Using plausible deniability against a systematically lying adversary

Donate

Written by The Saker; Originally appeared at The Unz Review

The Internet has been buzzing with reactions to the latest Stratfor report about how a military confrontation between Russia and the United States would play out. I did not find the full text, I suppose it is behind a Stratfor paywall or for subscribers only (and, frankly, I have better use for my time and money than to subscribe to that rubbish), but since the same excerpts are quoted everywhere, I might as well list them here and assume that they form the highlights of the article. Here we go (taken from the Business Insider quoting and paraphrasing the original article):

While Russia has some advanced surface-to-air missile systems and very agile fighter aircraft in Syria, it wouldn’t fare well in what would be a short, brutal air war against the US (…) Russia has “about 25 planes, only about ten of which are dedicated to air superiority (Su-35s and Su-30s), and against that they’ll have to face fifth-gen stealth fighters, dozens of strike fighters, F-15s, F-16s, as well as B-1 and B-52 bombers. And of course the vast US Navy and pretty much hundreds of Tomahawks.” “Russians have a lot of air defenses, they’re not exactly defenseless by any means,” Lamrani told Business Insider, “But the US has very heavy air superiority.” Even though individual Russian platforms come close to matching, and in some ways exceed the capability of US jets, it comes down to numbers. If US surveillance detected a mass mobilization of Russian jets in response to the back-and-forth, the US wouldn’t just wait politely for Russians to get their planes in the sky so they can fight back. Instead, a giant salvo of cruise missiles would pour in from the USS George H. W. Bush carrier strike group, much like the April 7 strike on Syria’s Sharyat air base. But this time, the missiles would have to saturate and defeat Russia’s missile defenses first, which they could do by sheer numbers if not using electronic attack craft. Then, after neutering Russia’s defenses, the ships could target the air base, not only destroying planes on the ground but also tearing up the runways, so no planes could take off. At this point US and Coalition aircraft would have free reign to pass overhead and completely devastate Russian forces.

So is the author, Omar Lamrani, right in his assessment? Yes and no. Yes, that is exactly what would happen if the Russians decided to engage their small number of air superiority aircraft to try to prevail over the entire CENCOM and NATO air force for the control of the Syrian skies. And no, simply because the Russians would never do that.

The author of the article, a civilian with no military experience, makes a basic mistake, he assumes that the Russians will act like idiots and fight the kind of war the US would want to impose upon them. That is kind of assumptions most newbies make and which make for excellent propaganda articles. The problem is, of course, that there is absolutely no reason at all why the Russians should collaborate with such a ridiculous scenario. So, let’s get back to basics here.

Question 1: are the Russians in a position of weakness in Syria?

Yes, absolutely. And they know that too. First, the Russians are operating only 2 facilities (Tartus and Khmeimim), far away from home, and the size of their task force in Syria is tiny compared to the huge amount of firepower available to the AngloZionists and their allies. Second, the USA have poured billions of dollars into this region to make sure that the Soviet Union could never successfully invade Iran and not only do they have an immense numerical superiority over the Russians, they also have a world-class network of bases where even more forces can be brought in. Syria is squeezed between CENTCOM to the south and east and NATO to the north and west while the closets Russian forces are in Crimea. The truth is that not only could the US and NATO take control of the Syrian skies, even Israel alone could probably do it. So, assuming the Russians are not suicidal imbeciles, what do you think they should do? If you were Russian, how would you play your cards?

Question 2: do the Russians have advantages of their own?

Absolutely. In fact, they have many advantages over the Americans. Here they are in no particular order:

  • All the boots on the ground that matter are either Russian allies or at least on good terms with Russia: the Syrians, the Iranians, Hezbollah and even Turkey are all much closer to Russia than to the AngloZionists. The only AngloZionist boots on the ground that matter are Daesh & Co.
  • Internal public opinion: in Russia, the Russian military intervention is understood and backed by a overwhelming majority of Russians. In the USA the public is clueless and profoundly skeptical of this latest US war of choice. Not only that, but Putin personally has an immense credibility with the Russian people, while Trump is barely avoiding being impeached.
  • External public opinion: while in the USA the Ziomedia is engaged in a truly heroic effort to avoid even mentioning the fact that even the US presence in, and nevermind the actual aggression against, Syria is completely illegal in terms of international law, most of the planet is quite aware of that. This only further erodes the US standing worldwide.
  • The Russians have fewer lucrative targets to offer the AngloZionists than the Americans. Simply put, the Russians have Tartus and Khmeimim. The Americans have an long list of bases and facilities in the region which all could become potential targets.
  • The willpower, courage and determination of the Russian solider is stronger than his US counterparts by many orders of magnitude. There are many reasons for this, historical as well as political, but I don’t think that anybody doubts the fact that while Americans love to kill for their country, they are much less enthusiastic about dying for it, especially when the “for it” part is extremely dubious and when the frontline solider feels that he is being used in some complex political game which he does not understand but where he is definitely used as cannon fodder.
  • There is Russian personnel and military hardware interspersed within the Syrian forces. We know that Russian technical specialists, military advisors and special forces are operating on the ground in Syria. This means that the Russian can probably use a Syrian S-300 to shoot down a US aircraft without necessarily giving the US proof of their involvement. To use and old CIA term, the Russian can have “plausible deniability”.
  • We know that Russia has a vastly superior intelligence capability in Syria as reflected in the kind of damage Russian air and missile strike inflict on their targets especially when compared to the painfully obvious lack of US understanding of what’s really going on on the ground.

So what does all this add up to?

1) Plausible deniability in the air

First, it is pretty darn clear that the Russians have no incentive to begin a large scale air battle in the skies of Syria with their US counterparts. However, the fact that such a battle would not be in their interest does not mean that they would necessarily avoid it either. For the time being, the Russians seem to have chose a strategy of deliberate uncertainty and harassment of the US aircraft, but they could decide to engage US aircraft using their ground based S-300/S-400 batteries. Here is how they could do it.

First, the Russians are the only ones in Syria with S-400s. So let’s set them aside for a minute and keep them for serious emergency purposes. Next, let’s look at the Syrian inventory of air defenses found on Wikipedia. Notice especially this one: the Pantsir-S1 (SA-22). According to Wikipedia, there are 50 SA-22 in Syria. Have you ever heard of the Panstsir-S1? Probably not.

Forget the S-300/S-400, think Pantsir

The Pantsir-S1 (aka “SA-22” in US/NATO classification) is an absolutely awe-inspiring air defense system, yet nobody in the general public or Ziomedia ever mentions it. Let’s take a look at it:

Using plausible deniability against a systematically lying adversary

The Pantsir-S1 is mobile short to medium range surface-to-air missile and anti-aircraft artillery weapon system which uses phased array radars for both target acquisition and tracking. Detection range: 32-45km (20-28mi). Tracking range: 24-28km (15-17mi). It can track up to 20 targets, engage up to 3 with 4 missiles at the same time. It has a secondary Autonomous Optoelectronic System with a 25km (15mi) engagement rage against a small F-16 size aircraft. The Pantsir’s missiles are solid-fuel rockets with a range of 20km (12mi), a ceiling of 15km (9mi) and a speed of Mach 2.3-2.8. The Pantsir also has two dual 30mm autocannons shooting up to 700 rounds of high explosive at a rate of 2’500 rounds per minute at a distance up to 4km (2.5mi). Now here is the really neat thing about it: both the Russian and the Syrian operate these mobile systems. In other words, not only might these Pantsirs be anywhere, but they might be operated by anybody. Heck, even the Iranians have them!

Though the Pantsirs look the part (they look like something out of a Terminator movie to me), they are even more dangerous than they appear because while they are capable of fully autonomous operations, they are also designed to be plugged-in into a global network via a digitally encrypted datalink which makes it possible for them to receive their engagement data from other land-based and airborne platforms. Finally, keep in mind that nobody really knows how many Pantsirs the Russians have brought with them to Syria, how many the Syrians currently operate, how many “Syrian” Pantsirs are operated by Russians and plugged in into the Russian digital air-defense network or, for that matter, how many Syrian and Iranian Pantsirs might be out there.

So what do we have? A system which is extremely mobile (being mounted on a heavy high mobility truck), easy to conceal (being small), which can engage any airborne target at altitudes ranging form 0m to 15’000m as far as 20’000m away. To do so, they can used their passive electronically scanned array (PESA), their Autonomous Optoelectronic System (AOS) or even data received from other radars including Russian S-300/S-400, Su-35 or AWACS.

Initially and officially, the Russian Pantsirs are solely tasked with defending the longer ranged S-300/S-400 systems and the Russian installations in Khmeimim and Tartus. But in reality they could be rapidly deployed anywhere and used to shoot down US aircraft with no evidence whatsoever that the Russians did it! Of course, the Russian would have to be very careful as to what source they would use to track the US aircraft and provide the Pantsir’s missile an engagement solution. As far as I know, the Pantsir’s missiles do not have an active or even semi-active radar system, but their AOS allows for completely silent/passive engagements. Depending on what intelligence assets the Americans do or do not have available at the time of attack, their might be no way of proving who shot down the US aircraft.

The bottom line is this: while the world is focused on the bigger S-300/S-400 capabilities, the Russians already have in place a far more flexible short-medium range air-defense system which would be impossible to destroy with Tomahawks (being mobile) and very hard to destroy with airstrikes. That system could be deployed anywhere in Syria and it could be used while providing the Russian with a plausible deniability. Of course, the US could try to fly outside the Pantsir’s flight envelope, but that would make use of any airpower very difficult. Another option for the Americans would be to rely solely on their low-RCS aircraft (B-1, B-2 for strikes, and F-22s to protect them), but that would dramatically decrease the overall capabilities of CENTOM/NATO over Syria.

