Russian AF already fighting in Syria

Discuss air warfare, doctrine, air forces, historic campaigns, etc.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

borg

Banned

  • Posts: 471
  • Joined: 20 May 2015, 10:11

Unread post05 Nov 2015, 12:43

You say Russia and Assad is destroying Syria, I say ISIS and all other factions, backend by Saudi's and US with weapons.

So who is right..
Offline
User avatar

popcorn

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7717
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2008, 08:55

Unread post05 Nov 2015, 13:40

An encompassing view of how the US is employing air power over Iraq and Syria. Very apparent is the great care with which inurgents are targeted leading to some surprisingly low attack sorties compared to previous air campaigns. As Gen. Carlisle notes, it's a very different kind of conflict with a mixed cast of actors in the air and on the ground. But with Obama's recent decision to deploy Special Forces to assist the Syrian Kurds, we can expect the tempo of air operations to pick up soon.

http://www.defensenews.com/story/defens ... /73667346/

Fighting ISIS: Is Using Air Power's Full Potential?
"When a fifth-generation fighter meets a fourth-generation fighter—the [latter] dies,”
CSAF Gen. Mark Welsh
Offline
User avatar

popcorn

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7717
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2008, 08:55

Unread post06 Nov 2015, 06:49

The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights has published some revealing statistics on the fighing in Syria. Russa's air force is excelling at killing more civilians than terrorists and Assad's Regime kills 7 Syrian civilians for every civilian murdered by ISIS.



http://www.vocativ.com/news/247479/russ ... -fighters/

Moscow’s first month of airstrikes in Syria killed more civilians than Islamic State militants and took their biggest toll among rebel forces battling President Bashar Al-Assad, new statistics compiled by a group monitoring the conflict show.

Weapons fired by Russian war planes through the end of October left at least 185 civilians dead, including 46 women and 48 children, which is 30 percent more than the 131 ISIS fighters killed by these strikes, according to the Syrian Observatory For Human Rights, which is based in the United Kingdom. During this time, the group said, Russian airstrikes also resulted in the death of 279 Syrian rebels...

Data compiled by the Observatory, however, shows that U.S.-led airstrikes, which began 13 months ago in Syria, have killed ISIS fighters at a far higher rate than Russia while also harming civilians less. On average, bombs and missiles fired by U.S.-led forces killed 286 members of ISIS a month, more than twice as many as Moscow’s did. Meanwhile, the number of civilians killed by U.S. coalition airstrikes has averaged about 17 a month, less than a tenth of Russia’s 185 in October...

The Assad regime itself is still the force claiming more innocent lives in Syria than any other. A recent study published by the Syrian Network found that Assad’s military was responsible for the more than three-quarters of the 10,354 civilians killed through July of this year.
Last edited by popcorn on 06 Nov 2015, 11:36, edited 2 times in total.
"When a fifth-generation fighter meets a fourth-generation fighter—the [latter] dies,”
CSAF Gen. Mark Welsh
Offline

tincansailor

Banned

  • Posts: 711
  • Joined: 05 Jul 2015, 20:06

Unread post06 Nov 2015, 08:21

borg wrote:You say Russia and Assad is destroying Syria, I say ISIS and all other factions, backend by Saudi's and US with weapons.

So who is right..


Please read popcorns post on who is killing more civilians vs. terrorists in Syria.

I ask you to use your common sense. Which side has been given the greater weight of support, the Assad Regime, or the Rebels? Obviously the regime has the weight of heavy weapons, armor, artillery, air power, and even poison gas. They have Iranian, Hezbollah, and now even Russian & Cuban forces fighting at their side and they still can't win. If the rebels didn't have the overwhelming majority of the people on their side how could they have kept fighting for 4 years?

ISIS is mostly confined to the NE part of the country. The regime largely leaves them alone. To claim all the rebels are ISIS is simple absurd. As for who is destroying the country, who has been using all this devastating firepower? Not the rebels, they don't have it. Not many of the 9 million internal, and external refuges are Alawites, they only make up about 10% or 2.2 million people of Syria's 22 million people. They also make up the popular base for the regime. 10% can't control the rest once the rest finally decide thieve had enough.
Offline

rkap

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 245
  • Joined: 28 Mar 2010, 14:29
  • Location: Australia

Unread post08 Nov 2015, 14:51

borg wrote:The Mainstream US media is pouring out statments that Russia is bombing CIA backed insurgence.

http://edition.cnn.com/videos/tv/2015/1 ... ry-threat/

But according to this article, there is a US Deputy Chief of Staff of the Air Force in charge of intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance, General Robert Otto.

