Israel Military Forum

Welcome to the Israel Military Forum. You are currently viewing our Israel Forum as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions, Image Forum and access our other features. By joining our Israel Military Forum you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so
Join Our Israel Community Today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
Go Back   Israel Military Forum > Israel National security > Global Military > Middle East
Register FAQ Pictures Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Middle East Military news from the Middle Eastern countries.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old 10-24-2016, 05:43 PM
Paparock's Avatar
Paparock Paparock is offline
Dragon
Photobucket
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Southern California High Desert Mountains
Posts: 48,313
Paparock is on a distinguished road
Exclamation Russia Prepares For U.S. Gov 'Operation War' By Increasing Military Assets In Syria

Russia Prepares For U.S. Gov 'Operation War' By Increasing Military Assets In Syria


__________________
O Israel
The LORD bless you and keep you;
The LORD make His face to shine upon you and be gracious to you;
The LORD lift up His countenance upon you and give you peace.

Asymmetric Warfare It’s not just for the “Other Guys”

  #22  
Old 10-24-2016, 09:18 PM
Paparock's Avatar
Paparock Paparock is offline
Dragon
Photobucket
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Southern California High Desert Mountains
Posts: 48,313
Paparock is on a distinguished road
Exclamation Putin Military attack on America frightened Obama for World War 3 year 2016

Putin Military attack on America frightened Obama for World War 3 year 2016


__________________
O Israel
The LORD bless you and keep you;
The LORD make His face to shine upon you and be gracious to you;
The LORD lift up His countenance upon you and give you peace.

Asymmetric Warfare It’s not just for the “Other Guys”

  #23  
Old 10-24-2016, 09:33 PM
Paparock's Avatar
Paparock Paparock is offline
Dragon
Photobucket
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Southern California High Desert Mountains
Posts: 48,313
Paparock is on a distinguished road
Default World War 3 is upon us!

World War 3 is upon us!


__________________
O Israel
The LORD bless you and keep you;
The LORD make His face to shine upon you and be gracious to you;
The LORD lift up His countenance upon you and give you peace.

Asymmetric Warfare It’s not just for the “Other Guys”

  #25  
Old 10-26-2016, 07:14 PM
Paparock's Avatar
Paparock Paparock is offline
Dragon
Photobucket
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Southern California High Desert Mountains
Posts: 48,313
Paparock is on a distinguished road
Exclamation Russia's Syria Campaign Positions Moscow as 'Key Power Broker' In The Middle East

Russia's Syria Campaign Positions Moscow as 'Key Power Broker' In The Middle East
PUTIN TAKES CENTER STAGE IN THE MIDDLE EAST
DAVID BARNO AND NORA BENSAHEL



http://warontherocks.com/2015/10/put...e-middle-east/


In the Middle East, there’s a new game — and possibly a new sheriff — in town.

Three weeks ago, Russian President Vladimir Putin stunned observers around the world by ordering his military directly into battle in Syria’s long-running civil war. This unexpected move is Putin’s first “out of area” power projection gambit — the first time that Russian troops and firepower have been deployed beyond the territory of the former Soviet Union since the end of the Cold War.

Putin first shocked the West and its regional allies by quickly, efficiently, and unexpectedly deploying strike aircraft, tanks (http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/22/wo...base.html?_r=0), and Russian military “volunteers” (http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/06/wo...ight.html?_r=0) into bases in Syria. Within days, he was launching lethal airstrikes (http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/01/wo...etType=nyt_now) on rebels battling the Assad regime. And just a week later, he fired dozens of cruise missiles from Russian ships in the Caspian Sea against other Syrian rebel positions — with apparently a few falling short into Iran (http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/08/politi...a-landed-iran/). As of last week, Russian aircraft were flying scores of sorties a day over Syria — in contrast to the U.S.-led coalition’s far smaller daily tally. Political leaders and Kremlin-watchers across the globe were surprised and astonished.