I will conclude this section by reminding everybody that neither the US nor any other NATO country has ever had to operate in an environment as dangerous as the Syrian skies. The poor Serbs had only ancient air defenses and yet even against them NATO failed miserably. In Syria the Russian air defenses could give the Americans a run for their money without ever using any of their (admittedly few) air superiority aircraft.

2) Plausible deniability on the ground

Has anybody ever considered that the Russians might decide to attack US forces deployed on the ground in Syria (or Iraq for that matter?)? Apparently not, if only because most people would assume that the Russian force in Syria is tiny and therefore cannot attack a much larger and stronger US force. But, just as with the air warfare, this is a mistaken assumption based on the idea that the US would know who is attacking. In reality, the Russians could attack the US using their special forces (either those already deployed or specially brought in) to attack US targets and retain plausible deniability.

How?

This is what we already know:

Russian operators are already deployed and active in Syria:

First the famous Spetsnaz ( Spetsnaz GRU Gsh). These are special units drawn either from the Southern Military District or, possibly, subordinated directly to the Military Intelligence (GRU) HQ in Moscow. Unlike the Spetsnaz GRU forces of the GRU brigades of the Military Districts, these small groups (8-12 men) are staffed by career officers only.

Next, the Russian Special Forces (SSO), a relatively new creation not to be confused with the Spetsnaz GRU even if they are similar in many ways, are also more or less officially in Syria (Russian TV channels have made reports and interviews with them). They are subordinated to General Staff of the Armed Forces. Here is a photo of them taken by a Russian journalist in Syria:

Using plausible deniability against a systematically lying adversary

Finally, there аre reports of some unnamed but very secret Russian unit working in Syria (for example here) but neither Vympel nor Zaslon fit the bill (the former is now subordinated to the FSB, i.e. deal with internal security issues, while the latter is more of a protective service for officials, their residences and Russian civilians abroad). I have found no info on who they are, but my guess is that they are what Vympel used to be: special forces of the Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) working in close collaboration with the SVR agent networks in Syria.

Whatever may be the case, the Russians already have more then enough special forces in Syria to start attacking US targets in Syria or even elsewhere in the region. For example, during the battle for Aleppo there have been numerous reports of Russian snipers killing Daesh leader one after the other almost decapitating their entire leadership. That could happen to top US officers on the ground in Syria. Special forces could also arrange for “unexplicable” missile strikes hitting US forces. But the most important aspect here is that these forces could be used in complete secrecy with nothing identifying them as Russians. They would look like Arabs, speaks like Arabs and have Arabic IDs with them. The Soviets did use exactly this technique in Afghanistan to overthrow Afghan President Hafizullah Amin. Likewise, Chechen President Ramzan Kadyrov has openly admitted that Chechen operators have been infiltrated into the Daesh command structure.. Finally, even if “Russians” are caught and somehow identified, there are about 5’000 Russian citizens of all sorts of ethnic groups (including Slavs) fighting in the ranks of Daesh and it will be impossible to prove that fighter X or fighter Z are agents of a Russian intelligence service.

Bottom line is this: Russia also has the option of ground attacks against US forces with plausible deniability.

So think of it – Russians SAMS shooting at US aircraft in the air, and Russian special forces killing US officers on the ground. And all this with complete plausible deniability.

Not convinced yet?

One the many uses of plausible deniability, especially against a systematically lying enemy

You might wonder how useful plausible deniability is against a country which makes up all sorts of ridiculous stories about Russian hackers stealing elections or invisible Russian armies in the eastern Ukraine. And I agree, a country which has 16 intelligence agencies and a long and shameful history of making up intelligence – yes, sure, they could say that “the Russkies did it” and have the Ziomedia repeat it all over and over again without any evidence.

But there is another side to this story: since the US propaganda machine has made up so many stories about genocidal Serbs, Viagra-enhanced raping Libyans, baby-tossing Iraqis, wannabe-nuclear Iranians, barrel-bombing Syrians and God knows who else – how credible will they be when they accuse the Russian of “this vicious and dastardly act” (whatever the act is, really)? Even as I write this, there are reports that the White House is already setting the stage for yet another false flag attack in Syria. Let’s be honest here and agree that Uncle Sam lies every time he moves his lips and while the brain-dead Ziomedia pretends to take each lie very seriously, the rest of the planet, including much of the American public, is under no illusions.

Now imagine a Russian operated Pantsir-S1 crew in Syria shooting down US aircraft or Russian operators blowing up a tent with the HQ of the US forces in Syria. Not only will there be no proof that the Russians did it, but even if there was, nobody would trust the Americans anyway. Furthermore, this also begs the following question: would it really be in the USA’s best interest to point the finger at the Russians? I would argue that it would not. It would make far more sense to blame the Syrians, then bomb some kind of Syrian government building (say the probably empty military intelligence building in downtown Damascus) and declare that “a message has been sent” then to take the military and political risk of attacking Russian forces in Syria.

Could the Americans retaliate in kind?

Probably not. Remember, they don’t have the boots on the ground, the intelligence capabilities or the political support (internal and external) to get away with that. Not only that, but US special forces have a long history of screwing up even relatively simple operations and I don’t see them trying to get away with a direct attack on Russian forces in Khmeimim or elsewhere. At most, they will do what they almost always do – subcontract the mission to some locals, which works great against defenseless civilians and ends up on disaster against a real “hard” target.

The many paradoxes of warfare

First, we should always keep in mind that any military action is just a means towards a political goal, the “continuation of politics by other means”. Because of that highly political nature, there are circumstances where being the weaker side can yield advantages. The key to the defensive strategy of the weaker side is not to let the stronger side impose the kind of warfare which maximizes the stronger side’s advantages. In the case of Syria, trying to defeat the entire air force of CENTCOM with just a few fighters would be plain stupid. And since the US does have an immense advantage in the number of cruise missiles it can launch – do what the Serbs did in Kosovo and Hezbollah did in 2006 against Israel: don’t give them a target. In the Syrian context this means: use only mobile air defense systems. Last but not least, hit the Americans were it hurts most – their morale. Remember how crazy they got when they could not find out who was attacking them in Vietnam?

An elephant in a porcelain store is a scary sight for sure. But once you get over your initial fear, you soon will realize that being a big bad elephant makes it very difficult to make a smart move. That is exactly the USA’s problem, especially the US armed forces: they are so big and confident that almost every move they make lacks to sophisticated caution imposed by life on a much weaker actor. This is why the almost always end up breaking the store and looking stupid. Add to this a quasi-total focus on the short-term quickfix, and you get a recipe for disaster.

The two options for a Russian counter-attack under the cover of plausible deniability are just the two that came to my mind. In reality there are many more, including many even much less “visible” than those I have suggested. My main goal was to illustrate that there is absolutely no reason for the Russians to behave like Omar Lamrani suggested in his frankly silly article. The truth is that I have absolutely no idea how the Russians might respond, and that is exactly how it should be. All I am sure of is that they won’t respond how Lamrani thinks they will, that’s all.

The wiser folks in the Pentagon and, apparently, on the ground are trying hard to avoid getting tangled up with the Russians not because they fear some specific Russian response, but because they are aware that they are dealing with an unpredictable and sophisticated actor. The good news is that the Russians are also trying hard to avoid getting tangled up with the Americans, especially so far away from home and smack in the middle of a thoroughly CENTCOM/NATO-controlled part of the world.

In conclusion, I want to mention just a small sampling of what I did not mention but which US commanders will have to consider before deciding on a direct attack on Russian forces: various naval scenarios, especially those involving diesel attack submarines, Russian options to deploy into Iran, Russian retaliatory options in other theaters such as Iraq, Pakistan and, especially, Afghanistan. Here is a good one: *real* Russian cracking (“hacking” is the wrong word) of crucial US computer networks, including the release of possibly very embarrassing information (think of it as “Wikileaks on steroids”). Finally, if cornered, one possibly option for Russia would be to draw US forces, resources and energy away from Syria to some other region truly critical to the USA. DPRK anybody?

The options are endless and the stakes very high. In the dreamworld of Mr Lamrani it’s all simple and easy. Which only goes to prove, yet again, that war is far to serious a matter to entrusted to civilians.

Donate

SouthFront

Do you like this content? Consider helping us!

  • Attrition47

    Retaliation against the US head-chopping, heart-eating rapers and their zionist proxies is a nice thought (they’ve had it coming for long enough) but shrugging off their provocations has worked so far.

  • Manuel Flores Escobar

    Russia has its own plan B in case of massive attack vs Syrian/ Russian troops in Syria…its is to destroy Siaulias and Amari air bases in Baltic countries and the two anti missile shields( Deveselu and Redzikow) with cruise missiles … another posible target is the air carrier deployed near Korea from Oscar class submarine( P-700 long range antiship missile),,,,,Russian military staff know there will be no retaliation vs Russia and there could be strong divisions among NATO/EU allies…Russian military have seen how North Korea has stopped US attacks by the pressure of South Korea and Japan as both know that its population reject the idea of be a US guinea pig in a nuclear war!

    • Solomon Krupacek

      stop paste this bullshit under each article!

      • Manuel Flores Escobar

        Why USA doesnt threaten with an inminent attack vs North Korea and his leader?…just only say the NK is a problem. and deploy Thaad and 2 B-1…because Pentagon is afraid the NK use nuclear weapons!…so imagine the day after Russia attacks those NATO bases…what about people in EU?..what about stock markets?..and Petrol prices?…I¨ll tell you again!..Russia will attack antimissile shields bases and two airbases in Baltic countries!…

        • Aurelian

          https://sputniknews.com/middleeast/201706291055077658-us-syria-pretext-pushkov-warning/

          My own amateur viewpoint is the new false flag being drummed up is to give the Americans the excuse to hammer the Syrian&allies forces at the iraq border, the timing says it all to me, i half except pro-government forces in aleppo and raqqah provinces to be hit as well.