Gen Otto said there was no Russian bombing of such Groups..

So what is going on here?

http://tass.ru/en/defense/825584


Most of it comes down to who you define as Moderates and Terrorists etc. According to "Janes" there is somewhere over 1000 various groups in non Assad areas of Syria who are in Coalition to various degrees. The best comment I have heard is many have three uniforms to choose from. The Free Syrian Army does not exist as an army as such anymore and is only a Political Wing representing those who oppose Assad excluding ISIS and the Kurds. There are no really clear cut divisions. Overall it has been admitted most of what was called the FSA is now fighting with AlNusra - [the Syrian branch of Al Qaeda]. Russia has been hitting Al Nusra and others fighting Assad very hard and ISIS where they are in direct conflict with Assad's military and Hezbolah and the Kurds. There policy is simple. Help Assad and Hezbolah and Iran and the Kurds on the ground to drive out all Terrorists. The US coalition wanting to get rid of Assad has not been bombing AlNusra. Backed by Qatar and Saudi Arabia and ? They also to a large degree have not been bombing ISIS where they are fighting Assad's Coalition directly. They have been mainly bombing ISIS where it tries to take over areas of Syria previously held by other groups such as AlNusra and McCains moderates? They also have been bombing ISIS where it is actively fighting the Kurds being care-full not to upset Turkey too much because of course they don't like the Kurds. I would not listen too much to what McCain says. As far as he is concerned any Terrorist fighting Assard is a good moderate? That's how I under stand it overall. The Russian position is clear. AlNusra/AlQaeda are Terrorists. ISIS also are Terrorists but not the first priority unless they are in direct conflict with Assad's Coalition. More or less the opposite of the USA in priority. The USA position is hard to understand. I don't know if they really know. They more or less admitted that a few weeks ago when they admitted only about 5 of the hundreds of people they trained and armed hoping they would support the Moderates? stayed loyal. All the others deserted and gave there weapons to Terrorists or joined ISIS.
It is not as McCain has been trying to make out.
Offline

rkap

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 245
  • Joined: 28 Mar 2010, 14:29
  • Location: Australia

Unread post08 Nov 2015, 15:10

popcorn wrote:The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights has published some revealing statistics on the fighing in Syria. Russa's air force is excelling at killing more civilians than terrorists and Assad's Regime kills 7 Syrian civilians for every civilian murdered by ISIS.

http://www.vocativ.com/news/247479/russ ... -fighters/

Moscow’s first month of airstrikes in Syria killed more civilians than Islamic State militants and took their biggest toll among rebel forces battling President Bashar Al-Assad, new statistics compiled by a group monitoring the conflict show.

Weapons fired by Russian war planes through the end of October left at least 185 civilians dead, including 46 women and 48 children, which is 30 percent more than the 131 ISIS fighters killed by these strikes, according to the Syrian Observatory For Human Rights, which is based in the United Kingdom. During this time, the group said, Russian airstrikes also resulted in the death of 279 Syrian rebels...

The two-bedroom Coventry home of Syrian immigrant Rami Abdel Rahman has been the organization’s base and the

Data compiled by the Observatory, however, shows that U.S.-led airstrikes, which began 13 months ago in Syria, have killed ISIS fighters at a far higher rate than Russia while also harming civilians less. On average, bombs and missiles fired by U.S.-led forces killed 286 members of ISIS a month, more than twice as many as Moscow’s did. Meanwhile, the number of civilians killed by U.S. coalition airstrikes has averaged about 17 a month, less than a tenth of Russia’s 185 in October...

The Assad regime itself is still the force claiming more innocent lives in Syria than any other. A recent study published by the Syrian Network found that Assad’s military was responsible for the more than three-quarters of the 10,354 civilians killed through July of this year.


"The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights" is Rami Abdel Rahma is an immigrant working from home in Coventry, England with no known sources or staff in Syria or in England.
Offline

rkap

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 245
  • Joined: 28 Mar 2010, 14:29
  • Location: Australia

Unread post08 Nov 2015, 15:18

borg wrote:You say Russia and Assad is destroying Syria, I say ISIS and all other factions, backend by Saudi's and US with weapons.

So who is right..