Putin’s actions may not have reestablished Russia as a preeminent global power as Putin may have wished, but his bold moves have captured the attention (https://www.nytimes.com/subscription...mpaignId=67LWR) of NATO and a wide range of actors all across the Middle East and beyond. Without a doubt, Putin has re-established Russia’s position as a Middle Eastern power broker. Rapidly deploying troops and aircraft, launching them within days directly into combat, and firing cruise missiles from distant warships in support are indisputably the marks of a serious and capable military actor.

But Russia’s move in Syria is more than simply one further extension of its military power. Putin’s now-direct military involvement in the Syrian civil war is a potential deadly addition to an already volatile mix in the region. The risk that the U.S. and Russian military efforts —and their airplanes (http://thehill.com/business-a-lobbyi...art-over-syria) — collide is high.

In many ways, Russia and the United States are fighting two separate and almost completely parallel wars in the Middle East today. In each, the two nations’ military and diplomatic maneuvers overlap, but their interests do not. They each have widely disparate goals. Russia seeks to keep Assad in power, bolster its regional position, and keep Islamist terrorism far from its borders. The United States seeks to defeat the Islamic State, preserve the Iraqi state, and find a political solution to the Syrian civil war without Assad.

The Russian war in Syria is a full-scale effort to preserve the rump of the Syrian state and the Assad regime. Any adversaries who threaten that end state may now face direct Russian military attack. Whichever opponents of Assad’s regime pose the greatest threat to his survival (http://www.wsj.com/articles/regional...ast-1445029738) will feel the brunt of Russian military force — and that presently seems to be rebel groups aligned with the United States, as well as the jihadist coalition known as the Army of Conquest, which includes Jabhat al-Nusra, al-Qaeda’s Syrian affiliate. Putin, however, seems interested in the Islamic State only insofar as the radical Islamist group threatens Assad’s hold on power or can attack him at home — and because it gives his military operations the veneer of international legitimacy.

The U.S. war in Syria and Iraq, by contrast, is focused primarily against the Islamic State in order to save the fraught Iraqi republic. The United States has been more ambivalent about its goals in Syria, particularly regarding the removal of Assad (https://www.washingtonpost.com/world...652_story.html). Had the Islamic State confined its aggressive behavior to Syria, it is hard to imagine that approximately 3,500 U.S. trainers and advisers (http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/12/wo...e-dempsey.html) would be back in Iraq today after having withdrawn entirely in late 2011. The Obama administration only deployed those forces after the Islamic State overwhelmed Iraqi defenders and seized nearly a third of Iraq’s territory, even threatening Baghdad itself. Yet the U.S.-led coalition of nearly 60 nations has accomplished little militarily beyond achieving a stalemate. The Islamic State remains potent and seemingly little-affected by either coalition airpower or the coalition’s intensified training of Iraqi forces.

Some observers have suggested that the United States and Russia should now collaborate in the common battle (http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/13/op...scow.html?_r=0) to defeat the Islamic State. But the fatal flaw of that argument is that the two parallel wars described above share very little in common. As long as the Islamic State does not directly threaten Assad’s hold on power in Damascus, such as by driving westward toward the coast and the capital, Russia may actually benefit from the group’s success. Its ongoing battlefield advances provide a deadly but useful thorn in the side of the United States. The apparent inability of the United States and its large coalition to roll back, much less defeat the Islamic State further erodes American power and influence in the region every single day the conflict continues. And Putin will be careful to ensure no one in the region sees the Russian intervention as weak, feckless, or anything less than potent and highly dangerous. Russia stands to gain in influence daily as the United States loses.

