Cold War II: The Donald warns Russia of missile strike in Syria

Skybird · 04-14-18, 11:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Onkel Neal

I'm with you, but

Eh - I miss your point, sorry...?

Skybird · 04-14-18, 11:38 AM

Googling on that Russian claim Neal mentioned, I found reports about last year's strike (that I did not follow that closely back then) that of 59 fired Tomahawks, 36 "went amiss". Its mentioned that they were not shot down, but got succssfully "blinded" by Russian ECM. The German sources for these reports that I found so far however are a bit dubious and by name unknown to me.

Is it true? If two thirds of those Tomahawks were successfully neutralised by Russian ECM defences, this would be not just a loss in prestige but a practical desaster for America's prime class of cruise missiles.

Mr Quatro · 04-14-18, 11:40 AM

It's a battle for what we think ...

This is how the real enemy works with lies and counter charges that the chemical attack was staged:

http://thehill.com/policy/cybersecur...e-syria-strike

Quote:

The Pentagon reported Saturday a massive spike in online Russian propaganda efforts in the hours before and after the U.S. missile strike on Syria the night before.

“The Russian disinformation campaign has already begun. There has been a 2,000 percent increase in Russian trolls in the last 24 hours," chief Pentagon spokeswoman Dana White said in a briefing on Saturday.

mapuc · 04-14-18, 11:59 AM

I hope it will stay with this one night bombing and thereafter nothing more

I hope this Swedish journalist is right in his statement

"
In fact, Russia has more to lose on starting a military confrontation with the United States than they have to gain from it.

The war in Syria has been an enormous success for Russia and strengthened Vladimir Putin's role as an international player. He certainly does not risk losing this Russian foothold in the Middle East. Better then swallowing humiliation that the West attacked despite Russia's warnings
"

Markus

Skybird · 04-14-18, 12:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Quatro

It's a battle for what we think ...

This is how the real enemy works with lies and counter charges that the chemical attack was staged:

http://thehill.com/policy/cybersecur...e-syria-strike

Yes.

But:

So far neither London nor Washington nor Paris have shown evidence for their own claims either. And they decided to strike less than a full day before the inspectors started their research work in Syria today. No matter how much trust you have in these inspectors and how much or how little credit you give the UN and the OSCW - wouldn't it have been more clever to let them do their work and finding evidence, refer to it - and then "strike"?

It also got reprted in the nationakl TV news an hour ago over here that obviously there has been far mor contacting between Russian and American military before the strike, then Washington now is ready to admit, and that the rsusians star5ted to relocate and - most important - left their very advanced radar for their quite lethal AS missiles deactivated. The cruise missiles that got shot down, seem to have been shot down by Syrian batteries alone. And Russia now threats to deliver even more S300 systems to Syria.

These damn things -S3000 - really start to become a pest in the ME. Will make surgical strikes from air much more difficult in the future, once the systems are installed and the crews have been trained (no short-termed task that is, they said).

Catfish · 04-14-18, 02:14 PM

^ for what i heard they did not let the UN inspectors do their work/blocked access.

Of course in this mudslinger war it is difficult to believe any side.. and Russia trolls, fog of war and general propaganda make it difficult to see through.

I guess it is the same with all wars, at some point the winners' historians agree on what the "truth" is, and what we can read that in history books later.
And it only makes sense when you read those books, because back then there was none.

Skybird · 04-14-18, 03:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Catfish

^ for what i heard they did not let the UN inspectors do their work/blocked access.

They just arrived this morning.

Onkel Neal · 04-14-18, 04:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skybird

Eh - I miss your point, sorry...?

Sorry, that was not meant to be a rebuttal. I agree with you about

Quote:

American units attacking sites with Russian "advisors" present I will believe when I see it. Not one minute earlier.

I'm pretty sure the Russians were given the exact coordinates of the missile strikes well before they were launched.

And the Syrians claim they knocked down a lot, and if true, that means the US is relying on old tech missiles, despite what the President claims.

Skybird · 04-14-18, 06:24 PM

Bringing down cruise missiles by ECM, and shooting them down, are two things, and I doubt that Syria is capable to perform strong in c ECM. Russia - is another case. ECM, like radar as well, is a speciality of theirs. For the Syrian claim of 13 downed missiles, there currently is no further evidence given. Although expecting a 100% reliability in any released wave of missiles is not realistic either. Some of the world'S most capable air defence systems currently are operating in Syria, if counting Russian-operated and Syrian operated platforms together.

