other planes. No problem………LOL.

      • Vas

        And I must add, is Israel willing to risk to lose 100+ jets which are a lot more expensive and a lot harder to replenish while an air defence unit is a lot cheaper and way easier to resupply and don’t forget of course the many pilots that will die, which again is a lot harder to train a new pilot(you need years) from a AD operator.

      • putinbeater

        IL will lose no plane. in worst scenario 1-2-3 planes. but in that case all s-300 and other AA defence sytems will be already destroyed. this is little price for IL.

  • RichardD

    These new S-300s will have access to S-400 and other radar and sat com data, which should be a significant efficacy booster. They are probably also capable of firing S-400 or equivalent missiles on an as needed basis. The biggest news to come from these missiles may be no news about Israeli air strikes from anywhere near or over Syria.

    If the modern Mig-29s that are on order are also delivered, or even delivered and added to. And are equipped with modern munitions. Not only will this make life extremely difficult for the IAF, but it would also significantly erode NATO’s options in Syria. Particularly as it pertains to any possible attack against SAA or other Syrian government coalition ground forces involved in clearing operations against Isis in the Al-Tanf area, and the SDF east of the river.

    Because with S-300s and Mig-29s in and over eastern Syrian. The Syrian government coalition would have qualitative peer air capabilities, in addition to the Russian air force. That could engage NATO air assets on an as needed basis if they attack or menace Syrian government coalition ground forces. Without Russian planes and pilots having to get directly involved themselves.

  • Oscar Silva Martinez

    I don’t think Israel will be able to take more than 5 losses, so they will need help form their lap dogs

  • χρηστος

    after the loss of Israeli aircrafts by the old Syrian defence systems ,they changed their tactics. more attacks from a very long distance. they used this tactic a lot in the past since they have carried 100s of strikes from libanese airspace which they consider their own. now the S-300 system the aircrafts will be tracked the minute they take-off. this is a very dangerous situation for Israel. they wont resist using their new F-35 jets. a very interesting situation lets see how it will develop.

  • paul ( original )

    This sound impressive by any measure. Like others I am unsure of the terminology. I don’t know if they are referring to 24 launch vehicles each with 4 missiles, or just 6 vehicle with 4 missiles each. I suppose this is because I don’t really know what is meant by a battalion. In either case this would be a good force, but I find it frustrating not knowing exactly what is meant. Can anyone offer help?

  • RichardD

    The S-200s, which are probably upgrades, are clearly a problem for the baby rapers. They’ve lost at least one plane to them. And in all likelyhood, at a minimum have had other planes damaged by them. They’re sufficiently afraid of them that they’re using non combatant planes in international airspace as human shields.

    The S-300s that have gone into Syria aren’t stand alone units. They’re fully, or close to it, integrated into the Russian sat com network. Which gives them substantially improved data feeds for much better battle management capabilities. This should provide them targeting information long before their unit specific radars pick it up, or don’t depending on stealth and the local EW environment. So that missiles can be launched on targets using external data feeds using gps coordinates. So that even if their units radars are damaged, destroyed or temporarily disabled. The larger network can be utilized to manage the missile launch process. This makes these missile launchers potentially very dangerous to both Israel and NATO.

    Russian forces don’t have to be embedded on location to manage these launchers, it can be done remotely. All that the Syrians have to do is make sure that they’re properly operational.

    • R Q

      Wait let me get this straight, you retards have claimed to shot down multiple Israeli planes and over 60 state of the art modern cruise misslies and now you are celebrating the delivery of the shit-300? Really? I thought old outdated Soviet equipment was enough? What will you retards say next? “Duhhhhh naow wi cen shot don 1000000% of Zionist American missiles and planes “. You people have to be some of the most brainwashed people on the internet or you are just wilfully stupid.n

      • RichardD

        Israel and NATO have been backed out of most Syrian airspace with what Syia and Russia have in the Syrian theater. Upgrading those capabilities will expand that process.

  • RichardD
  • well, I’ll start probably count how many times this S300 bullshit was repeated again and again.
    Please wake me up when Russia already got balls to shot down some Israeli warplanes.
    Probably not in this century with the speed like this.