Of deeper concern, a Russia–Iran–Iraq–Syria alliance (http://www.wsj.com/articles/iraq-sig...ght-1443369993) is emerging that may challenge every component of U.S. policy in the region (http://www.wsj.com/articles/a-path-o...pse-1445037513). Such an alignment could have destabilizing impacts far beyond the borders of Syria and may have far more important consequences than simply bringing more actors into the war against the Islamic State. Baghdad is now sharing intelligence (http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-w...th-iran-russia) with Russia and Iran, much to the chagrin of U.S. policymakers (http://cdn.defenseone.com/defenseone...ia%2F122372%2F). The Iraqi government has welcomed Russian support and some Iraqi politicians are calling for even more Russian help (http://www.wsj.com/articles/iraqis-u...sis-1444152440), further undercutting the importance of U.S. military support. American diplomats and military leaders in Baghdad now must compete not just with Tehran in dealing with the Iraqi government, but with Moscow as well. And there is no chance at all that the United States will cooperate with an anti-terror quartet composed of Russia, Syria, Iran, and Iraq.

With its newly launched military and diplomatic offensives, Russia now stands at the cusp of establishing itself as a major long-term power broker in the Middle East, rivaling the United States’ long-standing role. It may ultimately find itself over-extended or caught in a quagmire, as President Obama was quick to suggest. But in some ways, power in the Middle East is a zero-sum game. As Russia’s influence rises and its military presence on the battlefield expands, regional confidence in the military and diplomatic clout and staying power of the United States will almost assuredly wane (http://www.wsj.com/article_email/ame...OTExNzgxOTczWj).

Putin’s military gambits in the Middle East probably won’t evolve into the type of regional political and military influence that the Soviets wielded in the 1960s and 1970s. But now, for the first time in decades, the United States must face the fact that a newly resurgent Russia flexing its military power can garner allies in a region in ways that will directly compete with American interests and conflict with U.S. policy goals. Putin’s unwavering use of military force in a region that recognizes and respects pure power is a substantial challenge to the U.S. role in the Middle East — and one that America cannot afford to ignore.


Lt. General David W. Barno, USA (Ret.) is a Distinguished Practitioner in Residence, and Dr. Nora Bensahel is a Distinguished Scholar in Residence, at the School of International Service at American University. Both also serve as Nonresident Senior Fellows at the Atlantic Council. Their column appears in War on the Rocks every other Tuesday.

http://warontherocks.com/2015/10/put...e-middle-east/
__________________
O Israel
The LORD bless you and keep you;
The LORD make His face to shine upon you and be gracious to you;
The LORD lift up His countenance upon you and give you peace.

Asymmetric Warfare It’s not just for the “Other Guys”


Last edited by Paparock; 10-26-2016 at 07:36 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 10-28-2016, 05:08 PM
Paparock's Avatar
Paparock Paparock is offline
Dragon
Photobucket
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Southern California High Desert Mountains
Posts: 48,313
Paparock is on a distinguished road
Angry Who Wants What In Syria?

Who Wants What In Syria?
Current U.S. Mideast policy follows a pattern of failure by replacing the bad with the worse.
By Richard Butrick


October 28, 2016
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/..._in_syria.html


For openers, what does the U.S. want?

(2013) the Guardian: (https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...-rebels-jordan)

Western training of Syrian rebels is under way in Jordan in an effort to strengthen secular elements in the opposition as a bulwark against Islamic extremism, and to begin building security forces to maintain order in the event of Bashar al-Assad's fall…

Earlier this week, the US secretary of state, John Kerry, said Washington was now confident that arms supplies to the rebels would not be diverted to extremists. "There is a very clear ability now in the Syrian opposition to make certain that what goes to the moderate, legitimate opposition is, in fact, getting to them, and the indication is that they are increasing their pressure as a result of that," he said.

The deep thinking here looks like the same old: rebels -- good, dictator -- bad. The rise of ISIS and their sadistic exploits rudely complicated the story of “rebels” fighting against an evil repressive dictator to earn freedom and democracy for themselves. Now the U.S. fights half-heartedly for some unidentified slice of the opposition who want a tolerant, pluralistic democracy to force a peaceful transition away from Assad. It is hard to pick which is more fanciful.

What about Turkey?

Again from the Guardian:

"The Americans now trust us more than the Turks, because with the Turks everything is about gaining leverage for action against the Kurds," said a Jordanian source familiar with official thinking in Amman.