I agree. If the USA [You can leave out the British since there Parliament has grounded the British Admin.] solution was allowed to play out the end result would have been Al Nusra the Syrian offshoot of Al Qaeda in control or worse still we could end up like we did in Afghanistan in the 1980's with the Taliban in control. The uS tactic in Syria are exactly the same in most respects as they were in Afghanistan in the 1980's. Exactly the same as they were in Libya. Turn a blind eye to supporting Terrorists hoping for a miracle if they do win.
It is obvious to anyone with a brain the USA has only been half attacking ISIS for one reason only. Hoping if they did not bomb ISIS units in direct conflict with Assad they would weaken the Assad Forces enough so that Al Nusra [Qatar -Saudi backed] would be able to get on top. Then they hope all there Moderates who have joined with Al Nusra would have enough influence to bring about a moderate elected Government. Maybe but not likely.The exact same strategy as was adopted in Libya. Libya now a disaster case with hundreds of thousands wanting to escape the US/British etc. sponsored Government. Libya also is one of the main reasons we have seen ISIS grow so quickly in recent years.
The solution in Syria was there a few years ago but the USA/Britain/France were so intent on getting rid of Assad they refused to even entertain it. That solution engineered by Russia when they persuaded Assad to allow free open elections monitored by as many monitors as the USA/Britain/France wanted to send there. The USA/Britain/France also were free to fund the FSA and Moderate factions in any election. Hopefully the UN would have been allowed to run the elections. The above rejected that offer demanding Assad and his key people must not stand. Why not? A strange definition of Democracy. Free monitored elections that exclude certain sections from participating? The reason the USA rejected that offer of course is obvious to anyone with half a brain. At that time polls conducted in Syria indicated Assad had majority support.
Last edited by rkap on 09 Nov 2015, 04:14, edited 1 time in total.
Offline

rkap

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 245
  • Joined: 28 Mar 2010, 14:29
  • Location: Australia

Unread post08 Nov 2015, 16:03

popcorn wrote:Russia knows there's no purely military solution, Afghanistan taught them that painfully. Their bombing simply allowed them to become a player and influence events to promote their interests. They can't afford the costs, financial, diplomatic, PR, etc. that would arise from a massive and indiscriminate bombing campaign. We can imagine the collateral damage they've inflicted so far with the preponderance of ordnance being dumb bombs being dropped. Plus their getting targeting coofdinates from the SG who think nothing of barrel bombing civilian areas.


I do not think the Russian commitment is open ended. Putin wants to keep his popularity at home and so do key people in his Government. He already is working hard on a the Political solution. Odds are it will come off. Given time the USA will also go along with the Political solution that puts Assad in control to start with and then timely elections once everything is reasonably stable. Russia has indicated that is what they want and Assad has more or less agreed to let it happen. Lets face it he will have very little choice. If he does not even Russia will withdraw there support. The USA can't win the way they are going about it now. They have snookered themselves. They have nobody but Terrorists willing to put troops on the ground. The only winners would be AlNusra/ AlQaeda or ISIS. Common sense will prevail I am certain once the USA gets a chance to save face a bit. The USA Admin is in effect already supporting the Russian Coalition initiative by now bombing all ISIS groups. The fact they bombed the Power Station at Aleppo and finally bombed about 12 portable and permanent Oil refineries about a week ago indicates that. Installations they can't claim not to have been able to find. Too big. Installations the Russians were not prepared to bomb because they would leave many Syrians without power and clean water and make it difficult to provide essential services like hospitals. Russia has tried to stop the funding to ISIS via oil sales by cutting there delivery system to mainly Turkey by bombing bridges and roads. Not by destroying permanent Oil Refineries that will be needed in any recovery period. The USA using the same tactics they use in Iraq where they destroyed most infrastructure.
Also can you tell me why using dumb bombs in most situations out in the open is not accurate enough? The SU24's are all upgraded and capable of dropping dumb bombs when flown at low altitude within about 5m. Why wouldn't that be accurate enough for many targets away from civilian areas. The SU25's also are upgraded versions.
Last edited by rkap on 09 Nov 2015, 04:28, edited 1 time in total.
Offline

rkap

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 245
  • Joined: 28 Mar 2010, 14:29
  • Location: Australia

Unread post08 Nov 2015, 16:24

gideonic wrote:
rkap wrote:I don't want to get into the Politics of the matter in Syria but one thing I do note there has been nothing about the reliability of Russian Aircraft operating there.