  • Robert McMaster

    The technical stuff doesn’t matter now. It’s all politics and perception. Russia knows that it cannot be seen that the U.S. or Isreal can circumvent or destroy the air defenses in Syria. If these two parties could be seen as dancing around the Russians or knocking out its systems that would inflict very serious damage to Russias standing before the world. On the other hand, both Isreal and the U.S. would face equal humiliation if they send their very best hardware against the Russians and get shot to pieces.

    So, Russia will sent whatever it takes. Whatever, without missing a trick. And Isreal and the U.S will bluster and do nothing.

  • #’~A*QXm(>NRmm]w?dU4vXZ

    If that photo shows the actual batteries delivered, then the one in the back looks rusty. And
    “The S-300 systems underwent capital repairs at Russian defense
    enterprises, are in good condition and are capable of performing combat
    tasks”.

    That means they were not new, but overhauled ones.

    Questions: how much of this is for show to the ZioNazis, i.e. bluff, and how much is real? Yes, Russia does not want any more casualties nor material damage, but will these systems keep the ZioNazis away from Syria effectively?

    • NeoLeo

      Probably not rusty, but dirty (sand, mud, whatever). Shitty roads in Syria this time of the year I guess… Yeah I agree, it’s just (another) bluff, I doubt they will fire at israeli planes over Lebanon (especially not over Israel, and they probably are in range, depending of the version and location). Bibi is going to tell Putin: ‘we’ll never attack/provoke you again, I personally promise’ and then they will attack again. Maybe even one of these batteries, only to show they can.

  • R Q

    Wait let me get this straight, you retards have claimed to shot down multiple Israeli planes and over 60 state of the art modern cruise misslies and now you are celebrating the delivery of the shit-300? Really? I thought old outdated Soviet equipment was enough? What will you retards say next? “Duhhhhh naow wi cen shot don 1000000% of Zionist American missiles and planes “. You people have to be some of the most brainwashed people on the internet or you are just wilfully stupid.

    • NeoLeo

      @R(etard)Q another new, fake account with 4 comments (actually you repeated this one 3 times lol that’s how retarded you are)…. I know I shouldn’t feed the troll but in your case: eat shit and die you braindead pathetic troll with a single digit I Q.

  • Brad Isherwood
  • AlexanderAmproz

    CIA Democrats Call For Aggression Against Russia, Run Pro-War Campaigns In 2018 Congressional Races

    By Patrick Martin, Wsws.org

    October 9, 2018

    The Democratic Party is widely favored to win control of the House of Representatives in the US midterm elections November 6, with projections that it will gain 30 to 50 seats, or even more, well above the net gain of 23 required for a majority.

    The last time the Democratic Party won control of the House from the Republicans was in 2006, when it captured 30 Republican seats on the basis of a limited appeal to the massive antiwar sentiment among working people after three years of disastrous and bloody warfare in Iraq, and five years after the US invasion and occupation of Afghanistan.

    In stark contrast, there is not a hint of an antiwar campaign by the Democratic challengers seeking Republican seats in the 2018 elections. On the contrary, the pronouncements of leading Democrats on foreign policy issues have been strongly pro-war, attacking the Trump administration from the right for its alleged softness on Russia and its hostility to traditional US-led alliances like NATO.

    This is particularly true of the 30 Democratic congressional nominees in competitive races who come from a national-security background. These challengers, previously identified by the World Socialist Web Site as the CIA Democrats, constitute the largest single grouping among Democratic nominees in competitive seats, more than state and local officials, lawyers or those wealthy enough to finance their own campaigns.

    The 30 national-security candidates include six actual CIA, FBI or military intelligence agents, six State Department or other civilian national security officials, 11 combat veterans from Iraq and Afghanistan, all but one an officer, and seven other military veterans, including pilots, naval officers and military prosecutors (JAGs).

    The range of views expressed by these 30 candidates is quite limited. With only one exception, Jared Golden, running in the First District of Maine, the military-intelligence Democrats do not draw any negative conclusions from their experience in leading, planning or fighting in the wars of the past 25 years, including two wars against Iraq, the invasion of Afghanistan, and other military engagements in the Persian Gulf and North and East Africa.

    Golden, who is also the only rank-and-file combat veteran—as opposed to an officer—and the only one who admits to having suffered from Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, criticizes congressional rubber-stamping of the wars of the past 20 years. “Over the past decade and a half, America has spent trillions on the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and on other conflicts across the globe,” his campaign website declares. “War should be a last resort, and only undertaken when the security interests of America are clearly present, and the risks and costs can be appropriately justified to the American people.”