The Russians? The LA Times: (http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed...04-column.html)

The Assad regime has been Moscow's most dependable ally in the Middle East for more than 40 years. Assad's father, President Hafez Assad, asked the Soviet Union for military aid and gave the Soviet Navy a base in Tartus, on the Mediterranean coast, in 1971, when Bashar Assad was 6 years old…

There shouldn't be so much mystification about what the Russians are doing," Fiona Hill, a leading Putinologist at the Brookings Institution, told me. "They've been very consistent and very direct. They've been asking: If not Assad, who? They want to see a strongman in place who can keep order."


And China and Iran? Ostensibly, the Alawites (Assad) are a branch of Shia Islam. But behind that it is hard not to conclude that telling the U.S. to butt out is satisfaction in itself. They all want to stick the finger in Uncle Sam’s eye just for the humiliation. They sense that the U.S. role as the world’s power broker is over and China and Russia especially are preening for the role in their part of the world.

U.S. policy in the Mideast and North Africa has been a disaster:

Out with the Shah, in with Khomeini; out with Hussein, in with ISIS, chaos and terrible persecution of Christians and Yazidis and other religious minorities. Out with Gaddafi in with brutal tribal/religious conflict that makes life under Gaddafi look like a predictable, if harsh, sanity.

This follows a pattern of failure by replacing the bad with the worse. Out with Batista, in with Castro. Out with Diem, in with Ho Chi Minh and the communist takeover of Vietnam...

Looks like Putin has it right:

In his speech at the United Nations, Putin charged that "some" people, meaning the United States, had tried to foment "democratic" revolutions around the world, including Syria. "Instead of bringing about reforms, aggressive intervention rashly destroyed government institutions and the local way of life."

Is it time to get out of the Mideast and let Russia, the Turks and Iran and China “stabilize” the area?

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/..._in_syria.html

Obama has FAILED to have a realistic consistent Middle East Policy when it comes to dealing effectively with the "Radical Islamist" threat from terrorist groups and it has shown throughout his 7+ years in office! Obama's actions once again do not match his rhetoric as he talks a much more aggressive game than he actually executes on the battlefield. Thus ISIS went from being in Syria/Iraq to now in over 60 countries while Obama keeps claiming He is shrinking ISIL as he wants to call them which does not fit the reality of the situation. Obama has refused to listen to his best and brightest Generals , sacking all who dare disagree with him, and this we find the world in the situation where we are today but without Obama taking ANY personal responsibility for the command decisions he made! He has blamed "climate change", "drought", Republicans, "the Pentagon" and yet it is Obama who is the Commander-N-Chief who makes the final decisions who just does not want to be held accountable for the results of HIS decisions! It is ALWAYS someone else's fault; never his! The "buck never stops with Obama"as it gets passed off to someone else just as as Hillary Clinton was the head of the Department of State an despite 600 ‘requests’ from Benghazi for better security no increase in security ever came and as a result four American died; one of which was an American Ambassador! So what does the head of the State Department have to say about no action ever being taken to send the security need to Benghazi? We have all heard her say "What difference does it make?" Well, to an American serving in the field it makes a HUGE difference to know if those in Washington are listening to the needs of those in the actual field and in harms way! I matters if you believe a government official is supposed to actually perform their SWORN DUTIES and herd accountable if they refuse to or are grossly negligent in performing those duties! So ask any soldier or the families of those that needlessly died in Benghazi "What difference does it make?" and I believe you get a different answer that what Hillary Clinton came to when all it would have required was for State Department Employees to do the sworn duty! The four State Dept. employees Hillary blamed were removed from their current posts Eric J. Boswell, the assistant secretary of state for diplomatic security, resigned. Charlene R. Lamb, the deputy assistant secretary responsible for embassy security, and another official in the diplomatic security office whom officials would not identify were relieved of their duties. So was Raymond Maxwell, a deputy assistant secretary who had responsibility for North Africa. The four officials, a State Department spokeswoman said, “have been placed on administrative leave pending further action.” The report criticized officials in the State Department’s Bureau for Diplomatic Security as having displayed a “lack of proactive leadership.” It also said that some officials in the Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs “showed a lack of ownership of Benghazi’s security issues.” However in the end they were simply given different jobs; no one was fired, no one faced any charges, none was arrested for dereliction of duty, as it was only three grunts in the field and one ambassador. Paparock

__________________
O Israel
The LORD bless you and keep you;
The LORD make His face to shine upon you and be gracious to you;
The LORD lift up His countenance upon you and give you peace.