          Syria is going to be split up this is all about who controls which bits of real estate when the negotiations start.

          If The Russians Have any brains they are preparing for TOTAL WAR conventional biological and nuclear a few years down the line as NATO further encircles and threatens them.

          If we go down, then all shall be coming with us…should be the Russian mantra Nato is coming for them, i would not trust China as far as i could throw them

          • Manuel Flores Escobar

            Russian military staff know that SAA and Shia militia went to Iraq/ Syrian border near US base with the aircover of Russia….also Know that 23 missile hit in Shayrat and did insignificant damage and 36 were been desactivate over mediterranean as AEGIS operator comander sitting in a high chair in the centre of the operation room with extreme temperature of air cooler saw in the two big screen in front of him where in the left below a Windows PC operator show maps How Tomahawk went to the water no explication given by air defense system( left of the comander) and sea radar operators( right of commander) and launch system ( in the centre low of commander seat) they thought something similar to Donald Cook incident!..for other side all US attacks vs SAA have inflited the same damage as usual counterattacks of ISIS….so dont under values Russian military power!…

          • zman

            In interviews Putin has stated that they are preparing for just that. They realized by 2005 that they were the real eventual target…thus their military overhaul and rush to acquire and deploy gen 5 and develope gen 6 systems. Their latest electronic warfare systems are second to none.

          • Orcbuu

            Russia or better say the Old people of Hyperborea are always the Targets of the Zionists, just think about how many wars the people in Russia/tartaria have fought against invaders and betrayers, Russia and there people are and will be the NR.1 Target of them, the FINAL PLAN is to Destroy and Mixbreed them OUT. Because there “GOD`s” are the Stronger once. If u really want the truth to KNOW u have to Dig DEEP.

        • Tudor Miron

          Solomosha ziotroll hates you…You’re spoiling his agenda (wet dreams) of weak Russia as it was in 90-s.
          Solomosha, what you can’t comprehand is that Russia is only starting to stand up after defeat. West could only defeat us from within with lies – at one point (80-s) we really believed that theres light in the west. Freedom, democracy and prosperity. We found by personal experience that there’s very little of that in the west. Now your chance to defeat us from within are next to nothing. Russia only started to stand up but NWO is already shook.

  • paul

    Very interesting and informative article. For my part I doubt the Trump
    administration would understand any of this. Hilary would probably be
    worse. I suspect the opinion of Mr Lamrani is much closer to how the
    us administration fails to think than anything the Shaker might say.
    To these people reality is what they believe, it is entirely an
    internal state. This is not merely delusional, it is insane.

    The only similar situation I can think of is Hitler in his bunker. But
    this analogy is inadequate to the task of describing the evil we have at hand.

  • Pave Way IV

    So this rather long piece by The Saker is making the case that the Russians could act as deceptive, cowardly and dishonorable as the U.S. in Syria to counter any U.S. aggression against Russia/Syria.

    I don’t disagree that the Russian military could be somewhat effective, but I just can’t see that happening in reality for this one simple reason: Putin is infuriated with the cowardly U.S. moves in Syria, but he has stated many, MANY times that his priority is taking care of Russia, not Syria. He will not start WW III to defend Syria, and he has no reason to play the dangerous U.S./Israeli/GCC game of deceptions and escalation merely to preserve Syria. Of course he wants Syria preserved. He wants Assad and the Syrian people to defend Syria, period. Russia is there to help whack ISIS, not directly to defend Syria if it cannot defend itself. That’s simply the sad reality of the situation – the evil bully wins most of the time. Russia can’t save everybody, and won’t at the cost of their own security.

    That’s not a statement on Russian resolve. Would the average guy in the Russian military love to mix it up with the U.S. in Syria? Sure. Would a lot of Russians be willing to die to save Syria? Perhaps, but it’s just not going to happen. Fighting to save Syria from a determined U.S. attack/invasion does not directly nor immediately protect Russia, it weakens it.

    • paul

      Interesting and quite plausible. But may be the Russians will conclude ‘better to
      fight them over there than over here’. Ever heard these words before?

      • Pave Way IV

        “There” and “here” are meaningless for two nuclear-armed nations. How many hours would you expect U.S. leaders to last in a conventional war with Russia in Syria before they decided tactical nukes were needed? Think McCain and his ilk are unhinged now?
        I’m guessing the first carrier that was sunk would put them over the edge, but a dozen or two aircraft might do the trick, too. Putin knows he’s dealing with crazy on steroids with the U.S. and it would only be a matter of ‘when’ the U.S. or Israel would go nuclear, not ‘if’.

        The concept of safe geographical remoteness is only useful to a bully like the U.S. attacking far less powerful non-nuclear nations or against the lie of defending from imaginary or U.S.-created enemies somewhere else.

        • paul

          More good points. I think your characterization of the us response is very
          likely. The point I would make is, as far as I can understand your
          thoughts, that you would expect such thinking to restrain the
          Russians but not the americans. The idea lurking behind all this is
          that the Russians must be cautious and sane because the americans are
          not .

          I actually think that is the loop mankind has boxed itself into. I
          don’t see a happy resolution to this at all. This is the end of my
          comments here.

          • Tudor Miron

            “This is the end of my comments here.”(c) ” mankind has boxed itself”(c) We always box ourself don’t we?

          • Concrete Mike

            Its the obsession of modern society, everything must bé in its own box. Thats why we spend billions of dollars on guns, our main focus is tribal warfare.

            Tribes=box.

            You got Whites Blacks asians, jewss arabs Russians french english, first nations, men women gays Lesbos trans it goes on and on and on. Everybody needs their own box and fight for it.

            Its nonsense is what this crap is, im sick of it!!!

        • Ma_Laoshi

          I’m truly torn about this. There is the side you mention, but on the other hand I think even McCain would become sane real quick if it was his own obnoxious ass on the line. Why do you assume these people are what we see on TV? I think Bibi used Lieberman (is he even in or out of prison these days) in a similar way to snooker Obama: “better give me what I want or I can’t vouch for what Avigdor is liable to do”.

          • Pave Way IV

            I agree with you there, Ma_Laoshi. It’s always good to have a few crazies around you for show to keep the other side guessing. The problem with the U.S. government (and certainly Israel/GCC) in my opinion is that they are truly infested with the darkest of paranoid psychopaths. It’s the quiet ones I worry about, not the buffoons so much.

            The will of saner heads or the will of the people have both proved to be wholly inadequate to restrain these types in the short run. We (the U.S.) killed a million Iraqis based on a lie. We slaughtered three million in Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos for nothing. The Pentagam is about to ramp up an unwinnable, useless war in Afghanistan again despite any and all logic advising otherwise. Libya? Bosnia? Ukraine?

            I wish the evil we faced were just a handful of cartoonish nuts like McCain, but there are much more powerful dark forces either pulling the levers in Washington DC directly or whispering in their ears to pull those levers (Israel/GCC).

          • Terra Cotta Woolpuller

            They have left only carnage in their wake of fake wars , now honestly do you think that the US public would stand for it . Those that are awake have been preparing for this road and why the growth in militias in the US , this is just not something new planned . The US government has been prepping its police forces as para-military forces which has many people wondering these motives behind the actions .
            The US politicians and many others are crazy enough to believe they need to create the end times themselves . This is how really out their minds they are even Trump believes this nonsense which is scary to even think about .

            The belief in thinking the Russians don’t realize their own survival is on the line is very naive to think they aren’t prepared for this eventuality . The US politicos have not really thought out the fact that everything they know about Russian capabilities is based on outdated intelligence gathering and planning . The capability of the US is overrated and relies on many hope nots rather than what ifs .

            The US will try but will blunder and stumble in their current attempt and their hand will be shown , leaving them vulnerable for the world to see .

          • Ma_Laoshi

            Oh evil, yes. But who was it again who spoke of method behind the madness. For decades now, the Pentagram (like so many things I come up with, clearly I’m not the only one) isn’t exactly shy that winning may no longer be the point: it’s always “retaining a presence” this, “playing a role” that. As long as the orcs are there, the Dark Throne has an effective veto on Eurasian integration. I mean, ISIS now has a foothold in the Hindu Kush before anybody figured out what was going on; does “stoopid Yankees lolz” really cut it as a reaction?

            Regularly the body count rises to what they call a holocaust if Europeans do it. But we haven’t seen them sing when people *in Washington* are at risk of getting hurt, or simply losing money. Maybe they should do Fri Poker Nights in the Kremlin; then again, maybe they should pray instead. Like I said I’m torn, and will continue to be.

    • Jesus

      Taking care of Russia means withstanding every attempt by US and its lapdogs to threaten their security and economic well being. There has been an economic war going on since annexation of Crimea, recently the senate voted to impose more sanctions on Russia by attempting to impede the sale of their natural gas to Europe. Russia has been preparing for war for the last half dozen years, if US attacks Russian forces in Syria, the Russians can reach and attack every US base in the Middle East and the Indian Ocean with conventional weapons.

      • Tudor Miron

        annexation of Crimea? Interesting view but irrelevant. Crimeans view – they openly voted (direct democracy) on referendum with overhelming numbers (96%) to come back home to Mother Russia and that’s what happened. That’s what infuriates west the most with Crimea – actual democracy, direct people’s will at work. That’s a very dangerous sign for them and they know it.

        • Solomon Krupacek

          annexation of Crimea?

          it is annexation. check the word.