The number I asked about from last year, that 36 of 59 Tomahawks have been brought down in last year's attack, I researched futher. I do not trust it too much, since I found the original source behind this number seems to have been the Russian defence ministry itself. I found no credible source for this claim. On German sites, it was also claimed that some of those cruise missiles were brought down by already installed superior Russian anti-missile lasers on ships. Another claim I do not trust too much, since a.) there are not that many Russian ships at Syria, and b.) these claims again got spread by apparently pro-Russian sites.

Propaganda warfare.

mapuc · 04-14-18, 06:30 PM

Do not forget an important thing-In war exaggeration is something both sides use

Markus

Skybird · 04-14-18, 06:45 PM

This analysis of the strike last years contains some hints on to-be-expected reliabilities of US cruise missiles and Russian ones, that may give us a clue on what results to expect from the attack yesterday. I did not expect much form it at all, and this article kind of supports me. To quote from thatr last passage in that article: The US (read: Trump) is more intent on creating headlines than making an actual difference.

Rockstar · 04-14-18, 07:10 PM

Ummm, U.S. AND British and French fired missiles. Of course media makes it all about Trump, very convenient for European leaders. Makes a great distraction hiding their participation. But if I'm not mistaken Emmanuel Jean-Michel Frédéric Macron and Theresa Mary May partook in the attack too. What were their reasons, headlines as well? Then there's the German Syrian response as one headline states "... Their strategy: Delay an intervention and remain vague."

The Middle East is a decades long debacle where major powers have been vying for the strongest position (or not) at the expense of the local population. The Major players involved are China, Russia, Turkey, Israel, Sunni, Shiite, U.S. And yes you too Europe don't ever let it slip your mind, you are just as involved and lent just as much a hand in making the middle East into what it is today.

But lets make it all about Trump. How convenient.

Rockstar · 04-14-18, 08:50 PM

I remember Trump in his campaign for the presidency said he didn't want to do this. Now we're in it again, makes me wonder who is following who?

PARIS - French President Emmanuel Macron on Sunday said he had convinced U.S. President Donald Trump to keep troops in Syria, as he defended joint air strikes he said were legitimate and allowed France and allies to regain credibility.

Skybird · 04-15-18, 04:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rockstar

Ummm, U.S. AND British and French fired missiles. Of course media makes it all about Trump, very convenient for European leaders. Makes a great distraction hiding their participation. But if I'm not mistaken Emmanuel Jean-Michel Frédéric Macron and Theresa Mary May partook in the attack too. What were their reasons, headlines as well? Then there's the German Syrian response as one headline states "... Their strategy: Delay an intervention and remain vague."

The Middle East is a decades long debacle where major powers have been vying for the strongest position (or not) at the expense of the local population. The Major players involved are China, Russia, Turkey, Israel, Sunni, Shiite, U.S. And yes you too Europe don't ever let it slip your mind, you are just as involved and lent just as much a hand in making the middle East into what it is today.

But lets make it all about Trump. How convenient.

Its Europe, so what did you expect?

My general criticsm of this operation however stands - no matter who participated and who not: the operation is pointless, and a waste. And the US took the major share and the leadership, didn't it? And the Donald leaned himself out of the window like noone else, didn't he?

Platapus · 04-15-18, 06:44 AM

Nothing to worry about folks.

Trump tweeted "mission accomplished"

Now where have we heard that before.....

04-14-18, 11:38 AM	#2
Skybird Soaring Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: the mental asylum named Germany Posts: 42,778 Downloads: 10 Uploads: 0	Googling on that Russian claim Neal mentioned, I found reports about last year's strike (that I did not follow that closely back then) that of 59 fired Tomahawks, 36 "went amiss". Its mentioned that they were not shot down, but got succssfully "blinded" by Russian ECM. The German sources for these reports that I found so far however are a bit dubious and by name unknown to me. Is it true? If two thirds of those Tomahawks were successfully neutralised by Russian ECM defences, this would be not just a loss in prestige but a practical desaster for America's prime class of cruise missiles. __________________ If you feel nuts, consult an expert.

04-14-18, 02:14 PM	#6
Catfish Dipped Squirrel Operative Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: ..where the ocean meets the sky Posts: 17,819 Downloads: 38 Uploads: 0	^ for what i heard they did not let the UN inspectors do their work/blocked access. Of course in this mudslinger war it is difficult to believe any side.. and Russia trolls, fog of war and general propaganda make it difficult to see through. I guess it is the same with all wars, at some point the winners' historians agree on what the "truth" is, and what we can read that in history books later. And it only makes sense when you read those books, because back then there was none. __________________ >^..^<*)))>{ All generalizations are wrong.

