Breaking : Putin orders start of Russian forces' withdrawal from Syria
- Thread starter Vergennes
- Start date
SiCiSi
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2014
- Messages
- 375
- Reaction score
- -4
- Country
- Location
Seriously. Its painful to read some of the comments from the 'analysts' here.
We came into Syria to test out our weapons and turn the tide of war. Now the rebels are on the run and we have had the chance to test out some of our best stealth technology along with ammunition tests on live targets.
Mainly though, our jamming technology has been a huge success despite being used just a couple of times.
Article: Guest Column -- Why did Turkey shoot down a Russian Air Force jet? | OpEdNews
This basically turns US fighter jets into very expensive flying coffins.
As for the jews and their arab slaves thinking of invading syria on land, do they even know how much weapons, training and expertise we have transferred over to Hezbollah? They can barely handle barefoot farmers in Yemen, they would be slaughtered like lambs. Hezbollah doesnt show mercy.
All in all its been a good experience for our forces.
raptor22
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2011
- Messages
- 7,064
- Reaction score
- 9
- Country
- Location
It's a good sign of development .... ceasefire , peace talks and now withdrawal of troops ... the only way to address Syrian crisis is a political approach which hopefully is undergoing ....
I've seen people over here talk about supremacy of the US as if Taliban , AQ and all sort of terrorism have been completely eradicated and no more opium is being cultivated in Afghanistan after years of occupation by the US and ISAF ...
I've seen people over here talk about supremacy of the US as if Taliban , AQ and all sort of terrorism have been completely eradicated and no more opium is being cultivated in Afghanistan after years of occupation by the US and ISAF ...
The order of the President of Russian Federation Vladimir Putin to withdraw military
alignment of Russian Aerospace Forces of RF (VKS) from Syrian territory happened to be sudden and unexpected to everyone. What could have influenced such a step? Correspondent of Federal News Agency (Федеральное агентство новостей) talked to renown political scientist Rostislav Ishchenko.
How would you assess military operation of Russian VKS in Syria?
I can assess it as uncompleted, since its purpose was proclaimed as liquidation of “Islamic State” and establishing peace on Syrian territory. As I understand, peace talks about Syria only started, while “IS” is not destroyed.
Could our military’s withdrawal be influenced by certain agreements between Russia and the United States? For example, we withdraw forces, but we get guarantees and obligations to uphold and observe Syrian ceasefire from the USA. In their turn, Americans get carte-blanche for a quick and triumphant war with “Islamic State” and ultimate taking of Rakka.
I don’t think so. The decision of Vladimir Putin was unexpected, obviously for the
United States as well. And by the way, as I see, it was in a way spontaneous for Russian leadership because no announcement showed any intent to withdraw
forces. And the reaction of the United States which didn’t understand what
happened at all, indicates that Russia made spontaneous decision on some information that no one can understand. It is incomprehensible why such a decision. But it is obvious that, taking these steps, the President used some information.
Therefore it is obvious that it is not a question of some agreements. Agreements cannot be made in five minute time and they don’t follow that scheme.
What could be the basis of such sudden decision?
The leadership should’ve received a certain information that stimulated it to
undertake such actions.
First of all, one ought to realize that not all forces would be withdrawn, but only part
of them. Navy base in Tartus and Khmeimim Airbase. If one comes from what Vladimir Putin formulated and all his previous statements, then it is ncomprehensible what would be withdrawn from Syria at all. Because the announcement was this: to start withdrawal of forces from Syria, yet base in Tartus and Khmeimim Airbase remain untouched as well as land forces that are sufficient to guard these. According to all the previous announcements, Russia only had base in Tartus, Khmeimim Airbase and land forces to guard these. It is not clear what
would be withdrawn exactly.