          • Terra Cotta Woolpuller

            Kosovo was annexed by the US which is what actually happened there just as they annexed south Korea . Crimea was already an autonomous region in Ukraine Soviet Republic and had the right to leave which was already established . They were not part of Ukraine legally only a republic since Kruschchev ignored the Soviet constitution . The Crimeans have held many referendums and political discussions for nearly 20 years , we as people have to recognize this fact even if there are those who fail to recognize international law and procedure were followed.

          • Solomon Krupacek

            no.

            the problem is, you all are bery undergraduate. you think, annexation = occupation. and this is not true. west germany annexed east germany. annexation is legal process.

          • Terra Cotta Woolpuller

            They joined the Russian Federation not Russia , you are thinking wrong Crimea is Crimean still but part of the Federation like Belarus.

          • Solomon Krupacek

            do you not understand, that this act of joining is called annexation???

            and belarus is not part of russian federation.

          • Terra Cotta Woolpuller

            Belarus is a member of the Russian Federation there are several countries part of it .The annexation would take a vote by the Russian people in a Referendum to do so , but as a federation partner the benefits are there without causing any uproar since this would upset the US and it’s puppet regime in Ukraine.

          • Solomon Krupacek

            You are more stupid than a piece of rock. Belarus is independent stae like nigeria.

            go to the hell, you idiot!

          • Terra Cotta Woolpuller

            Nigeria belongs to a Commonwealth ,you do know that . Do you actually understand those concepts all members are there own separate countries but enjoy economic and military cooperation which the latter is rarely ever needed . That is how Britain ended its empire , the Commonwealth was created to help with economic ties and strengthen the same shared values and principles. The last country to join was Rwanda in 2009 .There are 52 states in the Commonwealth all are independent and equal sovereign states .There are 2.4 billion people that are part of it spanning the whole entire world . That is how they work to help each other out, there are advanced countries and developing countries .The concept is old but still beneficial to its members .

          • Solomon Krupacek

            Annexation (Latin ad, to, and nexus,
            joining) is the political transition of land from the control of one
            entity to another. It is also the incorporation of unclaimed land into a
            state’s sovereignty, which is in most cases legitimate. In
            international law it is the forcible transition of one state’s territory
            by another state[1] or the legal process by which a city acquires land.[2]
            Usually, it is implied that the territory and population being annexed
            is the smaller, more peripheral, and weaker of the two merging entities,
            barring physical size.

        • Jesus

          I did not mean it the way it sounded, yes crimeans voted to become part of Russia.
          The Russians protected their interests in the area.

    • zman

      Russia’s ‘stated’ position on their deployment and rules of engagement in Syria and their actual actions, dictated by US actions and posturing, may not be the same. As with any minority force, one has to pick his fights and yet maintain credibility. I believe this is exactly what happened with the Tomahawk swarm that failed miserably. I seriously doubt, although admittedly without proof, that the Syrians were the ones who dealt with those Tomahawks. Whether it was the Russian EW capabilities (tomahawks falling into the water) or short range missile systems (pantsir?) that was responsible, Russia denied any involvement in their destruction. This is exactly the kind of response Saker is postulating. Did the US accuse the Russians of being responsible? No, they acted as though the strike was a success. Also, to not totally support Syria, is to the detriment of Russia. If they are not stopped in Syria, then where? Syria is key to Russian economic survival… if not, the Russians wouldn’t be there at all. The Russians understand what is at stake, but also realize that if the US is successful in Syria, then comes Ukraine. Then all bets are off and insanity would reign. There are no easy answers here, but I believe that Russia will not abandon Syria for the exact same reason they are there in the first place…Russian security…both military and economic. So far, they have, as you say, let the drunk nut run amok…attacks on SAA proper, Syrian infrastructure, etc. But then again, just because we do not hear that they have taken steps to reign in the nut, doesn’t mean they haven’t…they just don’t broadcast it. But US command knows. The thing not mentioned is Iran and their thousands of missiles…I doubt that they would stand idly by while the US makes a major attack on Syria. They have stated many times their determination to not allow Syria to fall…and which way would Iraq and Turkey jump? Does one really think the Russians and Iranians have not given this scenario some thought? As for the Russians acting ‘as deceptive, cowardly and dishonorable as the U.S.’…that is not even possible. Doing what is immediately necessary, whether it violates your stated ROE, when dealing with an enemy that uses deception as a tactic, is not the same thing.

      • Pave Way IV

        Saker is taking this up a notch by throwing in a more extensive use of Pantsirs and Spetsnaz/SSO against significantly expanded U.S. aggression. They are probably used now in a limited way – I’m not suggesting they are not or would not be used all. But they are wholly inadequate to prevent or discourage the U.S. from a larger, widespread attack directly on Syrian government forces. In fact, if they were used in the way Saker describes, i.e, killing U.S. officers and/or taking out U.S. aircraft, then the U.S would have the exact casus belli they’re looking for to attack. Russia might escape blame herself – ‘plausable deniability’ – but the U.S. would just blame the Syrians instead and attack them like it’s always wanted to do.

        In the long run, the Pantsir is a point-defense weapon. You simply can’t defend an entire country with them. They are good, but would eventually be destroyed. Covert ops are not going to be a match against 120,000 U.S. troops. If the U.S. goes all-in to attack Syria, then Russia really has only two options: fight the U.S. directly (= WW III) to save Syria, or sit back and let it happen. Putin chooses his battles carefully – I just can’t see him getting tricked into fighting the U.S. and her Israeli/GCC cronies this way. Maybe I’m wrong.

        • Terra Cotta Woolpuller

          NATO would have to withdraw its troops if there were to be a conflict with between Turkey and the US , since NATO is forbidden to be involved in any conflict between any partners . This would cause the break up of NATO if it were to breach any of the conditions . Since there would be much intense arguments for and against and possibly causing a total withdrawal of all NATO forces in the area .

          This conflict between US and Russia would be limited if Turkey sided with Russia since you could already count the Iranians, Syrians and a possibly the Iraqis joining the Russian cause , this really makes it moot if Chinese embedded troops get hurt in Syria . This would be a conflict with truly only one side losing and that isn’t the Russian side .

          Many of these Policy centers are only good at being is consistently wrong on public policy , lacking the ability to gauge the public sentiment and opinion properly. The plan drawn up seems to be of these policy institutes ,the assumption by typical analytics of such lack actual hard data to support their hypothetical battle planning or foreign policy making which in theory sounds good but is never accepted in practice .

          • Ma_Laoshi

            Way too optimistic to count Turkey in Russia’s camp already. Isn’t it more Russia that is in Turkey’s camp? For a moment when this all started, it looked like the dawn of an alternative world order if the Russki’s could fix Syria. The world was watching. But the Kremlin critters can’t hide what they are for long, so after a while they also got in bed with one of the major terror sponsors to make some money. In exchange, Turkey obtained a get-out-of-jail-free card for its land grabs, of which we won’t have seen the last yet. Has Russia been defeated? No, but they have been distracted; and the world is still watching.

      • Terra Cotta Woolpuller

        There was an upgraded S-200 system at Shayrat airbase and the Russians as they have admitted even the old systems with a computer upgrade could be integrated into the current avs link and it could use the other links to track and engage incoming missiles. The load out capacity for the S-200 is 36 missiles the other systems of S-300 to 400 are smaller load outs .

      • Ma_Laoshi

        I can’t take what you and others write as fact without supporting evidence, but it’s an interesting way to look at the Hersh article: the Dark Throne wants to whack a Syrian airfield, gets its missiles jammed/intercepted, ending up with egg on its face when the Syrians resume the babykilling next morning. Not good. So the orcs sit down with Sy and portray themselves as angels of reason compared to the orange baboon. They look god and American deterrence is restored.

    • Jesus

      Since I live in the US I am quite familiar with American culture and social trends, it has been for over two decades that “being confident”, ” having control of the situation” are mere jargons to hype individuals that have inadequate skills or education to cope with problems.
      The American military leadership along with the politicians and neocons present this veneer of utter confidence and and being in control of the situation. When the veneer is peeled off, the sight is not pretty, as they will find out in Syria.

      • zman

        Yes, unfortunately the military leaders of today are more akin to politicians than military strategists. At the first sign that they are not invincible…

    • XRGRSF

      I don’t find your concept of the Russia/US confrontation valid in the least. You’re position fails on two simple facts: 1. If Russia didn’t think Syria was worth a decisive engagement with the US then Russia would not be in Syria. 2. If the US thought that Russia was not in the game for all of the marbles then the US would have already invaded, and overrun Syria.

      As for Russia’s defending Syria against a determined US attack weakening Russia: Nonsense ! Just the opposite would be true. A solid defense against the US would stop The Empire in its tracks. You say that Russia would not go nuclear over Syria without considering whether or not the US/NATO would go nuclear over Syria. Do you really think that The Empire is going to risk a decisive defeat in battle, even a localized defeat with conventional weapons, when it can simply declare victory, and go home? Do you think NATO is going to risk Europe in a nuclear exchange with Russia over Syria? Really, do you?

      Southern Russian cities are 800 miles from Damascus. If Syria falls then the US is effectively on Russia’s southern border, Russia is humiliated, and proven to be impotent, and all of Russia’s regional allies are betrayed. Syria, Iran, and the rest of the Middle East are lost. Russia cannot afford to lose in Syrian, and I’m certain the Russians realized that before they committed their support.

      I’ve been reading your posts for some time, and they all carefully lay out how hopeless Russia’s position is related to the all powerful American Empire. I don’t agree with you, and I don’t think that the Russians consider their position to be hopeless; if they did they wouldn’t be in Syria.