    These sentiments hardly qualify as antiwar, but they sound positively radical compared to the materials posted on the websites of many of the other military-intelligence candidates. In some ways, Golden is the exception that proves the rule. What used to be the standard rhetoric of Democratic Party candidates when running against the administration of George W. Bush has been entirely scrapped in the course of the Obama administration, the first in American history to have been engaged in a major military conflict for every day of its eight years.

    All the other national-security candidates accept as a basic premise that the United States must maintain its dominant world position. The most detailed foreign policy doctrine appears on the website of Amy McGrath, who is now favored to win her contest against incumbent Republican incumbent Andy Barr in the Sixth Congressional District of Kentucky.

    McGrath follows closely the line of the Obama administration and the Hillary Clinton presidential campaign, supporting the Iran nuclear deal that Trump tore up, embracing Israel, warning of North Korea’s development of nuclear weapons, and declaring it “critical that the US work with our allies and partners in the region to counter China’s advances” in the South China Sea and elsewhere in Asia.

    But Russia is clearly the main target of US national-security efforts, in her view. She writes, “Our Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff has testified that Russia is the greatest threat to American security. Russia poses an existential threat to the United States due to its nuclear weapons and its behavior in the past several years has been disturbing. Russia’s aggression in Georgia, Crimea, Ukraine, and Syria has been alarming. It’s becoming more assertive in the Arctic, likely the most important geostrategic zone of competition in the coming decades. The US should consider providing defensive arms to Ukraine and exerting more pressure on Moscow using economic sanctions.”

    She concludes by calling for an investigation modeled on the 9/11 Commission into alleged Russian interference in the 2016 elections.

    Five other national-security candidates focus on specific warnings about the danger of Russia and China, thus aligning themselves with the new national security orientation set in the most recent Pentagon strategy document, which declares that the principal US national security challenge is no longer the “war on terror,” but the prospect of great power conflicts, above all with Russia and China.

    Jessica Morse, a former State Department and AID official in Iraq, running in the Fourth District of California, blasts the Trump administration for “giving away global leadership to powers like China and Russia. Our security and our economy will both suffer if those countries are left to re-write the international rules.”

    Former FBI agent Christopher Hunter, running in the 12th District of Florida, declares, “Russia is a clear and present danger to the United States. We emerged victorious over the Soviet Union in the Cold War. We must resolve anew to secure an uncompromising victory over Russia and its tyrannical regime.”

    Elissa Slotkin, the former CIA agent and Pentagon official running in Michigan’s Eighth Congressional District, cites her 14 years of experience “working on some of our country’s most critical national security matters, including U.S.-Russia relations, the counter-ISIS campaign, and the U.S. relationship with NATO.” She argues that “the United States must make investments in its military, intelligence, and diplomatic power” in order to maintain “a unique and vital role in the world.”

    Max Rose, a combat commander in Afghanistan now running in New York’s 11th Congressional District (Staten Island and Brooklyn), calls for “recognizing Russia as a hostile foreign power and holding the Kremlin accountable for its attempts to undermine the sovereignty and democratic values of other nations.” Rose is still in the military reserves, and took two weeks off from his campaign in August to participate in small-unit drills.

    Joseph Kopser, running in the 21st District of Texas, is another anti-Russian firebrand, writing on his website, “As a retired Army Ranger, I know first hand the importance of standing strong with your allies. Given Russia’s march toward a totalitarian state showing aggression around the region, as well as their extensive cyber and information warfare campaign directed at the U.S., England, and others, our Article 5 [NATO] commitment to our European allies and partners is more important than ever.” He concludes, “Since the mid-twentieth century, the United States has been a principal world leader—a standard that should never be changed.”

    Four national-security candidates add North Korea and Iran to China and Russia as specific targets of American military and diplomatic attack.

    Josh Welle, a former naval officer who was deployed to Afghanistan, now running in the Fourth Congressional District of New Jersey, writes, “We have to stand together in the face of threats from countries like North Korea and Iran. The human rights violations and nuclear capabilities of these countries pose a direct threat to the stability of this world and therefore need to be met with strong military presence and a robust defense program to protect ourselves.”