04-14-18, 06:24 PM	#9
Skybird Soaring Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: the mental asylum named Germany Posts: 42,778 Downloads: 10 Uploads: 0	Bringing down cruise missiles by ECM, and shooting them down, are two things, and I doubt that Syria is capable to perform strong in c ECM. Russia - is another case. ECM, like radar as well, is a speciality of theirs. For the Syrian claim of 13 downed missiles, there currently is no further evidence given. Although expecting a 100% reliability in any released wave of missiles is not realistic either. Some of the world'S most capable air defence systems currently are operating in Syria, if counting Russian-operated and Syrian operated platforms together. The number I asked about from last year, that 36 of 59 Tomahawks have been brought down in last year's attack, I researched futher. I do not trust it too much, since I found the original source behind this number seems to have been the Russian defence ministry itself. I found no credible source for this claim. On German sites, it was also claimed that some of those cruise missiles were brought down by already installed superior Russian anti-missile lasers on ships. Another claim I do not trust too much, since a.) there are not that many Russian ships at Syria, and b.) these claims again got spread by apparently pro-Russian sites. Propaganda warfare. __________________ If you feel nuts, consult an expert.

04-14-18, 06:45 PM	#11
Skybird Soaring Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: the mental asylum named Germany Posts: 42,778 Downloads: 10 Uploads: 0	This analysis of the strike last years contains some hints on to-be-expected reliabilities of US cruise missiles and Russian ones, that may give us a clue on what results to expect from the attack yesterday. I did not expect much form it at all, and this article kind of supports me. To quote from thatr last passage in that article: The US (read: Trump) is more intent on creating headlines than making an actual difference. __________________ If you feel nuts, consult an expert.

04-14-18, 07:10 PM	#12
Rockstar In the Brig Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Zendia Bar & Grill Posts: 12,614 Downloads: 10 Uploads: 0	Ummm, U.S. AND British and French fired missiles. Of course media makes it all about Trump, very convenient for European leaders. Makes a great distraction hiding their participation. But if I'm not mistaken Emmanuel Jean-Michel Frédéric Macron and Theresa Mary May partook in the attack too. What were their reasons, headlines as well? Then there's the German Syrian response as one headline states "... Their strategy: Delay an intervention and remain vague." The Middle East is a decades long debacle where major powers have been vying for the strongest position (or not) at the expense of the local population. The Major players involved are China, Russia, Turkey, Israel, Sunni, Shiite, U.S. And yes you too Europe don't ever let it slip your mind, you are just as involved and lent just as much a hand in making the middle East into what it is today. But lets make it all about Trump. How convenient. Last edited by Rockstar; 04-14-18 at 08:10 PM.

04-14-18, 11:59 AM	#4
mapuc CINC Pacific Fleet Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Denmark Posts: 20,612 Downloads: 37 Uploads: 0	I hope it will stay with this one night bombing and thereafter nothing more I hope this Swedish journalist is right in his statement " In fact, Russia has more to lose on starting a military confrontation with the United States than they have to gain from it. The war in Syria has been an enormous success for Russia and strengthened Vladimir Putin's role as an international player. He certainly does not risk losing this Russian foothold in the Middle East. Better then swallowing humiliation that the West attacked despite Russia's warnings " Markus

04-14-18, 06:30 PM	#10
mapuc CINC Pacific Fleet Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Denmark Posts: 20,612 Downloads: 37 Uploads: 0	Do not forget an important thing-In war exaggeration is something both sides use Markus

04-14-18, 08:50 PM	#13
Rockstar In the Brig Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Zendia Bar & Grill Posts: 12,614 Downloads: 10 Uploads: 0	I remember Trump in his campaign for the presidency said he didn't want to do this. Now we're in it again, makes me wonder who is following who? PARIS - French President Emmanuel Macron on Sunday said he had convinced U.S. President Donald Trump to keep troops in Syria, as he defended joint air strikes he said were legitimate and allowed France and allies to regain credibility. Last edited by Rockstar; 04-15-18 at 04:13 PM.

04-15-18, 06:44 AM	#15
Platapus Fleet Admiral Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 19,427 Downloads: 63 Uploads: 0	Great news, it's all over Nothing to worry about folks. Trump tweeted "mission accomplished" Now where have we heard that before..... __________________ abusus non tollit usum - A right should NOT be withheld from people on the basis that some tend to abuse that right.