      • Pave Way IV

        I won’t belabor the points I have already made, XRGRSF, but I’m not clairvoyant. I may be completely wrong here. I had to respond to this one though:

        “…Do you think NATO is going to risk Europe in a nuclear exchange with Russia over Syria? Really, do you?…”

        WTF do the U.S. NATO lapdogs have to do with determining U.S. psychopath’s actions? The correct phrasing should be,

        “Do you think the U.S. would risk Europe in a nuclear exchange with Russia over Syria?”

        I’m guessing you can already figure out my response to that question.

        • Jesus

          Your response about US going in with tactical nuclear weapons because they would loose a carrier or a couple of squadrons of aircraft is the normal knee jerk reaction most people are prone to. It is not going to be like that, the neocons the politicians and the politicized military might blow a lot of hot air displaying ” self confidence” rethoric and breathing threats, the real military will present the matter in stark contrast of what their actions will cause.

          So what if US looses 100 planes and a carrier? It might be a good time to reassess the capabilities of a crumbling empire. US wants to use tactical nuclear weapons to overcome their embarrassment, Russia has far more tactical nuclear weapons. Syria is a lot closer to Russia than it is to the US, US position in Middle East is basically sandwiched between Iran and Russia.

      • Solomon Krupacek

        good comment

        • XRGRSF

          Thank you, Solomon.

      • Ma_Laoshi

        If Trump would decisively smack ISIS in both Mosul and Raqqa, or at least get the local poodles to do it, declaring victory and going home wouldn’t have been an idle gesture in all fairness. I’m sure the Kremlin would’ve played along praising US leadership and all that, and Trump would’ve been halfway to solving his political problems at home. It’s just been underestimated how committed those people are to do Israel’s bidding.

        • XRGRSF

          Yes, and we can only hope that Trump has the opportunity to bow out gracefully at some point in the future. Israel is an insane nation that is fully capable of destroying the world. All one has to do is read the history of the Hebrew people. The Old Testament is full of their brutal, murderous, and suicidal actions.

          • Ma_Laoshi

            Theology is a whole other can of worms, and I’m not fully with you on this. Seeing the Old Testament as the history of the Hebrew people and a holy text at the same time, seems to be indulging all the tendencies pushing us towards the cliff. The Hebrews were one of many humble iron-age tribes who, yes, lived in the Levant in biblical times. No archeological evidence of them prancing around in the Sinai; none of them stoning their children either. They may not have codified their stories until the Babylonian Exile, and did they even master writing at the time they claim that Moses lived. Yes to the secular eye their stories are cruel; yet read some Mongolian legends and also in this regard the Hebrews are no longer so special.

            Your own culture may not be without blame here with its notion that victims are heroes. Victims are broken people who should be looked after and I don’t mean blind love, and they may not be picky about whom they choose for revenge. German Nazis screw Dutch screw Indonesians screw East Timor. In none of those cases, people thought that handing out dozens of nukes was proper therapy; someone made a mistake here.

            None of those people are what we see on TV, but isn’t Trump the last person to sit down and take a deep breath “how did I end up in this mess again”. I see financial collapse as the only non-apocalyptic scenario. Fortunately, it’s not “exceptional” for empires to end like that.

          • XRGRSF

            I don’t look upon the biblical era as much from the theological standpoint as the historical aspect. I understand that the biblical period was brutal by today’s standards, and that violence on an epic scale was almost normal. The thing that interests me about the ancient Jewish mind was not as much its violence as its treachery, and hypocrisy. Said treachery, and hypocrisy continues to this day, and it infected the US long ago. This is a subject that we could discuss forever, and it would only be a waste of time.

            My own culture? Would that be hip hop, drug, rap, Rasta, sports or alcohol ? My friend, America has no culture. America also has no tradition or defined history. This is not by accident because a people with culture, history, and tradition have a foundation from which to resist manipulation. Russia has culture, history, and tradition so strong that not even the Bolsheviks could destroy it. From what I’ve seen the same applies to China.

            America does have a victim culture because victims require the strength of the state for protection. In America everyone is an honored victim, and the state provides all of the support that they need to cope with their misfortune. Thus the victims, and all of those associated with them worship the state. The State has become the American religion of the 21st century.

            I have a feeling that Trump does indeed wonder what he fell into, and how he’s going to remove the smell. Oh well, no one ever said that being POTUS was easy. I agree that the financial collapse of The Empire could be a non-apocalyptic route to the exit. However, dying empires do tend to thrash about, and destroy all around them, in a futile attempt to survive. Time will tell.

            Have a good life, Ma Laoshi. I’ve enjoyed our conversation.

          • Ma_Laoshi

            Not competing to have the last word, but these strike a chord with me. Clearly, you’ve had to re-assess much of the software you grew up with. I’ve grown up with the same narrative as everyone else in the club: “any time, any place, Our People have been the scapegoat, we’ll only pull through if we stick together”. Took me half a lifetime to ask the obvious question: if this is even true, then obviously it’s something in *our* culture that causes us to overstay our welcome in such a diverse array of host countries–what is it? Once you know where to look, you’d be surprised how many eminent Jews have been there one time or another.

            I’ve argued with others here whether Israelis are cowards. I think they’re merely dishonorable: they don’t care much about what you think of they way they win. For them, it’s simply about being rational. In their eyes, the suicide bomber is the gold standard for the glorious loser, and it’s just not how *they* roll. Hard to swallow for a good soldier like yourself I guess; but whatever else you do, you don’t get to feint surprise about it happening time and again. Yes the Anglos have learned from this, and now the damage is more than our kosher partners could’ve caused themselves.

            For all the claims it makes about itself, Jewry is an old-school tribal thing. PC Europe can no longer admit this, but gypsies also have a notion that taking from outsiders is no biggie. Italians didn’t only bring pizza to the New Country, but when they became a parasite on society at large, that society found the voice to say ITALIAN mafia (if they weren’t on the take that is), and took away their money and freedom when needed. The notion of deceiving and using outsiders is just what a persecuted minority develops–in Islam it’s called taqiyya.

            The trick here is of course that American Jews still style themselves as a persecuted minority, which is funny-but-not-really. A greedy, anti-intellectual, deeply religious victim culture controlling most of the globe’s firepower is just a playground they couldn’t have anticipated in their wildest dreams. If you agree on at least some of these harsh adjectives, you know what you have to clean up.

            And yet, we’re doing our mini-me Oliver Stone – Putin thing in that I see the US more mildly than you see it yourself. When Prince Vladimir baptized Rus, no doubt it was a humbler affair than we see in the paintings and poems. America is a teenager still experimenting with sex and drugs, also compared to China and Iran. It’s called growing up; but please enough with the rah-rah indeed, before it gets us all killed. Rasta and hip-hop are things which are not for our age brackets, and we can mostly tune out, if we accept that TV life. Let’s take things one at a time.

          • Ma_Laoshi

            Not competing to have the last word, but these strike a chord with me. Clearly, you’ve had to re-assess much of the software you grew up with. I’ve grown up with the same narrative as everyone else in the club: “any time, any place, Our People have been the scapegoat, we’ll only pull through if we stick together”. Took me half a lifetime to ask the obvious question: if this is even true, then obviously it’s something in *our* culture that causes us to overstay our welcome in such a diverse array of host countries–what is it? Once you know where to look, you’d be surprised how many eminent Jews have been there one time or another.

            I’ve argued with others here whether Israelis are cowards. I think they’re merely dishonorable: they don’t care much about what you think of they way they win. For them, it’s simply about being rational. In their eyes, the suicide bomber is the gold standard for the glorious loser, and it’s just not how *they* roll. Hard to swallow for a good soldier like yourself I guess; but whatever else you do, you don’t get to feint surprise about it happening time and again. Yes the Anglos have learned from this, and now the damage is more than our kosher partners could’ve caused themselves.

            For all the claims it makes about itself, Jewry is an old-school tribal thing. PC Europe can no longer admit this, but gypsies also have a notion that taking from outsiders is no biggie. Italians didn’t only bring pizza to the New Country, but when they became a parasite on society at large, that society found the voice to say “ITALIAN mafia” (if they weren’t on the take that is), and took away their money and freedom when needed. The notion of deceiving and using outsiders is just what a persecuted minority develops–in Islam it’s called taqiyya.

            The trick here is of course that American Jews still style themselves as a persecuted minority, which is funny-but-not-really. A greedy, anti-intellectual, deeply religious victim culture controlling most of the globe’s firepower is just a playground they couldn’t have anticipated in their wildest dreams. If you agree on at least some of these harsh adjectives, you know what you have to clean up.

            And yet, we’re doing our mini-me Oliver Stone – Putin thing in that I see the US more mildly than you see it yourself. When Prince Vladimir baptized Rus, no doubt it was a humbler affair than we see in the paintings and poems. America is a teenager still experimenting with sex and drugs, also compared to China and Iran. It’s called growing up; but please enough with the rah-rah indeed, before it gets us all killed. Rasta and hip-hop are things which are not for our age brackets and we can mostly tune out, if we accept that TV life. Let’s take things one at a time.

      • Ma_Laoshi

        Most of what you write sounds impeccable from the point of view of the Russian national interest. That’s after all, in your own words, how you’ve been *trained* to think on your side. But what if the Dark Throne says “We’ve got your number, Vlad: you’ll go to the mat for much narrower kleptocratic interests only. We are generous so we’ll throw those interests a bone, but you DON’T get to defy us where it matters.”

        Leave aside the question whether their assessment is right before we all have to spend the next week arguing about that. If that’s how they see the Kremlin, wouldn’t they be prepared to push a lot further than you think compatible with the interest of our collective survival?