Nevertheless, the fact of the slippage of military activity in Syria had only one unambiguous interpretation: Russia is freeing its hands to act on other directions. Since these actions are planned well ahead, the spontaneity of these raises questions. I would not insist, but I can assume that information about threat on other direction, a serious threat in addition, was received. This could influence certain kind of response. This is one of the versions. In reality, there could be tens of such versions. Why exactly this way? Why exactly yesterday and so spontaneously? We cannot choose one right of those, so there is no need to even speculate.
Could Donbas be involved in it?
If involved, then not Donbas, but Ukraine as a whole. Kiev could present potential
threat regardless of where it attacks, be it Donbas, Crimea, etc. This might provoke serious conflict. Even more so, not long time ago Poroshenko made a flight to Erdogan to agree upon joint actions against Russia.
What are your predictions concerning Syria? Will there be peace in the near future?
Sometime there will be peace. Maybe even in the years immediately ahead. It is understandable that there won’t be peace in 2017 and maybe not even in 2018. Because even having destroyed large terrorist groups, Islamist guerilla warfare would be present for a long time.
Ищенко: Вывод ВКС из Сирии может быть связан с новой угрозой
alignment of Russian Aerospace Forces of RF (VKS) from Syrian territory happened to be sudden and unexpected to everyone. What could have influenced such a step? Correspondent of Federal News Agency (Федеральное агентство новостей) talked to renown political scientist Rostislav Ishchenko.
How would you assess military operation of Russian VKS in Syria?
I can assess it as uncompleted, since its purpose was proclaimed as liquidation of “Islamic State” and establishing peace on Syrian territory. As I understand, peace talks about Syria only started, while “IS” is not destroyed.
Could our military’s withdrawal be influenced by certain agreements between Russia and the United States? For example, we withdraw forces, but we get guarantees and obligations to uphold and observe Syrian ceasefire from the USA. In their turn, Americans get carte-blanche for a quick and triumphant war with “Islamic State” and ultimate taking of Rakka.
I don’t think so. The decision of Vladimir Putin was unexpected, obviously for the
United States as well. And by the way, as I see, it was in a way spontaneous for Russian leadership because no announcement showed any intent to withdraw
forces. And the reaction of the United States which didn’t understand what
happened at all, indicates that Russia made spontaneous decision on some information that no one can understand. It is incomprehensible why such a decision. But it is obvious that, taking these steps, the President used some information.
Therefore it is obvious that it is not a question of some agreements. Agreements cannot be made in five minute time and they don’t follow that scheme.
What could be the basis of such sudden decision?
The leadership should’ve received a certain information that stimulated it to
undertake such actions.
First of all, one ought to realize that not all forces would be withdrawn, but only part
of them. Navy base in Tartus and Khmeimim Airbase. If one comes from what Vladimir Putin formulated and all his previous statements, then it is ncomprehensible what would be withdrawn from Syria at all. Because the announcement was this: to start withdrawal of forces from Syria, yet base in Tartus and Khmeimim Airbase remain untouched as well as land forces that are sufficient to guard these. According to all the previous announcements, Russia only had base in Tartus, Khmeimim Airbase and land forces to guard these. It is not clear what
would be withdrawn exactly.
Nevertheless, the fact of the slippage of military activity in Syria had only one unambiguous interpretation: Russia is freeing its hands to act on other directions. Since these actions are planned well ahead, the spontaneity of these raises questions. I would not insist, but I can assume that information about threat on other direction, a serious threat in addition, was received. This could influence certain kind of response. This is one of the versions. In reality, there could be tens of such versions. Why exactly this way? Why exactly yesterday and so spontaneously? We cannot choose one right of those, so there is no need to even speculate.
Could Donbas be involved in it?
If involved, then not Donbas, but Ukraine as a whole. Kiev could present potential
threat regardless of where it attacks, be it Donbas, Crimea, etc. This might provoke serious conflict. Even more so, not long time ago Poroshenko made a flight to Erdogan to agree upon joint actions against Russia.
What are your predictions concerning Syria? Will there be peace in the near future?
