The all purpose terrorism thread featuring plenty of allah akbar

[Skybird]

Kaliningrad is a top priority for Moscow, since it is the only permanent ice-free harbour of Russia in the Baltic. It also is now armed with latest generation long range SAMs to a degree that it turns most of Poland and major parts of the Baltic into a no-fly area, being able to deny NATO access there for longer time. Already in 1915 NATO commanders have warned of that. Around 10,000 troops are stationed in that tiny little piece of land, with plans for quick relocation of forces via Belarus and through Lithuania in case of a ground war with NATO, which would necessarily lead to a cracking down on the Baltic states like the Germans crushed down on Holland just reach France faster.

This has Russia's "lowest priority?" You live in an alternative reality, ikalugin. Its a strategic top concern in the Kremlin.

We now expect massive Russian interference with the campaign for German elections at the end of this year:

http://www.focus.de/politik/ausland/...d_6458005.html

Wichtigste taktische Aufgabe ist der Sturz Merkels. Ihre kritische Haltung gegenüber Putin ist richtungsweisend für die Russlandpolitik der EU. Ohne Merkel werden die Russland-Sanktionen höchstwahrscheinlich abgeschafft und die EU-Politik gegenüber Moskau wird sich grundlegend ändern. Putin träumt davon, ihm gegenüber loyale Kräfte an die Macht zu bringen. Der Kreml würde dann unausweichlich zur dominierenden Kraft in einem geschwächten Europa. Putin würde dann faktisch der Chef Europas.

[mapuc]

If Russia invade Poland or some of the Baltic states or all of them it would mean war. There are some other areas which has same level of strategic importance These areas are

They could send it some undercover "problem-makes" and set Poland or some of the Baltic states on fire-Demonstration, strike a.s.o

Moldova and the Swedish Island Gotland-Taking one of these or both could probably mean war not necessarily.

Markus

[ikalugin]

Originally Posted by Skybird

This has Russia's "lowest priority?" You live in an alternative reality, ikalugin. Its a strategic top concern in the Kremlin.

Yes, it does have the lowest priority for formation of new units and rearming the old units. For example regarding the SAMs, or your statement here:

It also is now armed with latest generation long range SAMs to a degree that it turns most of Poland and major parts of the Baltic into a no-fly area, being able to deny NATO access there for longer time.

When compared to other regions (ie Crimea) Kaliningrad indeed does have a lower priority, as it lacks permanently deployed advanced A2AD systems (such as the S-400 SAMs or the above mentioned Iskander-M missile systems) simply because the local units were not rearmed with such systems (I provided the example of the local missile brigade and it's delayed transition from Tochka-U to Iskander-M above), with the out of the region systems being brought in during increased tensions.

This is not even a NATO style rotation, as the units are moved out of the region without replacement, when tensions are lowered. The hysteria regarding them is amusing but ultimately dumb.

Already in 1915 NATO commanders have warned of that.

This is a gem, worthy of being saved.

Around 10,000 troops are stationed in that tiny little piece of land, with plans for quick relocation of forces via Belarus and through Lithuania in case of a ground war with NATO, which would necessarily lead to a cracking down on the Baltic states like the Germans crushed down on Holland just reach France faster.

And here you are overinflating the threat again. Instead of looking into the "scary" manpower figures (which are scary exactly why?) you should look at what they represent. And they represent 2 combat brigades, out of 4 total brigades on that whole axis.

Morever that force did not go through the kind of expansion the force on the south-western axis did, in fact the changes were limited to transition of one regiment into a brigade (a minor increase in combat power) and creation of a new operational command (corps command in Kaliningrad region for better force cohesion). Now, you are free to compare that meagre combat power with the force Poland has deployed against it (16th mech division) and you would see that this force (especially considering the even split between Kaliningrad and st Petersburg areas) is only capable of conducting the defense of Kaliningrad area and is not capable of threatening anything outside of it.

While we can bring the out of region forces to bear, there are postured for operations on another axis.

[Fubar2Niner]

Originally Posted by Skybird

Poland did not invade Russia, nor did Poland attack Germany first. Still Russia had no problem to annex half of Poland, and Hitler and Stalin were two psychopaths who indeed deserved each other since they were brothers in mind and used the same brutality to secure their grabs on power. Both countries planned to attack the other, the only question was who would get the drop on the other's attack first.

But Russia'S history of brute force to supress its own people as well as trying to expand reaches far beyond the second world war, it reaches centuries back earlier. The whole regime of the Tsars expresses that, the whole communist era, and the Stalinist tyranny anyway. And a majority of Russians seems to like it. Stalin is "in" again, and support for Putin as well as for a tough stance in foreign politics seem to rank high. The collapse of the USSR and the end of Russian reign in eastern Europe still is a sting in the self-understanding of many people. The dreaming of that past "glory" (paid for with economic misery and dictatorship) seems to serve as a drug helping to overlook the difficult economic status Russia is in now. Military pomp as a distraction from the depressing realities of contemporary ordinary life.