        • XRGRSF

          I’m astounded, and somewhat pleased by your assumption that I’m Russian. At the end of my name you’ll find XXX XXX, LTC, INF, AUS (ret.). I’m a retired US Lieutenant Colonel of Infantry. In 1984 I was on division staff (G2 Section) in an armored division, and I was tasked with finding information on the Soviet T-72/84 tank. That model being the T-72 with a fully stabilized main gun, and coupled laser ranging. I asked for, and received permission to contact the Soviet Embassy, and from there was directed to the Soviet Armor School, and they provided the information. I soon realized that they were reaching out to me, a lowly captain, and that they wanted to be understood. That action opened a window into the Soviet, and later the Russian mind set.

          I was trained to think like my side, the US. However, I opened my mind to understand, and think like what, at that time, was my opponent. I soon developed Soviet contacts that I have to this day, although we’re much older now. I have never met these men, and I have no idea if they are who they say they are, but their information has proven accurate over the years. I’m not taking about classified intelligence, I’m not some sort of spook, I want to understand the world view of the Russian. I realize that I can never see the world as a Russian sees it, but I want to understand their perspective as best I can.

          The US is blinded by its hubris, and Is fixated on Putin. Putin is a true patriot, but American’s simply cannot understand anyone being motivated by anything other than money. What America fails to see is what’s behind Putin: The entire being, and spirit of the Russian nation. Following, and supporting Putin is a national will that stretches back for over a thousand years. Russia will be no vassal.

          What I’m seeing right now should terrify you, and all of the chest thumping rah, rah, Americans. Russia transitioned to a war footing about 5 years ago. At this moment Russia has determined that a war with the US/NATO is inevitable. China has made the same determination. America is blundering toward what, at best, will be a strategic defeat, and at worst a global nuclear holocaust.

          • Ma_Laoshi

            Sir, no,sir! ;-) Not what I was implying. I remember you from when you clarified “baiting” vs “probing”, and NVA vs Rhodesian resolve–at least that was you, right? What I meant was: in US Army Academy or whatever it’s called you have US national interest as a guiding principle. In that frame of mind, you assess Russian actions and redlines relative to Russian national interest. But what, I wondered, if Washington doubts the Kremlin’s commitment to Russian national interest?

            Or in the words of Oscar Wilde, “I am in a constant fear of not being misunderstood”. But then, does passport matter here. Up to your rank but not much higher, I guess most US and RF soldiers would be fine with working together or at least coexisting; or am I being naive here. Doesn’t mean they won’t slaughter each other plus plenty of us when ordered to.

            I’m no pro, but following these matters independently I’m amazed at the level of snark “look at the tantrums of an outmaneuvered US LOL”. Some kind of reverse virtue signaling of people shaking off the MSM cocoon. I AM terrified and it’s not just the news either. I do have some qualifications to appreciate what the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists is saying about US nuclear planning and posture. These people are *not* going to just switch off the lights for the Empire; they’d feel it’d be an abdication of duty.

          • Ma_Laoshi

            [huh where did my earlier answer go]

            Sir, no, sir! ;-) You are the one who wrote about baiting vs probing, and NVA vs Rhodesian resolve, right? What I meant was: in Army Academy or what that place is called, you studied strategy from the perspective of US national interest I assume. By extension, you evaluate Russia’s actions and red lines from the perspective of Russian national interest. But what, I wondered, if Washington doubts the Kremlin’s commitment to said interest? If they go full Hillary, just pouring into Syria expecting everyone else to scurry away?

            I’m no pro, but looking at things independently I can’t believe the level of snark doing the rounds. I AM a bit terrified and it’s not just Syria. I do have some qualifications to get what the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists is saying about US nuclear planning and posture–not good.

          • XRGRSF

            When we (US) launched our first attack on Iraq I know of a least one division commander (Major General) who resigned in protest. I know of numerous lesser ranks who retired, and many more who did not remain in service. I know that the US military was excited by the prospect of a quick, and easy war, but its been anything, but quick, and easy

            It could be that Trump appointed two former US Marine generals to important positions (Homeland Security, and Sec. Def.) thinking that they would go along with an expansion of the endless Middle East wars. It’s too early to tell, but that doesn’t seem to be the case. Perhaps Trump intends to wind things down, and he thinks that having two warrior Generals leading this project will quell the howls of the war mongers; it wont. Remember that General Kelly lost his son in Iraq so he knows the grief of a parent who’s child has done his duty, and died for nothing. My pessimism is tempered by the glimmer of hope that we are indeed going to declare victory, once ISIS is finished, and go home.

            I do think that the cancer in Washington doubts Russia’s commitment to Russia. The neo-con/liberal crowd only sees the world in the aspect of their own attributes. They are evil, and corrupt people who respond only to power, and money. They assume that everyone one else is exactly the same. They are wrong. They can’t understand the commitment of the Russian, and Chinese leadership to duty, and honor. In the end that will be their undoing.

            If I were to speculate on Russia’s response to a full invasion of Syria by the US I would expect Russia to engage, and absorb the attack. Russia has a theater wide air defense system, owns the Black Sea, and the Med., and has a 12 hour supply route from Russian territory. Russia, and Iran would buy a short amount of time for China to deploy into the theater of operations. China would move on the US western flank via their common border with Afghanistan, and their fellow SCO member, Pakistan. China would also cut off US assets in the South China Sea. If you look at R/I/C’s current shifting of strategic assets it becomes somewhat obvious that they are in an engagement posture. The US simply lacks the ability to defend against an attack of this magnitude while half way around the world, and the American military knows it.

            Once China is in the game US logistics will be disrupted, the US attack will be starved, and US forces will lose their ability to maneuver. Russia, Iran, and China will achieve strategic, and tactical superiority within the theater of operations, and the US will be given a path to withdraw. R/I/C will not threaten the US mainland or Europe. If the US doesn’t panic, and employ nukes it will be over in 2 weeks or less. A year after it’s over the US will make nice in order to put Walmart back in business, and things will adjust to the new normal of no more empire. The US will finally settle for being a great nation among equals, and the world will be a peaceful, and prosperous place for my grandchildren.

            Ma Laoshi is Chinese is it not? China, the world’s oldest, and by some opinions, most advanced civilization. There’s so much for America to learn from China. All the US has to do is open its mind, and accept the fact that there are other great nations.

          • Ma_Laoshi

            It’s one irony among many that one gets jeers “armchair general” only from other armchair generals. So allow me to make a fool of myself: “engagement posture” is a tricky thing. After the Six Day War, the Arab leaders were all tears “Look how easily you beat us, that only proves our troops at your borders were not intent on invasion!” A bit mixed feelings myself, but the Western consensus seems to be that those Arab troops could have, you know, been stationed somewhere else.

            Ma Laoshi is “teacher Ma”, the Chinese version of my last name. I’ve lived several places and am several things, mostly without really belonging. Armenians, Turks, Japanese, Jews, Serbs, Hungarians and what have you share(d) American delusions that it’s all about themselves. But with greater power comes greater responsibility–a concept I find missing in most theologies as well.

    • Terra Cotta Woolpuller

      The problem with waiting too long is obvious since Syria holds a high strategic value , what everyone forgets is the US has said they are willing to commit a limited Nuclear War . Now we have to keep that in mind when dealing with the Naked Crazy Drunk Guy . This remains to be seen as whether or not they will use nuclear weapons by either side which would change everything that was said . The possibility of it going beyond a limited engagement by the Naked Crazy Drunk Guy is very high ,since no one really trusts the guy . This leaves all queries and hypothesis in what ifs of a conventional battle, to what could actually happen in a nuclear confrontation.

  • Derapage

    Too optimistic article.

    1) All Russian air defence systems currently deployed in Syria are ineffective against saturation attacks from Turkey, Israel, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, US & friends airbases. Don’t trust Erdogan! On 2017/04/05 he volunteered to annihilate both Russians and Syrians if Trump ordered him. The only effective system against saturation attacks is S-500 which is still in production.

    2) The war will not be confined to Syria. Russia will have to defend itself along the European border without natural defences. There are currently 2500 NATO tanks and 15000 men deployed in the Balkans.

    3) Geographically: the front is much closer to Russia than to the USA. This situation should not be underestimated. The American elector will continue to eat popcorn while he watches the war on TV or Internet if both Russia and USA don’t pass to the nukes… Erdogan will close the Bosphorus. Game over.

    4) Information & Electronic Warfare: USA & Israel are ahead by six points on Russia. The Russian hacking tale is bullshit made in CIA.

    5) Boots on the ground: NATO, Israel, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, HTS, FSA, SDF, Jordan, EAU, ISIS. Did I forget someone? All demoted?

    6) Stealth. No system is present in Syria to intercept them. See Israeli flight over the Assad Palace a few months ago.

    7) Exit strategy: The Russians do not have it. They can only abandon Assad. The western countries can defeat ISIS, kill Assad, support the Kurds, etc.

    • Rodger

      8) Political. The US and the EU populations won’t accept even casualties in the 100’s let alone 1000’s.

      • Solomon Krupacek

        they accept. accepted also in afghanistan, iraq.

        • Ilies Bekhtaoui

          8000 soldiers over 10 years of fighting it’s not like 5000 in 3 weeks , they will refuse such loses

          • Solomon Krupacek

            5000 were not in iraq in 3 weeks

            be realist

          • zman

            Yes, the shock and awe will be what is on their faces when they hear of the loss of an Aircraft Carrier or a brigade or two. It will be unheard of and unexpected. The fear of nuclear confrontation will most likely scare them to death. Israels wishes will probably be relegated to second place, finally.

          • Solomon Krupacek

            when they hear of the loss of an Aircraft Carrier or a brigade or two

            :))))))
            sorry, but you are not realistic

        • Rodger

          No they didn’t. In a country where sacrifice by troops has a near religious status forcing troops to lay down their lives for a joke or some bucks can actually kill you.