Sometime there will be peace. Maybe even in the years immediately ahead. It is understandable that there won’t be peace in 2017 and maybe not even in 2018. Because even having destroyed large terrorist groups, Islamist guerilla warfare would be present for a long time.
Ищенко: Вывод ВКС из Сирии может быть связан с новой угрозой
HAIDER
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- May 21, 2006
- Messages
- 33,771
- Reaction score
- 14
- Country
- Location
Russia secured Damascus and left mess for others. And nobody will come to clean Syria. Eventually , Kurds will get secured homeland and ISIS will partly create state............. but it will be headache for Turkey,Iraq and Izrael......Russia is not leaving Syria, it will be partial withdrawal for goodwill to show some progress in UN peace talk. If Russia permanently leave Syria, they know they will have value like some rag tag 3rd world army.
But last week they brought in state of the art surveillance system in Syria.
But last week they brought in state of the art surveillance system in Syria.
Last edited:
Serpentine
INT'L MOD
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2011
- Messages
- 12,131
- Reaction score
- 30
- Country
- Location
I'm in no hurry and not even for a second I have counted on Russians or anyone else's friendship, I just see facts on the ground. Russia was not supposed to enter Syria militarily, but it did, and during this period, thousands of terrorists turned into fertilizer. I'm actually one of those who advise against not only trusting Russia, but any other major power, but I did support their air campaign, because if one more Saudi supported rat is dead, it will have have my support no matter what.
Full Moon
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2013
- Messages
- 1,601
- Reaction score
- -5
- Country
- Location
I'm in no hurry and not even for a second I have counted on Russians or anyone else's friendship, I just see facts on the ground. Russia was not supposed to enter Syria militarily, but it did, and during this period, thousands of terrorists turned into fertilizer. I'm actually one of those who advise against not only trusting Russia, but any other major power, but I did support their air campaign, because if one more Saudi supported rat is dead, it will have have my support no matter what.
Their relatively quick withdrawal (by the standards of a super power) confirms that Asad's sustainability in power is no longer possible.
500
BANNED
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2010
- Messages
- 16,678
- Reaction score
- 38
- Country
- Location
Well u predicted Assad victory in half year.
Judging by videos, Shia invaders suffered more casualties than Syrian defenders. No wonder they asked for a ceasefire.I just see facts on the ground. Russia was not supposed to enter Syria militarily, but it did, and during this period, thousands of terrorists turned into fertilizer. I'm actually one of those who advise against not only trusting Russia, but any other major power, but I did support their air campaign, because if one more Saudi supported rat is dead, it will have have my support no matter what.
Serpentine
INT'L MOD
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2011
- Messages
- 12,131
- Reaction score
- 30
- Country
- Location
500
BANNED
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2010
- Messages
- 16,678
- Reaction score
- 38
- Country
- Location
azzo
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2015
- Messages
- 1,171
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
If assad relinquishes his throne then we would have won, and all the dollars and souls wasted by russian axis would be for nothing.
Our will have been enforced and victory completed, we would have kicked assad even though most of the western world stood behind him against our rebels, and russia would have submitted to the superior power, the Islamic alliance lead by King Salman the decisive. King of all the Arabs and "minorities" that dwell in Arab lands.
Our will have been enforced and victory completed, we would have kicked assad even though most of the western world stood behind him against our rebels, and russia would have submitted to the superior power, the Islamic alliance lead by King Salman the decisive. King of all the Arabs and "minorities" that dwell in Arab lands.
RoadRunner401
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- May 28, 2015
- Messages
- 3,757
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
Seat at geopolitical top table allowed Putin to scale back in Syria| Top News| Reuters
MOSCOW (Reuters) - Vladimir Putin cited Russian military success in Syria as his reason for scaling back his forces there. But his belief that the intervention delivered him a seat at the top table of world affairs is more likely to have tipped his hand.