Stability, predictability look different.

Originally Posted by Skybird

On Europe and the EU, the term "Europe" to me always implies(d) the plural. There is nothing like "one European identity". There nevwer was, that is a fiction of the elites, an obsession to justify their drive for uniformity with themselves leading the one unified collective from the top. The drive behind European innovation and invention was the need to be innovative, was competition, was survival. The local cultural differences within "Europe", are imense, and can be extremely diverse.

If anything, the Brusselian attempt to force all this diversity under one centralised hood with a continental planned economy and one almost feudal government, has led to enormous distortions, rifts, anger, animosity, even hostility. The Euro Union is a cataclysmic disaster. The EU model after 1990 is a failure. We have reached a state where the EU as we know it know could collapse and turn into a thing of th epast as fast as the collapse of the sovjet Union surprised and overrolled us, and German reunification came upon us and left us breathless due to its pace. The situation has become unpredictable - and everything now seems to be possible, for more years of stagnnation and delcine, to sudden, violent collapse. I expect this phase of uncertainty to last for another decade or so - if things do not blow up earlier. In this time, things will not have a chance to turn for the better, but always will turn for the worse.

I said it before, and I stick to it: so often the cause of peace and living-together would be so much better served if we would not fall to ideologies demanding us to forcing the other and everybody else to be all like one and the same, but if we would accept differences, and leave them as that: being differences.

That is called diversity.

Regarding Europe role on the world stage, either way we simply have to accept that the great times of Europe, the centuries of shine and glory, are over. We must stop claiming it our mission to "Europeanise" the world and gift it with our cultural "enrichments". We have enough to do in our own home, and we hardly can manage the problems we already have in there. Being militarily toothless and even unwilling to defend ourselves, we want to mess with al the world and make it our mission to become the savior for all the evils and lows and sufferings around the globe...?

Good luck with that.

@Sky

These two posts are possibly the most profound and IMHO unpredujiced I have read.

In regard to the Russian stance, we all know (hopefully) the diabolical history re Hitlaer and Stalin. One was no better than the other. Stalin just bleated harder and his crimes were discovered later.

Regarding your post about europe and the EU. You summed it up completely.

A great post, thank you

Fubar

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by ikalugin

This is a gem, worthy of being saved.

Öh - yes, that laugh is on me. A typo, however. The year should read 2015.

[ikalugin]

Originally Posted by Skybird

Öh - yes, that laugh is on me. A typo, however. The year should read 2015.

Yes, I guessed so. Still, b/c you were discussing A2AD systems, when was S-400 deployed to Kaliningrad? You may consider changing that year once more after looking it up.

p.s. To get back on topic though (and this is, after all a thread about terrorism), did anyone listen to this audio:

I have also posted it in the US politics thread, but I wonder if this is a better thread for it after all.

p.p.s. Kuznetsov is going home:


What do you think about the current balance in Syria? Any predictions for the near future?

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Fubar2Niner

@Sky

These two posts are possibly the most profound and IMHO unpredujiced I have read.

In regard to the Russian stance, we all know (hopefully) the diabolical history re Hitlaer and Stalin. One was no better than the other. Stalin just bleated harder and his crimes were discovered later.

Regarding your post about europe and the EU. You summed it up completely.

A great post, thank you

Fubar

Not often I get flowers these days - thanks!

[mapuc]

And now back to what this thread is about-terrorism

If I heard what have been said about this shooting in Fort Lauderdales airport, it is terror.

The shooter walked around and fired his gun at people completely random

Markus

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by ikalugin

Yes, I guessed so. Still, b/c you were discussing A2AD systems, when was S-400 deployed to Kaliningrad? You may consider changing that year once more after looking it up.

Nuclear-capable Tochka-U platforms: 2001, maybe even earlier. Nuclear warheads for it popped up regularly, too.

Iskander: 2011 at the latest, probably earlier.

Updated Iskander-M: summer and auztumn 2016.

Other sources mention the year 2013 as key date when Iskander got moved in. Russia massively tries to hide and disguise what it moves in and out, and when, and where.

Voronezh (location) long range special radar: fully operational since 2014.

S400, accompanied by Pantsir-S: info widely varies. Probably during 2016, probabaly not earlier than late 2015, some even say not yet fielded but in the process of beeing fielded in Kaliningrad right now. Depends on sources. The naval units of the Baltic fleet got the system already 2012. And for the Baltic fleet - Kaliningrad is vital.