          • Solomon Krupacek

            accepted. also in my country. the soldiers are professionals. their cshoise, their private death. nobody cares.

    • Wahid Algiers

      You got it. The only way for Syria’ s SAA and allies at the present is to keep on reaching more and more terrain and to secure it. At last they only will find vital support through Iran and Iraq (weapons and nutrition, water) and Iran (money for the salary of the civilians and soldiers).

    • Ilies Bekhtaoui

      south front is talking about a secret war between nato and russia and you are talking about a total war scenario . if nato ever shoot one round inside russia it’s totall war and there is no back down any more it’s not about assad anymore , russia will not leave and with russia and iran and controlling europe with gaz and natural ressources and russia being totally independent from the west i don’t see the west resisting the blockade before we see large problems and people on the streets . we are talking about stealth wars

    • zman

      1) A lot of ifs here. None of this is certain. Iran alone has the capacity to neutralize Saudi and surrounding US bases with their own swarms, not to mention destruction of US flotilla. They have literally thousands of anti-ship missiles alone.
      2) NATO and allies have zero chance against Russian home forces…even the Pentagram concedes this. It would be a second front, but this means the same for NATO and US forces. Russia has forces in hand to deal with this now.
      3) American politicians will be mortified if there are massive casualties in the first 24-48 hours…it’s not what they have been led to believe will happen. Erdogan’s actions are far from certain…he is much closer to the bear and its wrath…closing the Bosphorus will not happen.
      4) This by far your worst point. There is zero proof that the US might hold any advantage in this area..in fact the opposite may be true. One might point to the 36 ‘lost’ Tomahawks for an example. The US has no explanation other than to state that all missiles hit their target. Then there is the incident with the Donald Cook in the Black Sea, where it unexpectedly turned tail and left. Hacking is of no value and meaningless. In country intel is by far owned by the Russians.
      5) In all out conflict, boots on the ground are the last in. Russia already has SOFs in country, Iran can enter very quickly. Admittedly, they are outnumbered, but only after a fashion…they have to get there first, then survive any direct fire. Then again, which way will Iraq and Turkey jump? Also looking at the relations between the Kurds and US, their allegiance is questionable.
      6) Russia has stated many times that stealth technology is pretty much negated by their systems and I have no reason to doubt them. The Israeli flyover is a non-sequiter, as the Russians have yet to engage their systems..
      7) With this you are correct. The Russians have no options here. It is do or die…in more ways than one. With the US/NATO, they can leave with their tails between their legs if need be…or lie their asses off and say that they have forced an agreement out of Russia. They have the media to present and push such a lie. They can flee, but it is no real option for Russia.

      • Solomon Krupacek

        1) A lot of ifs here. None of this is certain. Iran alone has the
        capacity to neutralize Saudi and surrounding US bases with their own
        swarms, not to mention destruction of US flotilla. They have literally
        thousands of anti-ship missiles alone.

        iran has only few missiles. saddam had more, and did not help. iran has old weapons. probaly could neutralize saudis, but not the saudis + their allies.

        2) NATO and allies have zero chance against Russian home forces…
        Nato is superior in all ways

        3) American politicians will be mortified if there are massive casualties in the first 24-48 hours..
        mortified??? strong words. such thing never happened

        4) … One might point to the 36 ‘lost’ Tomahawks for an example
        nobody confirmed the loss. also the russians not. only talked something, but no evidences

        5) In all out conflict, boots on the ground are the last in. Russia already has SOFs in country, Iran can enter very quickly.
        russians are few, between iran and syria is iraq. will not allow. and also iran will not send regular army.

        6) Russia has stated many times that stealth technology is pretty much negated by their systems
        statements are nothing, combat conditions were not
        and russia has no stealth planes, that means, the russian engines are vulnerable

        • Manuel Flores Escobar

          Iran has 11.000 missile…Sadam had about 250!.
          Russia deployed in few days 150.000 soldiers near Estonia during Crimea crisis…Nato now have 4000!…
          Russia can attack easily with cruise missile( Iskander-K) K= Kalibr 2.700 km range from land and X-101 ( 5000 km) from planes all NATO bases.
          Russia can close baltic sea while Iran can do it easily Ormuz straight.
          F-117 and B2 are easy target for S-400.
          Israel cannot shot down( using F-16 and Patriot) a Russian Drone( with Jamm pod) which flew over Israeli border.
          Russia has missile Kalibr with electromagnetic pulse as well as MIg-x Drones with Jammer system to disrupt areas under threat.( was used during US ballistic test in Alaska).
          59 cruise missile would destroyed Shayrat base in case of impact its know every military expert and base was operacional de day after!..the base only had 23 impact while USA never proof 59 impact sites!

          • Solomon Krupacek

            Russia deployed in few days 150.000 soldiers near Estonia during Crimea crisis…Nato now have 4000!..

            and? russia WILL NOT ATTACK nato. and be sure, if russia would attack estonia, there would be total war.

            look, russia has only few missiles. 1 year ago also in SF wrote, that russia had to stop bombing an shelling jihadist by missiles, because the industry was not able to produce enough of them. (otherwise, the same problem with armatas, planes). and for this reason iran sure has no 150 000 missiles. the whole nato has not so much.

            russia can not close baltic sea, but nato yes. and iran can close hormuz for 1 week, and finished. for good. iran is now weaker then saddams iraq was in 1990. s-400 and b-2, f-22 … i am not sure. i wonder, you are so sure. never met themselves :P

            until this minute. nobody told, that 59 sam were destroyed. only few journalists. also the russian mod did not tell this. but they clearly told, russian air defense sytem did not anything. for me this is tale, until somebody does not bring clear evidense. and again, the statement of shoyhus workplace does not correspond with yours.

          • Manuel Flores Escobar

            Why USA want to attack Shayrat air base if as USA sources told they destroyed that base?…man Russia invade Estonia and NATO will do NOTHING!….Iran can close Ormuz straight( 50 km) with massive artillery, rockets,ballistic missile, antiship missile,Drones…Sadam NO!….Russia can supply to Iran through caspian sea weapons…Sadam NO!….Russia can close easily Baltic sea from Poland to St Peterburg once all NATO military assets in Baltic countries( air bases) have been destroyed!….the main target of Russia military is to sink US air carriers with massive antiship long range cruise missile and USA lost 89% of his military power as they are isoleted in American continent!…Oscar 2( 24 P-700) tracking Carl Viccens, Akula( 32 cruise missile)= George Bush, Yasen( 60 cruise missile)= US base Norfolk, Oscar 2 = US navy station of san Diego….dont under value Russia military!…

          • Solomon Krupacek

            americans did not want destroy. they informed russians enough time before, that means alla syrian airplanes hadd chance to leave. also personell.
            i told clearly: iran can close for 1 week, during this period american, saudi, israeli, btish planes sendiran back to middle age.
            and russia will not be involved. i wonder, that you take your fantasies as facts.
            look at russian baltic navy. it is nothing. the russian navy is old, unfunctional. the soviet union was not able to close baltic sea. always the soviet ships were in baltic trap. the baltic sea is closed in denmark.

            look, germany and japan were not able to isolate america :D anfd they hed much better conditions. russia was never naval nation. you can believe what you want, but russia has wrong ships.

          • Manuel Flores Escobar

            Saudis? man look at Yemen…Houttis have shot down fighter planes, helicopters, have been destroyed saudi bases with ballistic missile, have sunk saudis warships…and so on!..look at Lebanon war 2006 2 weeks of intense airstrike and Israeli troops kick backs to israel….Russia learnt the lesson during Japan-USA world war 2..it is to sink air carriers and USA is nothing!…long range cruise missile and end of the problem!…airstrike cannot stop the close of Ormuz as you have seen in Siria/Irak war where it needed troops on ground!…so Iran can close Ormuz and it will be a severy damage to world economi!

          • Solomon Krupacek

            saudis lost some planes. and? they have enough.
            in 2006 in 1 battle had israelis bigger losses. but they won the war.

          • Manuel Flores Escobar

            saudis lost some planes and?…are dying and losing military equipment without be reach to reach any objetive there!..Houttis militia are inside saudi Arabia fighting!…Israel lose the lebanon war as failed to stop rocket attacks and keep troops inside lebanon as everyday ATGM destroy tanks or APC…Israel fled from there and Hezbollah stopped launch rockets!..

    • Terra Cotta Woolpuller

      The points are so far fails and they wouldn’t be able to counter any real wars at the home fronts since there is a possibility of civil war in the US and Europe, these have been building for some time the media so far has been trying to hide this fact for a long time now . Turkey has changed their Tune since they realize they are still on the US appetites for countries since they have added more and their hunger is growing . The possibility of a war with the Kurds backed by the US would preclude any other NATO forces helping out .

      The truth about the EW with the US it relies heavily on its allies for all of its reliable intel now , and any child can hack the US computers the CIA had the back doors built in. The Russians and China are so far ahead its unbelievable , these countries were the first to play the game we are newcomers .The linked avs of the current systems have let everyone of the pilots know they are being tracked with no knowledge if they have incoming missiles , pantsir , S-200-300-400 are linked by AVS tracking .
      The Israelis like the US hide at a distance and shoot and the attacking over aircraft in their airspace would be provocation enough . That still doesn’t let them off the hook of committing acts that are considered war crimes which currently the UN and many others see this as such .The US is still facing investigations of using chemical weapons and indiscriminate bombing of civilians .

      The boots on the ground etc. like the Kurds are incapable of being any help, ISIS is all but destroyed and losing daily, FSA are still splintered and disjointed half will go join Syria and the others and foreigners will be left to fight ISIS/Al Qaeda and it has lost its shine with most and need support from Israel . The Russians run their own training operations with other federation members and have twice as many tanks as NATO has entirely . The NATO forces in the Balkans are there for stopping the region from blowing up .The Western countries public opinion is strongly against any further action and would lead to the toppling of some governments.There seems to be only one outcome for the US and the few followers it really has is to not escalate any further or suffer the consequences , which is not what anyone wants ever .