    Tom Malinowski, former assistant secretary of state for human rights, running in New Jersey’s Seventh District, calls for maintaining economic sanctions on Russia “until it stops its aggression in Ukraine and interference in our democracy,” effusively endorses the state of Israel (whose government actually interferes in US elections more than any other), and calls for stepped up sanctions against North Korea.

    Mikie Sherill, a former Navy pilot and Russian policy officer, running in New Jersey’s 11th District, writes, “I have sat across the table from the Russians, and know that we need our government to take the threat they pose seriously.” She adds to this a warning about “threats posed by North Korea and Iran,” the two most immediate targets of military-diplomatic blackmail by the Trump administration. She concludes, referring to North Korea’s nuclear program, “For that reason I support a robust military presence in the region and a comprehensive missile defense program to defend America, our allies, and our troops abroad.”

    Dan McCready, an Iraq war unit commander who claims to have been born again when he was baptized in water from the Euphrates River, calls for war to be waged only “with overwhelming firepower,” not “sporadically, with no strategy or end in sight, while our enemies like Iran, North Korea, Russia, and the terrorists outsmart and outlast us.” He is running in North Carolina’s Ninth Congressional District, adjacent to the huge military complex at Fort Bragg.

    One military-intelligence candidate cites immigration as a national-security issue, echoing the position of the Trump administration, which constantly peddles scare stories that terrorists are infiltrating the United States disguised as immigrants and refugees. That is Richard Ojeda, running in the Third Congressional District of West Virginia, who publicly boasts of having voted for Trump in 2016, in the same election in which he won a seat in the West Virginia state senate running as a Democrat.

    Ojeda writes on his web site, “We must also ensure that terrorists do not reach American soil by abusing our immigration process. We must keep an up to date terror watch list but provide better vetting for those that go onto the watch list.”

    A career Army Airborne officer, Ojeda voices the full-blown militarism of this social layer. “If there is one thing I am confident in, it is the ability of our nation’s military,” he declares. “The best way to keep Americans safe is to let our military do their job without muddying up their responsibilities with our political agendas.”

    He openly rejects control of the military by civilian policy-makers. “War is not a social experiment and I refuse to let politics play a role in my decision making when it comes to keeping you and your family safe,” he continues. “I will not take my marching orders from anyone else concerning national security.”

    Only one of the 30 candidates, Ken Harbaugh, a retired Air Force pilot running in the Seventh Congressional District of Ohio, centered on the industrial city of Canton, acknowledges being part of this larger group. He notes, “In 2018, more vets are running for office than at any moment in my lifetime. Because of the growing inability of Washington to deal responsibly with the threats facing our nation, veterans from both sides of the aisle are stepping into the breach.”

    Referring to the mounting prospect of war, he writes, “Today, we face our gravest geopolitical challenge since 9/11. Our country remains at war in Afghanistan, we have troops engaged in North Africa, Iraq and Syria, and Russia continues to bully our allies. Meanwhile, North Korea has the ability to directly threaten the American mainland with nuclear missiles.” He concludes, “we need leaders with the moral authority to speak on these issues, leaders who have themselves been on the front lines of these challenges.”

    These statements, taken cumulatively, present a picture of unbridled militarism and aggression as the program of the supposed “opposition” to the Trump administration’s own saber-rattling and threats of “fire and fury like the world has never seen.”

    Perhaps even more remarkable is that the remaining 17 national-security candidates say nothing at all about foreign policy (in 11 cases) or limit themselves to anodyne observations about the necessity to provide adequate health care and other benefits to veterans (two cases), or vague generalities about the need to combine a strong military with diplomatic efforts (four cases). They give no specifics whatsoever.

    In other words, while these candidates tout their own records as part of the national-security apparatus as their principal credential for election to Congress, they decline to tell the voters what they would do if they were in charge of American foreign policy.

    Given that these 17 include intelligence agents (Abigail Spanberger and Gina Ortiz Jones), a National Security Council Iraq war planner (Andy Kim), and numerous other high-level State Department and military commanders, the silence can have only the most ominous interpretation.

    These CIA Democrats don’t want to tell voters about their plans for foreign policy and military intervention because they know these measures are deeply unpopular. They aim to gain office as stealth candidates, unveiling their program of militarism and war only after they take their seats, when they may very well exercise decisive influence in the next Congress.

  • Nod

    Any military aircraft flying into Syrian airspace who is not invited should be shot down.

    period.