S300PS: 2011.

Whats your point? If there is any.

And for people maybe not being fully aware of the geography:

[ikalugin]

 

Originally Posted by Skybird

Nuclear-capable Tochka-U platforms: 2001, maybe even earlier. Nuclear warheads for it popped up regularly, too.
Iskander: 2011 at the latest, probably earlier.
Updated Iskander-M: summer and auztumn 2016.
Other sources mention the year 2013 as key date when Iskander got moved in. Russia massively tries to hide and disguise what it moves in and out, and when, and where.
Voronezh (location) long range special radar: fully operational since 2014.
S400, accompanied by Pantsir-S: info widely varies. Probably during 2016, probabaly not earlier than late 2015, some even say not yet fielded but in the process of beeing fielded in Kaliningrad right now. Depends on sources. The naval units of the Baltic fleet got the system already 2012. And for the Baltic fleet - Kaliningrad is vital.
S300PS: 2011.
Whats your point? If there is any.
And for people maybe not being fully aware of the geography:

(deleted the immage and the spaces between paragraphs for compactness)

My point is that Kaliningrad (and the relevant operational-strategic axis) has the lower priority that other areas and regions. But lets break up your post.

First things first - Tochka (and and it's variants Tochka-U, Tochka-R), S300PS are Soviet systems (late 70s and mid 80s), which remained in Kaliningrad area since Soviet times. If Kaliningrad area specifically or North-West operational-strategic axis in general had the priority then those systems would be long replaced by much more modern ones by now.

Secondly, the brigade, stationed in Kaliningrad does not operate Iskander-M as it was not yet rearmed with it (unlike atleast 10 other known brigades, which transitioned from Tochka-Us to Iskander-M). This is so due to the Russia avoiding a real offensive military build up in that operational-strategic axis.
There even isn't a rotationary arrangement (like the NATO ones) with the Iskander-M systems to be permanenly deployed to Kaliningrad, with systems being moved there only during the periods of increased tensions (and leaving the region when those tensions dissapate).

Thirdly, regarding S-400, so you lack data, that is fine. If you want to discuss Baltic Fleet you should compare and contrast the programs for the Baltic Fleet with those, for example for the Black Sea Fleet and the general strengths of those two fleets.

Regarding Voronezh - it is an early warning radar, used for ballistic missile attack warning. The radar that used to cover this vital approach in Soviet times was built in the area that is now under control of the Baltic states and thus is no longer operational.
Thus adding it to your list shows that you have no idea about what it actually does or why it's presense in there is important for European security. (hint European existential security is based around the strategic nuclear stability which this specific radar greatly improves by reducing the vulnerability of Russian deterent to a NATO first strike with ICBMs and SLBMs)
I mean if we are going into nuclear-strategic dimension here then the US made radar in Quatar is by far more destabilising, as it can be used for forward based ABM systems.

[ikalugin]

To (separately) sum up, Russian leadership specifically avoided significant military build up in Kaliningrad area specifically and the North-Western operationaly-strategic axis in general by:
- not expanding the land forces in the area significantly.
- not expanding the Baltic Fleet significantly.
- delaying rearmament of key land units in Kaliningrad area.
- not running a Navy rearmament program.

At the same time compare and contrast this with:
- massive build up of land forces in the South-Western operational-strategic axis post 2014 (but not prior to 2014).
- units in Eastern, Southern and Central MDs receiving priority for the new A2AD systems.*
- emergency Naval program for the Black Sea Fleet.

*- with the obvious exception for the Moscow Air Defense Region which got the new SAMs first.

p.s. if anything I find the forces we have in the North-Western operational-strategic axis underwhelming, as those would be hard pressed to conduct a defense against a NATO offensive out of Poland simply due to their small combat strength, but I guess the changes in organisation and thus improved cohesion would allow us to redeploy and conduct counter strokes appropriately.
p.p.s it is amusing how people talk about repeating Crimea or even Donbas events in Baltics and more so in Poland, considering that the conditions are different. I guess those Euro-Atlantic elites really need to generate an external enemy in Russia for internal mobilisation of support.

[Skybird]

Still Kaliningrad is a strategic top priority for Moscow, due to its location and strategic importance. With some of your claims on weapon data stationed there, I must disagree, on some others I point at the very diverse sources and their different claims. S300 may be an old orignal Sovjet design, envertheless it has seen notoriousnupdates and upgrades and today with latest upgrades and new missiles is one of the world's top notch air defence systems - the F35 has been specifically designed and called for just in reaction to this threat, amongst other demands. Whether F35 can really defeat S300 with klatest kit, is something different. Latest tests of S300 over the past 4-8 years saw it performing with excellent scores, even setting up some firsts in the history books.