  • gl_ben

    “….that war is far to serious a matter to entrusted to civilians.” – I only read the bottom line from this another Saker anthem –
    Yes onward christian soldiers marching as to war – JudeoZionist’s knew they were onto a good thing enlisting christians and fundamentalists everywhere to their cause – More christian wars murder and mayhem than all the other ‘religions’ put together – Set them Generals free – Go mad dog Mattis

  • Rodney Loder

    Allah is in control, the Soviet Union was betrayed by the Orthodox Christians, that’s true, but Allah dumped the Christians before the Christians used my intellectual property to destroy the Soviet Union, actually the Soviets were untenable without Christianity, and Civilization is disfunctional with Capitalism which is now unassailable, so don’t worry Allah knows best who should be the last jew standing, even if he’s only standing in for a Christian.

    • John Mason

      What are you waffling about?

      • zman

        Some mumbo-jumbo religious inanity…

      • Rodney Loder

        Consumerism and ethics are polar opposites, but alas, ! they are not representative of a paradoxical state that supports some kind of civil accord, from Confucius to RtLoder they never have and never will, it’s a symbiotic relationship, the Christians in Russia believed the opposite, all Roman Catholics do I think it comes from the Roman system of property ownership, which was anathma in Russia before Gorbachev, so was banks and there was only ever one since 1921.
        I brought the Holy Ghost to Earth the homosexual Sid Loder took command of it and used it to virtually destroy life on Earth, so I do not face recriminations for his evil actions I just make my objection known, I never once supported Roman Catholics or their surrogate israel.

  • Solomon Krupacek

    “The Pantsir-S1 is mobile short to medium range surface-to-air missile and anti-aircraft artillery weapon system which uses phased array radars for both target acquisition and tracking. Detection range: 32-45km (20-28mi). Tracking range: 24-28km (15-17mi). It can track up to 20 targets, engage up to 3 with 4 missiles at the same time. It has a secondary Autonomous Optoelectronic System with a 25km (15mi) engagement rage against a small F-16 size aircraft. The Pantsir’s missiles are solid-fuel rockets with a range of 20km (12mi), a ceiling of 15km (9mi) and a speed of Mach 2.3-2.8. ….”

    Sue, and is very useful, when the enemy releases missiles from 60 km distance.

    “Whatever may be the case, the Russians already have more then enough special forces in Syria to start attacking US targets in Syria or even elsewhere in the region.”

    And will not be used …

    • Jesus

      LOL, what is the difference between a missile traveling Mach 3 and an aircraft traveling Mach 1-2? A target is a target, the missile fired does not differentiate the a distinction between a HARM, PGM or an aircraft. As usual you are rather clueless and are a contrarian unwilling to learn and prone to the propaganda spillled by delusional knuckle heads.

      • Solomon Krupacek

        aha, but they wrote about f-16

    • Turbofan

      Forever pretending to be unbiased and have more knowledge that he actually does.Why dont you switch to CNN

      • Solomon Krupacek

        the cnn is for you. i like sf and doneted also.

      • zman

        Don’t feed the terd..uhhh troll.

    • Turbofan

      To release a missile from 60km should you first detect a target?

      • Solomon Krupacek

        look, IAF did always so. what do you no understand?

  • FlorianGeyer

    The Saker has again given us a balanced and well thought out appraisal of possible scenarios to combat the US Juggernaut.
    Today being a big target like a US Carrier is not so comforting when current missiles are so accurate.

  • paolo duchateau

    Excellent

    • Wahid Algiers

      But unfortunately only a theory (what is written regarding the russian special forces and their means against US, others).

      • paolo duchateau

        This guy of the Saker is a expert or specialist of military and strategy matters and for long years of the Russian. He doesn’t speak for nothing. Take a look on the Saker if you R good in english otherwise, you have the saker in many languages. I’m french and when it’s difficult, I read ” le saker francophone”. You also have traductions of many international links. Really a super great tool for knowledge.

        • Wahid Algiers

          Thank you for the advice, but I have The Saker in my favorite list. Nice greetings to France where I am born (in Lyon).

  • John Mason

    Agree with most of the Sakers’ article but he has left out some important military options that Russia has. Russia has the worlds most powerful torpedo, VA-111 Shkval, they have also hyposonic missiles which are operational, virtually undetectable submarines, ray gun, laser gun….and these would be already in position and ready if the US/NATO decides to attack. US/NATO are well aware of this and that is why they need 70 odd countries to confront Russia and they still doubt whether they can win. Russia’s nuclear weapons the US fears most and they can not match it and are unsure if Russia will use them if the US/NATO attack Russia with conventional weapons. In other words, the US/NATO are in a stale mate situation and Russia holds the upper hand.

  • Blaine

    It would go nuclear very quickly. Most of the details will be irrelevant.

    • Turbofan

      Now this I agree with

  • Ma_Laoshi

    People had to lose a lot of money before they figured out that stock “analysis” wasn’t meant literally. Likewise, this Stratfor “rubbish” isn’t meant literally–as if the Pentagon doesn’t have planning staff of its own. You just beat that drum and make clear you’re lusting for war; then observe how far the Russki’s can be pushed this time to avoid it. All the while, you move the Overton Window at home to keep Trump where you want him; nice work if you can get it!

    Nobody gets to tell the hegemon to just sod off. But Putin went beyond by *inviting* the Americans into Syria. What the latter still want to do with their position is now a sovereign US decision. If Trump chooses to go full Attila, things may get dicey indeed.

    Speaking of which, if Russia decides to whack themselves some orcs but leave the bull’s eye painted on the Syrians, wouldn’t the latter have all right to feel used? If this is about the smartest way to do something which only hurts them, I’m out. And would subtle Judo maneuvers even register with Trump; just as likely, he’d gleefully bomb all suspects.

  • Real Anti-Racist Action

    The USSA and Russia should just fight a conventional war already, that way the USSA can legitimately be pushed out of the ME and Europe once and for all, the US was wrong to ever go to Europe in the First World War anyway.
    It will not go nuclear, as the US hates our politicians anyway.
    No one in the US actually believes that Russia wants to conquer the world anymore, and we no longer believe that Germany wanted to either.
    It is the same lie the the zio-media always markets, and we have finally learned they have lied about Russia and Germany and Iran and Syria and Best-Korea all along.
    Accusing Germany of wanting world conquest was a ploy to hide the UK and USSA and Jews plans for world conquest all along.
    Russia and Germany and NK and Syria and Iran and India and Ireland and Spain are the victims.
    The USSA, UK, UN, EU, AU are the perpetrators of all these accusations and crimes.

  • John Brown

    The Saker is either a Shabbos Goy or a racist supremacist Jew. If the Saker is a Shabbos
    Goy can he tell me what drives is it that drives him the Shabbos Goy? If the Saker is not a racist supremacist Jew? Is it greed? Is it power seeking? What is it
    that pushes people like the Saker to become servants of a foreign despotic state?

    This delusion of Stratfor and the Saker sounds like an Israeli Pentagon delusion. Like in World War 1 when they said it would be over by Christmas.
    This analysis is total bullshit. The entire area is well within range of thousands of Russian kalibre cruise missiles and ballistic missiles. All Israel’s /Americas Zionist bases in the area, especially floating coffin air craft carriers can easily be destroyed by such missiles. A modern war between Russia/ China etc. and the USA will be a missile war fought from very long thousands
    kilometers away. Its close to Russia not the USSA.
    Russia should be planning to decapitate the Israeli military’s aiir force and nuclear forces with a conventional strike of large numbers of Kalibre cruises missiles and ballistic missiles and the sinking of Israel’s nuclear armed subs similar to what the USA said they wanted to do to North Korea. It’s much easier with Israel then North Korea would ever be, due to Israel’s flat Geography and small size. The US would then be ordered by its chicken hawk Israeli slave masters to surrender immediately.
    Most important all these wars started by and for Israel would cease as the racist supremacist Jewish beast would be castrated.
    As I predicted Turkey is moving decisively into the Russian / Chinese sphere of influence. Turkey will now go to war with the Kurds and then withdraw from the NATO pact. They had to wait until they got all the Rothschild Jewish fifth column of racist supremacist Jews and their Sabbath Goyim who are
    plotting another Israeli coup in Turkey. Erdogan also needed that Russian gas pipeline to be complete for the inevitable Zionist oil and gas embargo against Turkey and the Turkish stream pipeline is now almost complete. Turkey will face the same embargo as Qatar and needed energy, financial, military and domestic security to be ready.
    These sanctions are now good for Russia the pain is almost over if there was any it was the oil price that really did some damage and the benefits are now kicking in.
    China and Russia will and Russia is currently and easily winning any war of sanctions with what use to be the free west, now the collapsing Jewish racist supremacist military police state empire. The racist supremacist Jewish elite has just about killed their host nations, their global empire is about to
    collapse which is why they are desperate for war.
    Turkey is defecting, the Philippines is defecting, Indonesian is defecting now Qatar, etc. Russia and China are winning big time in Africa and South America and Asia as Jewish dictatorship America’s economic and military influence, including its soft power collapses everywhere.

  • Igor Henrique

    I do not understand why Syria does not use such Pantsir systems against Israel’s attacks, especially those directed at Damascus. It is shameful to be targeted by so many attacks that are practically unpunished.

    • Solomon Krupacek

      beacuse they have only few and short range missiles. IL has capacity to destroy the whole syrian defense system. russian would not help.