Russia's Syria operation, launched on Sept. 30 last year, made military, diplomatic and domestic political sense for the Kremlin which was keen to shore up its closest Middle East ally and protect its only naval facility on the Mediterranean. It has largely achieved both aims.
But an analysis of comments made by the Russian president and other officials, and conversations with people familiar with his thinking, suggests his primary aim was to make Russia so indispensable to the Syrian peace process that it could regain a measure of the global clout the Soviet Union once enjoyed.
"Russia has returned to the global board of directors," said Alexander Baunov, a senior associate at the Carnegie Moscow Center. "(It has returned) to the table where world and regional powers decide the fate of others' conflicts and Russia is clearly not a local but a world player."
Putin is famously inscrutable and unpredictable, and his decision to draw down in Syria was no exception. He confides in only a small coterie of people around him, and it came as a total surprise for many in the Kremlin and the defense ministry.
"I spent all day at the defense ministry and did not hear a peep," one defense industry source told Reuters, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the matter's sensitivity.
State propaganda outlets spoke on Tuesday of a "mission accomplished", a phrase that deliberately mimicked the one plastered on a U.S. warship in 2003 when President George W. Bush declared the end of major combat operations in Iraq.
The real mission, some say, was to give Russia a say in world affairs.
In the space of six months it has gone from being a pariah state in the West because of its annexation of Crimea and support for pro-Kremlin rebels in eastern Ukraine to being the go-to partner over Syria. Once spurned by Western leaders, it is now a regular interlocutor for both Washington and EU leaders.
"Putin has already got all the political benefits," said Nikolai Petrov, a political expert at the Higher School of Economics in Moscow. "It is better to withdraw before costs increase, before any accident can happen, and before the risks become too high."
Reuters estimates the 5-month operation has cost the Kremlin $700-800 million. The human cost has been higher. Although the official Russian military body count is just four, Islamic State claimed it blew up a Russian passenger plane over Egypt in October, killing all 224 people onboard, in revenge for Syria.
NEW WORLD ORDER
Reasserting Russia's global voice is crucial to Putin, who has been alternately president and prime minister for over 15 years, and is thought to have a close eye on his historical legacy while showing no signs of wanting to leave the Kremlin.
He has long pushed for a new multilateral world order where other powers counter-balance U.S. influence.
In a speech to the United Nations in New York in September, in a barely disguised dig at the United States, he complained of the "arrogance, exceptionalism and impunity" of those he said had engineered the Arab spring.
Dmitry Medvedev, his prime minister and ally, outlined the world order the Kremlin craved as recently as last month, evoking the 1962 Cuban missile crisis as a model of how Moscow and Washington were able to solve dangerous crises.
He said he believed the world's powers could come together in "a fair and equal union" to maintain global peace.
Russian officials say recent events show how Moscow has, once again, come to matter.
They point out that it was Russia, along with the United States, which co-brokered the current cessation of hostilities in Syria, however fragile. Officials also rarely miss a chance to note that it is the Americans who have time and time again come to them for help over Syria.
John Kerry, the U.S. Secretary of State, flew to Moscow in December to discuss Syria with Putin, and has recently spoken almost daily to Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, Kremlin and White House statements confirm.
Even Putin's critics have recognized the clout Syria has gifted the Russian leader.
"There's one man on this planet who can end the civil war in Syria by making a phone call and that's Mr Putin," Philip Hammond, Britain's foreign secretary, told BBC TV last month.
ASSAD SEEN SAFE
By scaling back after a campaign of over 9,000 sorties estimated to have cost $700-800 million, the Kremlin has made it less likely it will be dragged into a potential regional conflict with Turkey or Saudi Arabia.
And although it did not in the end help bag a spectacular battlefield victory, such as the complete taking of Aleppo, the Kremlin thinks it has done enough to ensure that Assad and his forces can hold the line.
Domestically, the intervention helped keep Putin's ratings near record highs and served as a useful distraction at a time of economic pain. Amid brass bands and rousing speeches, state TV on Tuesday presented the decision to start drawing down forces as the culmination of a short, victorious war.