You comfortably ignore too many aspects there that oppose your simplified claim of that the Russian moves in the area are posing no threat. In parts Kaliningrad is a defensive situation indeed, and NATO arrogant expansion to the east and broken promises to not do so ever certainly have not helped to keep relations to Russia intact. But Moscows reactions in past years moved beyond just taking on defensive needs for that enclave, and the whole russian foreign policy has become far more aggressive. Many of the incidents in the Baltic air derive from Russian attempts to move in aerial reinfocements without active transponders, and the fact that Russian forces aggressively approached and sometimes penetrated foreign sea space and air space cannot be denied. This cannot be just a reaciton to realistic fears for a sudden nATO attack : NATO simpyl lacks the military forces needed to attack Russia in the Baltic area, all of a sudden. And why should it even want that? In Russia, on the other hand, there is a clearly defined desire by many to restore the fame and glory of the good old empire, and to get back the buffer zone that the Warsaw Pact states once had officially been defined as. The way to do so, to get all that back, is destabilization of the West (split between Europe and the US, destabilizing the EU by any means, taking Germany out as opinion leader), and destabilization of the Baltic states and manipulation of global opinion.

And where have we seen the textbook demonstration for a testrun for this kind of new warfare? Correct, during the Crimean conflict. A masterfully executed textbook example, I admire the precision of the execution.

I don't buy your claims, ikalugin. That in the past I voiced my belief that I could understand why Russia does what it does, does not mean that I sympathise with it. Its the pure and sober techniques and mechanisms of power, seen without any sentimentality. But that is more about "understand thy enemy", not about agreeing with him.

[Dowly]

You know what would be great, guys? Sources! Otherwise, it is just one's word against another's.

PS. Preferably the key bits translated, if the source is not in english.

[ikalugin]

First to get the obvious out of the way:

S300 may be an old orignal Sovjet design, envertheless it has seen notoriousnupdates and upgrades and today with latest upgrades and new missiles is one of the world's top notch air defence systems

Indeed S300 series did see upgrades during it's long history of usage. However that specific system in question (S300PS) uses the old (80s vintage) missiles (specifically 5V55R series). I can make a separate post on the modern and not so modern Russian SAMs, as it is quite complicated and your confusion is understandable.

But Moscows reactions in past years moved beyond just taking on defensive needs for that enclave

Now, to the bone of the matter. My point still stands, if you compare forces stationed in Kaliningrad region specifically and on that axis in general in comparison to, say, relevant Polish forces you would see that the Russian presense in Kaliningrad is not overmatching.

Evidence - you can see from the sourcing (for example military balance 2016 page 196) that the Baltic Fleet has 2 mechanized brigades stationed in Kaliningrad area (one of those brigades is marked as a regiment but that regiment was expanded into a brigade in 2016). Compare it to the Polish mechanized division stationed against that force and you would notice that there is no over match.

Thus it appears that you are just inventing threat where none exists. I wonder why such an apparently inteligent person as yourself would do that.

This cannot be just a reaciton to realistic fears for a sudden nATO attack : NATO simpyl lacks the military forces needed to attack Russia in the Baltic area, all of a sudden. And why should it even want that? In Russia, on the other hand, there is a clearly defined desire by many to restore the fame and glory of the good old empire, and to get back the buffer zone that the Warsaw Pact states once had officially been defined as. The way to do so, to get all that back, is destabilization of the West (split between Europe and the US, destabilizing the EU by any means, taking Germany out as opinion leader), and destabilization of the Baltic states and manipulation of global opinion.

And here we run into a political narrative. I believe that you would find it beneficial to this discussion to entertain the idea of mirrowing your view of Russia into the Russian view of NATO and then deconstruct exactly why and how we want to achieve our objectives.

And where have we seen the textbook demonstration for a testrun for this kind of new warfare? Correct, during the Crimean conflict. A masterfully executed textbook example, I admire the precision of the execution.

Crimea was a one off operation, hinged on many unique factors, such as the stationing of Russian troops in the region before initiation of operations, mass pro Russian support, etc. It is stupid to project that unique one-off adhoc operation onto the likely future Russian operations.

[ikalugin]

To balance off my own narrative.


Just like the real changes in Russian military posture, real changes in military posture by NATO are fairly minor, do not change existing correlation of forces and means and appear to be tasked with reassuring eastern NATO members.

Thus they are tolerable and I would expect Russia to show restraint and not reinfroce that axis significantly in response.


Regarding Germany and it's role in NATO - in the end Germany won't have a say in NATO agression against Russia if such agression happens.