world

Russia slams U.S.-led action in Syria as ineffective

27 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© 2017 AFP

  • Sort by
  • Oldest
  • Latest
  • Popular

27 Comments
Login to comment

The US had no desire to fight ISIL nor Daesh in Syria, in fact the US was a financier and supporter either directly or indirectly-Obama is on the record admitting this! The transport of oil across Syria into Turkey was such a massive operation that seemed to be invisible to the US military but not the Russian Airforce which bombed it to oblivion!

Obama's intervention in Syria used and supported hard line terror groups and.....thankfully.lost!

5 ( +8 / -3 )

Thank you. Russia just sent a message to the future president to build up the military and reaffirm the USA role as "cop of the world." It is exactly the same strategy that the USA used on the USSR - make them spend until they are broke mentally, physically and militarily.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Of course they gonna say that; what else would they say

Now let's see if they finally go east Syria and focus on ISIS

Let's see who frees Raqa first

1 ( +4 / -3 )

Russian military officials on Tuesday slammed U.S.-led coalition action against Islamic State jihadists in Syria as having had “less than zero” impact.

The title implies the impact was zero, but it's actually worse, the US was not just ineffective, it had a negative effect.

I noticed from the very start that everything the US did in Syria (and elsewhere) only strengthened the terrorists, and weakened the legitimate government.

3 ( +8 / -5 )

@lostrune2

Of course they gonna say that; what else would they say

Actually, Russians are very accurate in their facts and assessments. Can you provide different facts?

Now let's see if they finally go east Syria

Russians do not have ground troops for major offensive operations, Syrian army will do the job.

@Raw Beer

The title implies the impact was zero, but it's actually worse, the US was not just ineffective, it had a negative effect.

Very correct observation. Even in the West a lot of people think the same:

<https://consortiumnews.com/2016/09/29/how-the-us-armed-up-syrian-jihadists/ >

0 ( +5 / -5 )

Of course they gonna say that; what else would they say

Actually, Russians are very accurate in their facts and assessments. Can you provide different facts?

Yes, their coalition is closing in on Raqa:

https://southfront.org/ypg-forces-make-significant-progress-against-isis-in-al-raqqah-syria-map-update/

The Kurdish People’s Protection Units (YPG), backed up by the US-led coalition, have seized a high number of villages, including Jib Shaair, Saryan, Harmalah and Al-Hedy, from ISIS terrorists in the province of al-Raqqah.

The course of the US-backed advance shows that its goal is to close the ISIS-held pocket northwest of al-Raqqah prior to moving closer to ISIS defense lines around the terrorist group’s self-proclaimed capital.

In turn, ISIS implements a fluid defense approach, withdrawing to prepared defense sites near al-Raqqah and tactically counter-attacking against US-led forces in a number of directions.

Now, the terrorist group is avoiding a direct confrontation with US-backed forces. Heavy clashes will took place as soon as YPG units reach the boundary circle of ISIS defenses near al-Raqqah.

ISIS has implented the same approach in response to the US-backed offensive on the terrorist group’s Iraqi stronghold – Mosul.

That's not ineffective, methinks.

Now let's see if they finally go east Syria

Russians do not have ground troops for major offensive operations, Syrian army will do the job.

That's fine - neither do the NATO coalition - the Kurds are doing the ground offensive to Raqa, while the coalition provides support (same role as Russia).

2 ( +3 / -1 )

What's that cranky old jet? Surely it doesn't really fly in the 21st century?

0 ( +3 / -3 )

@lostrune2

Yes, their coalition is closing in on Raqa:

Good luck to them. I hope their fight would not become another stalemated slogging match as the battle for Mosul.

@Madverts

What's that cranky old jet? Surely it doesn't really fly in the 21st century?

It's called Su-25, very effective ground attack plane.

From this article:

An American B-52 bomber struck Sarmada in the Idlib province without warning the Russian side.

Want to poke fun at Americans for their use of 50s-vintage aircraft?

1 ( +4 / -3 )

What's that cranky old jet? Surely it doesn't really fly in the 21st century?

Old... yes

Flying... yes

Cranky... you mean like cranky as in angry?

Effective... well, just ask your rebel friends in Syria what they think of it.

Well done Russia pilots and ground crew.

Mission (actually) accomplished.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

It's called Su-25, very effective ground attack plane.