But though Putin's partial Syria withdrawal may be seen as a diplomatic coup by some, his country's return to the world stage has not been a complete success.
U.S. and EU sanctions imposed over the Ukraine crisis remain in place and compound a domestic financial crisis made worse by the collapse in oil prices.
And the decision to scale back Russian forces was, some analysts believe, conversely dictated more by weakness and a realization that Russia could not make a deal with the West over Syria to lift sanctions on it.
Others, including one Western diplomat who told Reuters the news came as a complete and inexplicable surprise, say Putin's motives are unfathomable.
"None of us knows what the intent of Mr Putin is when he carries out any action, which is why he is a very difficult partner in any situation like this," Britain's Hammond said on Tuesday.
Putin's move is being interpreted in some circles as an attempt to influence the outcome of Syrian peace talks in Geneva and possibly to put pressure on Syrian President Bashar al-Assad to get serious about doing a deal.
Yet few inside Russia believe Assad is in danger of losing Putin's support, even if the Kremlin does want him to contest any future presidential election.
Putin has shown no particular fondness for the Syrian leader but appears to see little point in replacing him with someone who might turn out to be even worse and does not believe Syria is ready for Western-style democracy anyway.
Putin has in any case hedged his bets.
If he feels his new-found global influence or Assad is threatened he can use the two military bases left behind to rapidly expand the Kremlin's military footprint.
His public relations strategy is also hedged.
"If the ceasefire turns into a lengthy peace he will automatically be considered the victor," said Carnegie's Baunov. "But if war breaks out again, he can always say: 'You see, when we were there everyone was making peace but after we left war erupted.'"
MOSCOW (Reuters) - Vladimir Putin cited Russian military success in Syria as his reason for scaling back his forces there. But his belief that the intervention delivered him a seat at the top table of world affairs is more likely to have tipped his hand.
Russia's Syria operation, launched on Sept. 30 last year, made military, diplomatic and domestic political sense for the Kremlin which was keen to shore up its closest Middle East ally and protect its only naval facility on the Mediterranean. It has largely achieved both aims.
But an analysis of comments made by the Russian president and other officials, and conversations with people familiar with his thinking, suggests his primary aim was to make Russia so indispensable to the Syrian peace process that it could regain a measure of the global clout the Soviet Union once enjoyed.
"Russia has returned to the global board of directors," said Alexander Baunov, a senior associate at the Carnegie Moscow Center. "(It has returned) to the table where world and regional powers decide the fate of others' conflicts and Russia is clearly not a local but a world player."
Putin is famously inscrutable and unpredictable, and his decision to draw down in Syria was no exception. He confides in only a small coterie of people around him, and it came as a total surprise for many in the Kremlin and the defense ministry.
"I spent all day at the defense ministry and did not hear a peep," one defense industry source told Reuters, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the matter's sensitivity.
State propaganda outlets spoke on Tuesday of a "mission accomplished", a phrase that deliberately mimicked the one plastered on a U.S. warship in 2003 when President George W. Bush declared the end of major combat operations in Iraq.
The real mission, some say, was to give Russia a say in world affairs.
In the space of six months it has gone from being a pariah state in the West because of its annexation of Crimea and support for pro-Kremlin rebels in eastern Ukraine to being the go-to partner over Syria. Once spurned by Western leaders, it is now a regular interlocutor for both Washington and EU leaders.
"Putin has already got all the political benefits," said Nikolai Petrov, a political expert at the Higher School of Economics in Moscow. "It is better to withdraw before costs increase, before any accident can happen, and before the risks become too high."
Reuters estimates the 5-month operation has cost the Kremlin $700-800 million. The human cost has been higher. Although the official Russian military body count is just four, Islamic State claimed it blew up a Russian passenger plane over Egypt in October, killing all 224 people onboard, in revenge for Syria.