Asymmetric Warfare It’s not just for the “Other Guys”


Last edited by Paparock; 10-28-2016 at 06:07 PM..
  #27  
Old 10-29-2016, 04:03 PM
Paparock's Avatar
Paparock Paparock is offline
Dragon
Photobucket
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Southern California High Desert Mountains
Posts: 48,313
Paparock is on a distinguished road
Exclamation The Admiral Kuznetsov Aircraft Carrier – Mission And Goals (An Update)

October 27, 2016
Special Dispatch No.6655
http://www.memri.org/report/en/0/0/0/0/0/0/9516.htm

The Admiral Kuznetsov Aircraft Carrier – Mission And Goals (An Update)

Russia’s only aircraft carrier, the Admiral Kuznetsov is en route to Syria,[1] where it will be deployed for at least 6 months. On October 15, Russia's Northern Fleet’s press service said that a group of warships headed by the aircraft-carrying cruiser Admiral Kuznetsov accompanied by the Pyotr Veliky (Peter the Great) heavy nuclear missile cruiser, the Severomorsk and Vice-Admiral Kulakov anti-submarine destroyer, and support vessels was sent to the Mediterranean to hold drills and reinforce capabilities. The Admiral Kuznetsov carries deck-based Su-33 and Su-25 aircraft, as well as Ka-27/Ka29 helicopters. The ship is 306 meters long and can simultaneously carry 25 planes, helicopters and 1980 servicemen.[2]


Admiral Kuznetsov (Source: Vk.com/milinfolive)

The flotilla conducted three-day exercises in the North Sea 273 kilometers off the Norwegian coast. The drills involved practice flights of the carrier’s aircraft. The exercises were closely monitored by the Norwegian navy frigate HNoMS Fridtjof Nansen. On October 21, the Admiral Kuznetsov passed though the English Channel. The UK Defense Secretary Michael Fallon pledged that the Royal Navy would man-mark the Russian fleet.[3] However, the British newspapers and social media mocked the Admiral Kuznetsov billowing smoke as it passed close to Dover Strait. A naval expert at the Royal United Services Institute, Peter Roberts, said: “In naval folklore, there’s something called an unlucky ship and the Kuznetsov is undoubtedly an unlucky ship.” However, the Russian media claimed that British reactions were motivated by a desire to minimize the Russian fleet's power. A blogger in Komsomolskaya Pravda said that the smoke emissions were deliberate: a ship emits short blasts, to greet the shore, and long blasts of smoke as a menacing signal.[4] “And now it's your turn to think why the Russian flagship Kuznetsov traversed the English Channel under a 'cap' of smoke. Was it greeting the Englishmen or perhaps the very opposite,” wrote Komsomolskaya Pravda.[5]

A sardonic exoneration of the smoke-belching Kuznetsov appeared on Twitter. The smoke showed that the Kremlin was undecided over who would be elected as the new American president.


(Source: Twitter.com/sharzhipero, October 25, 2016)


Admiral Kuznetsov crossing the English Channel (Source: Novorossia.today)


Admiral Kuznetsov (Source: Pravdareport.com)

Kremlin spokesperson Dmitri Peskov said that the Admiral Kuznetsov is unlikely to exert control over the skies of Syria. Peskov said: "I do not think that it is necessary to keep somebody away, [or that] somebody can attack [the Syrian government forces] … as there are enough instruments to control the skies, to control the safety of our temporary infrastructure in Syria, which is why there is no such opportunity."[6]