I imagine it is more effective on the ground indeed. Hard to believe it actually flies. It kinda reminds me of the Lada Samara's we chortled at as children.

And bah, your fellow Russians are dying left right and centre because of geriatric aircraft dropping out of the skies y'know. Largely because all the state coffers in in Putin's accounts. The Denial has got pretty intense on your side, I even read a post by some crazy Russian guy blaming Syrian rebels and held held missiles on the seized Crimean peninsula for the latest Russian air tragedy...

There's no wonder Russia is fleeing ISIL, they know that economically the best they can do is prop up Assad through their terror campaign of bombing hospitals and schools.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

hat economically the best they can do is

blackmail Trump? It looks like that was pretty easy to do. Do you think Trump will allow any of the Russian oligarchs to join forces with US oligarchs? Will Trump use part of his new military budget to help Russia upgrade its military?

1 ( +2 / -1 )

PT,

It looks like the Russians have kompromat on the US President elect. Scary times...

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Yes, their coalition is closing in on Raqa:

Good luck to them. I hope their fight would not become another stalemated slogging match as the battle for Mosul.

I think it'll take awhile. Like Mosul, their offensives have been spearheaded rather than by carpet-bombing but by ground forces fighting block by block. It's slower and puts their ground forces at greater risks, but it spares as much as possible for the residents.

(That's why I'd like to see if Russia-Syria focuses on the east and see who frees Raqa.)

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

There's no wonder Russia is fleeing ISIL,

When, where? By the way, while Russian planes flew thousands of sorties, the mighty RAF flew fifty or sixty sorties in the whole year. Are you guys too tired after such intensive fighting?

And back to the aircraft. Su-25 is much newer then B-52. Where are your jokes about geriatric US planes? Or you are not allowed to joke about the Master?

It looks like the Russians have kompromat on the US President elect

Tinfoil army is on march?

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

Oh its ok. At least we will have some Hollywood movies glorifying how the strategy has worked efficiently.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

And back to the aircraft. Su-25 is much newer then B-52.

The Lada Samara is much newer than a Trans Am. What's your point?

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

@lostrune2

I think it'll take awhile. Like Mosul, their offensives have been spearheaded rather than by carpet-bombing

I know. Like Aleppo, where Russian aviation spearheaded the Syrian army offensive by pinpont strikes (no carpetbombing of Western media lies).

@Madverts

What's your point?

My point is logic. If Su-25 of 80s is old and cranky for you, then demonstrate me your sense of humour on B-52 from 50s.

And what's the point of having shiny new aircraft if you don't use them? I think heroic RAF pilots during their exhausting fight with IS destroyed more beer then their aircraft used fuel.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

I think heroic RAF pilots during their exhausting fight with IS destroyed more beer then their aircraft used fuel.

Make beer not war sounds good to me, but I'm not a Russian barbarian.

I know. Like Aleppo, where Russian aviation spearheaded the Syrian army offensive by pinpont strikes (no carpetbombing of Western media lies)

Meh, you bombed specifically pinpointed strikes on hospitals. And schools. And then hit them again when locals tried to assist the stricken. The Russian campaign to keep Syria under its' control has been medieval in it's barbarism, just with cranky 1950's jets. And all that with the intent of terrorising the local Syrian population to capitulate to their new Russian masters. And it worked, for now. The blow-back will come later - as it always does. You will be able to feign nationalist outrage when it does, so all good news....

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

I think it'll take awhile. Like Mosul, their offensives have been spearheaded rather than by carpet-bombing

I know. Like Aleppo, where Russian aviation spearheaded the Syrian army offensive by pinpont strikes (no carpetbombing of Western media lies).

Yeah they pinpointed every block of the opposition areas lol

We'll see if Mosul comes out better than Aleppo did

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Asakzae - Obama was smart enough not to commit the US too deeply into Syria, and Trump is too deeply into Putin's debt to dare (and anyway, considering the investigations into the Trump-Putin axis and possible consequential impeachment, the US has enough on its plate as it is). So it's yours now! - as is the blowback. Hope you're ready for another Afghanistan.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Asakaze, it was Bush who unleashed the violence in Iraq and Obama who extracted US troops with enough delicacy to allow a tepid peace between the Sunni and Shia - and allow the US to now disown it. It's up to them now, and they know it.