There are some sensationalist headlines about the matter like here stating ~70% readiness rate:
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nati ... /74586002/

If true, it certainly isn't something to write home about, but it also isn't really that "catastrophic" as the article claims.
All depends on what to compare it to. US ain't what it used to be either, because of older aircraft:

Image


There is another more balanced article in the "National Interest" based on interviews with US Air-force people.
Basically they said the best the US could do hypothetically would be about 90 sorties for a few days with 32 aircraft.
Probably end up at about 30-40 sorties per day long term.
One said he thought about 23 per day is all the Russians would achieve. Less than a US force on 30-40 per day.
Another though said he thought they would do better since there aircraft on average are more rugged provided there logistics were up to it.
They are obviously doing well on all fronts. There average is still over 40 sorties per day peaking at 87 a few weeks ago. .
Offline
User avatar

popcorn

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7717
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2008, 08:55

Unread post09 Nov 2015, 05:47

rkap wrote:
popcorn wrote:The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights has published some revealing statistics on the fighing in Syria. Russa's air force is excelling at killing more civilians than terrorists and Assad's Regime kills 7 Syrian civilians for every civilian murdered by ISIS.

http://www.vocativ.com/news/247479/russ ... -fighters/

Moscow’s first month of airstrikes in Syria killed more civilians than Islamic State militants and took their biggest toll among rebel forces battling President Bashar Al-Assad, new statistics compiled by a group monitoring the conflict show.

Weapons fired by Russian war planes through the end of October left at least 185 civilians dead, including 46 women and 48 children, which is 30 percent more than the 131 ISIS fighters killed by these strikes, according to the Syrian Observatory For Human Rights, which is based in the United Kingdom. During this time, the group said, Russian airstrikes also resulted in the death of 279 Syrian rebels...

The two-bedroom Coventry home of Syrian immigrant Rami Abdel Rahman has been the organization’s base and the

Data compiled by the Observatory, however, shows that U.S.-led airstrikes, which began 13 months ago in Syria, have killed ISIS fighters at a far higher rate than Russia while also harming civilians less. On average, bombs and missiles fired by U.S.-led forces killed 286 members of ISIS a month, more than twice as many as Moscow’s did. Meanwhile, the number of civilians killed by U.S. coalition airstrikes has averaged about 17 a month, less than a tenth of Russia’s 185 in October...

The Assad regime itself is still the force claiming more innocent lives in Syria than any other. A recent study published by the Syrian Network found that Assad’s military was responsible for the more than three-quarters of the 10,354 civilians killed through July of this year.


"The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights" is Rami Abdel Rahma is an immigrant working from home in Coventry, England with no known sources or staff in Syria or in England.



I think you doth protest too much..must have really struck a nerve. has Moscow even admited to a single civilian fatality?

http://www.syriahr.com/en/about-us/
About Us
The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights is not associated or linked to any political body.
The SOHR was founded in May of 2006.
Description
Towards a country for all…
A country in which all citizens are equal before the law.
We are a group of people who believe in Human Rights, from inside and outside the country, documenting the Human Rights situation in Syria and reporting all Human Rights violations, filing reports and spreading it across a broad Human Rights and Media range. We cooperate with Human Rights organisations in Syria, the Arab world and the international community with what goes along with our goals and aspirations:
Democracy, Freedom, Justice and Equality.
Director and founder of the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights:Rami Abdurrahman (Ossama Suleiman)
The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights is not associated or linked to any political body.
"When a fifth-generation fighter meets a fourth-generation fighter—the [latter] dies,”
CSAF Gen. Mark Welsh
Offline
User avatar

popcorn

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7717
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2008, 08:55

Unread post09 Nov 2015, 08:02

Another monitoring group, the Syrian Nerwork for Human Rights, reports on the impact of the Russian air campaign.

http://sn4hr.org/blog/2015/11/02/14136/

Russian Airstrikes Kills 254 Civilians Including 83 Children and 42 Women
“Russian Forces Kill More Civilians than the International Coalition Killed in a Year”

http://sn4hr.org/wp-content/pdf/english ... ple_en.pdf
"When a fifth-generation fighter meets a fourth-generation fighter—the [latter] dies,”
CSAF Gen. Mark Welsh
Offline

borg

Banned

  • Posts: 471
  • Joined: 20 May 2015, 10:11

Unread post09 Nov 2015, 14:39

I do not think anyone here(now that Sergei is gone) thinks there will not be civil causalties in Syria.
That goes without saying.
And let me be clear, this is very sad and wrong.

But i think we need to see this on a larger picture.
Putin and VVS is going after the Terrorist in a manner that state a very clear message.. -You will not hide from us by merging/ using civilians as shelters. We will take you out. And that sort of sentiment.

Which happend to be exactly the same approach done by Israel on West bank etc.
They knew the Terrorist hide in civil buildings, in hospitals etc, and what did they do?
Bomb the sh*t out of em(even with cluster wwarhead in densed populated area), and as a results there was a large civilian fatalities.

Israels sentiments was, simple(and crude) enough, -It is the Terrorist responsebilities, not ours..