Northern Fleet admiral ret. Vyacheslav Popov explained that Admiral Kuznetsov is capable of performing missile strikes as well as air strikes. He added that the heavy nuclear missile cruiser Peter the Great is also capable of providing air cover, acting against submarines, collecting intelligence and more. Popov said that the deployment of a carrier group has two primary goals: "First, strategically our presence in the Mediterranean is our interest. In modern times, with the precision and the range of missile weapons our presence in the Mediterranean has grown in importance in order to provide security to Russia. Second, [it is important] to assist the Russian air-force in Syria, which conducts anti-terror operations in Syria."[7]

According to Admiral Viktor Kravchenko, former commander Chief Naval Staff Directorate, it's doubtful that the flotilla will be involved in launching a massive missile strike, but each ship may fire a few missiles. Kravchenko added: "Why not test our weapons in a real combat situation, especially as such a great opportunity has been granted." However, former deputy of Chief of Naval Staff vice-admiral Vladimir Pepelyaev said that Russia’s mid-range P-700 Granit missile is unlikely to be fired against ground targets in Syria since they were designed against naval targets and are unsuitable for hitting ground targets.

Ria.ru columnist Aleksandr Khrolenko exulted that while NATO forces were spinning their wheels in the Middle East sands the Russian navy was exerting control in the Atlantic after establishing its presence in the Mediterranean and Black Seas. One result of "the cold Atlantic standoff" was to turn Western intentions of creating a-no-fly zone over Syria into "an unrealizable dream".[8]

Endnotes:

[1] The Admiral Kuznetsov was named after Soviet Admiral Nikolai Gersaimovich Kuznetsov, who achieved distinction in World War II.
[2] Pravdareport.com, October 15, 2016.
[3] Rt.com, October 22, 2016.
[4] Kp.ru, October 23, 2016.
[5] Kp.ru, October 23, 2016.
[6] Sputniknews.com, October 22, 2016.
[7] Ng.com, October 17, 2016.
[8] Ria.ru, October 18, 2016.

http://www.memri.org/report/en/0/0/0/0/0/0/9516.htm
__________________
O Israel
The LORD bless you and keep you;
The LORD make His face to shine upon you and be gracious to you;
The LORD lift up His countenance upon you and give you peace.

Asymmetric Warfare It’s not just for the “Other Guys”


Last edited by Paparock; 10-29-2016 at 04:13 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 10-30-2016, 03:46 PM
Knaur's Avatar
Knaur Knaur is offline
Super Moderator
Photobucket
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Punjab
Posts: 10,153
Knaur is on a distinguished road
Default

The whole Russian fleet belches smoke whenever they leave port, their capital ships have to take their tenders and tugboats along on those Latin American holidays they seem to enjoy.

Air component of AdmK is not something comparable to say the QE or any USN a/cs , since both navy and naval aviation assets have never been too strong a point of theirs. The missile pack they carry is another matter though.
__________________
It is absolutely true in war, were other things equal, that numbers, whether men, shells, bombs, etc, would be supreme. Yet it is also absolutely true that other things are never equal and can never be equal - Maj.Gen. J. F. C. Fuller

At that time, I will search out and destroy all of the nations who have come against Jerusalem - Zechariah 12:9
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 11-20-2016, 02:25 AM
Paparock's Avatar
Paparock Paparock is offline
Dragon
Photobucket
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Southern California High Desert Mountains
Posts: 48,313
Paparock is on a distinguished road
Exclamation Russia-NATO Update – October-November 2016


November 15, 2016
Special Dispatch No.6679

Russia-NATO Update – October-November 2016

Russia-NATO Update is a new monthly review by the MEMRI Russian Media Studies Project, covering the latest news on Russia-NATO relations from the Russian and East European media.


__________________
O Israel
The LORD bless you and keep you;
The LORD make His face to shine upon you and be gracious to you;
The LORD lift up His countenance upon you and give you peace.

Asymmetric Warfare It’s not just for the “Other Guys”

Reply With Quote
Israel Forum
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 02:41 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Israel Military Forum