Please - go ahead with support for the Assad dynasty. It's a great match with Putinism. Serious doubts remain, though, about whether it will in the end be worth that decrepit navy base.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

about whether it will in the end be worth that decrepit navy base.

And, now an airbase as well.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

@Madverts

Make beer not war sounds good to me, but I'm not a Russian barbarian.

I totally believe you! It`s very British indeed to drink beer and let others fight, periodically demanding "fight more, fight harder". Just like in WWII, when Soviets fought at Stalingrad and Kursk and British barbarians drank beer on their island.

you bombed specifically pinpointed strikes on hospitals. And schools

Every hospital and school has its name. Can you provide a name of even one school or a hospital, destroyed by Russian planes?

@lostrune2

Yeah they pinpointed every block of the opposition areas

And you have proof to support this claim?

@Laguna

it was Bush who unleashed the violence in Iraq and Obama who extracted US troops with enough delicacy

Yes, yes, "bad cop and good cop"! Tell your tales about "Obama`s delicacy" to the US special forces who were thrown into battle for Mosul in order to get a good TV picture for Nov.8 ("victory for the election day").

go ahead with support for the Assad dynasty

Why Russian support for a secular president is "bad" while US/UK support for Saudi or Qatar monarchies is "good". Western democracies and medieval kings, great match. And tell me about US support for Afghani drugs makers. The production of heroin in Afghanistan skyrocketed out of any control since the Western occupation, some estimates say tenfold. Congrats, or something.

Madverts, lostrune2, Laguna, I know it`s hopeless, but read this why Western propaganda about Syria may not be trusted:

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/iraq-syria-aleppo-mosul-patrick-cockburn-propaganda-we-consume-a7373951.html

http://rusvesna.su/news/1482575991

http://rusvesna.su/recent_opinions/1480460391

http://rusvesna.su/news/1482250947

Enjoy the reading!

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Yeah they pinpointed every block of the opposition areas

And you have proof to support this claim?

Even better, satellite images, the eye in the sky

https://www.google.com/search?q=aleppo+satellite&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X

(Ya can even get 'em yourself - ya'd have to pay for it, but at least ya can get it directly)

Madverts, lostrune2, Laguna, I know it`s hopeless, but read this why Western propaganda about Syria may not be trusted:

Don't worry; I'm automatically skeptic of anything - Western, Russian, or otherwise. The difference between other people and me is that I believe everybody is out for their own self-interest - e-v-e-r-y-b-o-d-y That includes America, Europe, China, Japan, Syria, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Arabia, etc. and yes including your precious Russia. I don't automatically believe a-n-y of them.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Even better, satellite images, the eye in the sky

These images confirm only one thing: the city suffered considerable damage from the fighting. Who, when and how inflicted the damage is not clear. Let me remind you that "moderate rebels" actively used all their firepower on the government-held areas.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Even better, satellite images, the eye in the sky

These images confirm only one thing: the city suffered considerable damage from the fighting. Who, when and how inflicted the damage is not clear. Let me remind you that "moderate rebels" actively used all their firepower on the government-held areas.

That's true, and it's good that you considered that as well as people who have been studying those publicly-acquired satellite images have been taking that in consideration too.

The satellite images map the destruction in Aleppo:

"A new report on the city of Aleppo shows where the damage has hit--and it's anything but evenly distributed. The distribution lends credence to reports that government forces have been bombarding rebel-controlled areas with long-range weapons like missiles."

http://www.popsci.com/sites/popsci.com/files/styles/medium_1x_/public/import/2013/images/2013/08/distributionofdamage.jpg

http://syria.liveuamap.com/en/2016/21-december-un-map-using-satellite-imagery-to-show-the-damage

Basically, the damages are not all the same due to disproportionate amount of firepower, resulting in the rebel areas having been flattened.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

That's true, and it's good that you considered that

I consider a lot of aspects. In fact I closely follow military conflicts since 90s, and I've noticed how untruthful and one-sided Western mainstream media can be. It was particularly obvious during the war in Yugoslavia (vilifying Serbs), then Ukraine and now Syria. Your sceptical approach is fine with me. Can not say the same to some other JT posters, who just retranslate silly propaganda stuff from NATO "Ministry of Truth".

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration