They can insist on free and fair elections. As there is no other Syrian with the prestige of President Assad he cannot be removed from the list of candidates without the elections ceasing to be free and fair.
ISIS/ISIL conflict in Syria/Iraq (No OpEd, No Politics)
- Thread starter Jeff Head
- Start date
Jura The idiot
General
I sure didn't go over all 365 posts, but while some people there considered this appearance of the aircraft too obvious to be true (and cried Photoshop
some other said the airport was likely clogged with another equipment ... hardly anybody in Russian Internet now denies a presence of Russian troops in Syria ... I saw this video of allegedly Russians practicing off the Latakia airbase and inside of the Tartus port:who were cursing at the presence of Russian Military in Syria (I got that without knowing Arabic; I'd post them only if you insisted)
janjak desalin
Junior Member
Russia Expands Fleet in Syria With Jets That Can Attack Targets on Ground
finally, russia sends more su-25s!
the su-24s are somewhat of a head-scratcher [unless they're the recon variant], but the su-25s are long overdue, specifically for the capability stated in the nyt headline. now, another 12 more just might do the trick!
finally, russia sends more su-25s!
the su-24s are somewhat of a head-scratcher [unless they're the recon variant], but the su-25s are long overdue, specifically for the capability stated in the nyt headline. now, another 12 more just might do the trick!
Continued from the Russian flanker thread.
I thought Su-30SMs were new production aircraft rather than upgrading older flankers to the SM standard?
The difference is that in Georgia, I feel like the Russians had a much more substantial ground force and rotary aviation that could pick up pilots if they were downed. And getting a downed pilot captured by Georgian forces is probably a far less torturous fate than if a pilot was captured by Daesh.
The latest pictures show an additional 12 Su-24s at the airbase as well as 12 Su-25s, suggesting to me that the Su-24s will be used for precision bombing, while the Su-25s used for low flying CAS, and Su-30SMs likely as escorts, air defence, and occasional precision bombing.
Such a strike group makes much more sense to me, one which has a heavier presence of fast, higher flying Su-24s for the precision bombing role, where they are at lower risk of getting shot down by Daesh MANPADs or AAA. The fact that they're willing to risk Su-25s makes me wonder where they will be used... because if one goes down deep over hostile territory, chances are the pilot will be unrecoverable.
I thought Su-30SMs were new production aircraft rather than upgrading older flankers to the SM standard?
The difference is that in Georgia, I feel like the Russians had a much more substantial ground force and rotary aviation that could pick up pilots if they were downed. And getting a downed pilot captured by Georgian forces is probably a far less torturous fate than if a pilot was captured by Daesh.
The latest pictures show an additional 12 Su-24s at the airbase as well as 12 Su-25s, suggesting to me that the Su-24s will be used for precision bombing, while the Su-25s used for low flying CAS, and Su-30SMs likely as escorts, air defence, and occasional precision bombing.
Such a strike group makes much more sense to me, one which has a heavier presence of fast, higher flying Su-24s for the precision bombing role, where they are at lower risk of getting shot down by Daesh MANPADs or AAA. The fact that they're willing to risk Su-25s makes me wonder where they will be used... because if one goes down deep over hostile territory, chances are the pilot will be unrecoverable.
Last edited:
I saw a bit of video at The Saker site with what looked like four Su-24's with an Ilyushin transport, I saw on a photograph of Latakia airfield four Su-27 or Su-30 and a considerable number ( I didn't count them ) of Su-25's. There are also said to be helicopters.
Four Flankers seem to be too few to be used in air to ground attacks or to deter Turkish interference ( you need more aircraft and revetments for them and preferably more airfields, but it seems to me it is not politically necessary ) so I supposed these were for reconnaissance.
There are estimated to be some two thousand Russians which will include, besides the personnel belonging to the aircraft, no more than the construction companies extending the airfield and the marines defending the place.
plawolf
Lieutenant General
Ha, I see what I did there, when I was referring to "SM", I was think of the Su25SM, the version in service with the Russian Air Force with PGM capabilities, which, as far as I know, the Russians only have 30 examples upgraded so far.
True enough, and the Russians (or Soviets) certainly know what to expect, having fought the likes of these savages during the Afghan war.
However, the Russians are also a very hardy people, and would not really let the threat of torture and horrible death to downed pilots change their tactics much. It's not like standard Russian MO does not do all it can to minimise risk to aircraft and aircrew and provide the best chance possible to rescue downed pilots IMO.
In addition, Su25s with rockets and iron bombs are never going to be used to attack targets deep in enemy controlled territory, that will be left to the Su30s and Su24s.
Su25s will be doing what they were designed to do - provide CAS to advancing ground forces. These ground forces will be overwhelmingly Syrian, but I would also expect some Russian SF mixed in to provide forward close air control and targeting information.
These Russian SF would be ideally placed to launch SAR ops if a Su25 does down, and I'm sure the Syrians would also give high priority to any rescue op for downed Russian pilots.
As such, I don't think the Russians would be dissuaded from using their Su25s to their full potential by flying high and safe and taking pot shots. If that was all the Russians were intending, they would never have bothered to send Su25s over as there are plenty of other assets better suited to that role.
In my view, sending in Su25s gives a very big clue as to what role the Russians expect their tac air to perform.
The Russians, like everyone else, knows you cannot win wars from the air, you need boots on the ground. The Russian tac air deployed are meant to assist with the ground campaign rather than just dropping bombs at random targets of opportunity deep behind enemy lines.
That also leads to the interesting question of, who will be doing the fighting and dying on the ground? As I don't think the Syrian army has that kind of fight left in them at this point.
Will the Russians send in significant ground forces themselves, or will it be the Iranians picking up the slack?
Ah, I see what you meant. In that case, yes.
I think the presence of Su-24s changes my position on the matter a little, now. Before I was a little confused as to the existence of only Su-25s, as I imagined Russia using the Su-25s which may lack PGM capability for strike missions would be a little risky, and the idea of them only conducting CAS missions using Su-25s seems a bit difficult to comprehend as well.
With the arrival of Su-24s, they can now also conduct precision strike from higher altitude, while Su-25s may conduct CAS missions in select, safer areas where lack of guided A2G munitions makes their job a little less risky, compared to having to do CAS as well as long range strike lacking guided munitions.
That said, if Su-25 pilots are downed in possibly risky CAS taskings, the ability for Russian forces to conduct CSAR is not exactly easy. CSAR for the US is a very high risk task, even with all the intelligence, forward based air and naval assets, and supporting firepower they can bring to such an operation. I'm sure the Russians will arrange their more risky sorties in such a way that if the pilot does go down, they will have some assets relatively close on hand to provide support (i.e.: possibly conducting riskier missions like CAS closer to their base of operations, where transport and attack helicopters and additional CAS aircraft can be brought to extract a pilot out of a hot spot, as opposed to somewhere a few hundred km from the airbase, where it would be far more difficult to allow such an operation to occur)
plawolf
Lieutenant General
I am beginning to be more and more convinced that Latakia is only a staging ground, and that once the Russians do engage directly, they will disperse their assets to various FOBs closer to the front line and actions.
CSAR is one of the most dangerous and risky ops there is, but I think the Russians have always been more willing and ready to assume greater risks than what western forces are prepared to take under most circumstances.
So I don't think risk would dissuade them if they think something is worth doing.
I understand that the undercarriages of Russian tactical aircraft are still more robust than those of Western aircraft so setting up forward operating bases costs less effort and time