Anyway, i think you guys should be very carefull saying anything about this, just think about Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia wars..
The bombing done there was not very discriminating to say the least.
Offline
User avatar

popcorn

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7717
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2008, 08:55

Unread post09 Nov 2015, 16:10

Israel has demonstrated much more restraint in avoiding collateral damage to the extent of even warning target areas before hand to allow civilians time to evacuate. The Coalition has been very, very conservative in carrying out attacks, the actual number of strikes as a percentage of total sorties is around 13%. Granted many of the other sorties are for support aircraft eg. Tankers, ISR, etc. but in many occasions Coalition strike aircraff RTB with ordnance unnexpended.


http://www.defense.gov/News/Special-Rep ... nt-Resolve
As of 3:59 p.m. EST Nov. 3, the U.S. and coalition have conducted a total of 7,871 strikes (5,151 Iraq / 2,720 Syria).
*U.S. has conducted 6,164 strikes in Iraq and Syria (3,586 Iraq / 2,578 Syria)
*Rest of Coalition has conducted 1,707 strikes in Iraq and Syria (1,565 Iraq / 142 Syria)
The countries that have participated in the strikes include:
*In Iraq: (1) Australia, (2) Belgium, (3) Canada, (4) Denmark, (5) France, (6) Jordan, (7) The Netherlands, and (8) UK
*In Syria: (1) Australia, (2) Bahrain, (3) Canada, (4) France, (5) Jordan, (6) Saudi Arabia, (7) Turkey and (8) UAE
As of Nov. 3, U.S. and partner nation aircraft have flown an estimated 61,288 sorties in support of operations in Iraq and Syria.

(NOTE - that's 7,871 strikes over some 14 months since Operation Inherent Resolve started).

As of Nov. 4, after only 2 months, and given far fewer aircraft, Russia is overachieving and already racked up 1,631 strike sorties. Not only are they bombing at a terrific rate, they are doing so using a preponderance of dumb bombs. It is clear the Russians are a trigger-happy bunch by comparison.. And yet they claim with a straight face they incur no collateral damage. :doh:
http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/616 ... -militants
"When a fifth-generation fighter meets a fourth-generation fighter—the [latter] dies,”
CSAF Gen. Mark Welsh
Offline

rkap

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 245
  • Joined: 28 Mar 2010, 14:29
  • Location: Australia

Unread post12 Nov 2015, 04:42

popcorn wrote:Another monitoring group, the Syrian Nerwork for Human Rights, reports on the impact of the Russian air campaign.

http://sn4hr.org/blog/2015/11/02/14136/

Russian Airstrikes Kills 254 Civilians Including 83 Children and 42 Women
“Russian Forces Kill More Civilians than the International Coalition Killed in a Year”

http://sn4hr.org/wp-content/pdf/english ... ple_en.pdf


Yes some civilians will be killed whoever is bombing.
Are you trying to somehow claim it will only be Russian strikes that will kill civilians.
Are you trying to say only about a week ago when the USA bombed the still operating 5,000mW power station near Aleppo no civilians would have been killed.
This is not the Form for this sort of one eyed Political type discussion but I do think it is time someone puts up a response to those one eyed types who insist of bring it in if the moderators do not stop it.
Offline
User avatar

popcorn

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7717
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2008, 08:55

Unread post12 Nov 2015, 04:51

rkap wrote:
popcorn wrote:Another monitoring group, the Syrian Nerwork for Human Rights, reports on the impact of the Russian air campaign.

http://sn4hr.org/blog/2015/11/02/14136/

Russian Airstrikes Kills 254 Civilians Including 83 Children and 42 Women
“Russian Forces Kill More Civilians than the International Coalition Killed in a Year”

http://sn4hr.org/wp-content/pdf/english ... ple_en.pdf


Yes some civilians will be killed whoever is bombing.
Are you trying to somehow claim it will only be Russian strikes that will kill civilians.
Are you trying to say only about a week ago when the USA bombed the still operating 5,000mW power station near Aleppo no civilians would have been killed.
This is not the Form for this sort of one eyed Political type discussion but I do think it is time someone puts up a response to those one eyed types who insist of bring it in if the moderators do not stop it.

Nope, US Coalition collateral damage are well publicized and often admitted to. Russian dumb bombs and cruise missike fired from the Ural Sea are apparently so precise that Russia claims only terrorists are killed. Any accusations to the contrary are dismissed. Sorta like the IAAF scandal,, ya know.. :shock:
"When a fifth-generation fighter meets a fourth-generation fighter—the [latter] dies,”
CSAF Gen. Mark Welsh
PreviousNext

Return to Air Power

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests

cron