NEW WORLD ORDER
Reasserting Russia's global voice is crucial to Putin, who has been alternately president and prime minister for over 15 years, and is thought to have a close eye on his historical legacy while showing no signs of wanting to leave the Kremlin.
He has long pushed for a new multilateral world order where other powers counter-balance U.S. influence.
In a speech to the United Nations in New York in September, in a barely disguised dig at the United States, he complained of the "arrogance, exceptionalism and impunity" of those he said had engineered the Arab spring.
Dmitry Medvedev, his prime minister and ally, outlined the world order the Kremlin craved as recently as last month, evoking the 1962 Cuban missile crisis as a model of how Moscow and Washington were able to solve dangerous crises.
He said he believed the world's powers could come together in "a fair and equal union" to maintain global peace.
Russian officials say recent events show how Moscow has, once again, come to matter.
They point out that it was Russia, along with the United States, which co-brokered the current cessation of hostilities in Syria, however fragile. Officials also rarely miss a chance to note that it is the Americans who have time and time again come to them for help over Syria.
John Kerry, the U.S. Secretary of State, flew to Moscow in December to discuss Syria with Putin, and has recently spoken almost daily to Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, Kremlin and White House statements confirm.
Even Putin's critics have recognized the clout Syria has gifted the Russian leader.
"There's one man on this planet who can end the civil war in Syria by making a phone call and that's Mr Putin," Philip Hammond, Britain's foreign secretary, told BBC TV last month.
ASSAD SEEN SAFE
By scaling back after a campaign of over 9,000 sorties estimated to have cost $700-800 million, the Kremlin has made it less likely it will be dragged into a potential regional conflict with Turkey or Saudi Arabia.
And although it did not in the end help bag a spectacular battlefield victory, such as the complete taking of Aleppo, the Kremlin thinks it has done enough to ensure that Assad and his forces can hold the line.
Domestically, the intervention helped keep Putin's ratings near record highs and served as a useful distraction at a time of economic pain. Amid brass bands and rousing speeches, state TV on Tuesday presented the decision to start drawing down forces as the culmination of a short, victorious war.
But though Putin's partial Syria withdrawal may be seen as a diplomatic coup by some, his country's return to the world stage has not been a complete success.
U.S. and EU sanctions imposed over the Ukraine crisis remain in place and compound a domestic financial crisis made worse by the collapse in oil prices.
And the decision to scale back Russian forces was, some analysts believe, conversely dictated more by weakness and a realization that Russia could not make a deal with the West over Syria to lift sanctions on it.
Others, including one Western diplomat who told Reuters the news came as a complete and inexplicable surprise, say Putin's motives are unfathomable.
"None of us knows what the intent of Mr Putin is when he carries out any action, which is why he is a very difficult partner in any situation like this," Britain's Hammond said on Tuesday.
Putin's move is being interpreted in some circles as an attempt to influence the outcome of Syrian peace talks in Geneva and possibly to put pressure on Syrian President Bashar al-Assad to get serious about doing a deal.
Yet few inside Russia believe Assad is in danger of losing Putin's support, even if the Kremlin does want him to contest any future presidential election.
Putin has shown no particular fondness for the Syrian leader but appears to see little point in replacing him with someone who might turn out to be even worse and does not believe Syria is ready for Western-style democracy anyway.
Putin has in any case hedged his bets.
If he feels his new-found global influence or Assad is threatened he can use the two military bases left behind to rapidly expand the Kremlin's military footprint.
His public relations strategy is also hedged.
"If the ceasefire turns into a lengthy peace he will automatically be considered the victor," said Carnegie's Baunov. "But if war breaks out again, he can always say: 'You see, when we were there everyone was making peace but after we left war erupted.'"
Serpentine
INT'L MOD
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2011
- Messages
- 12,131
- Reaction score
- 30
- Country
- Location
500
BANNED
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2010
- Messages
- 16,678
- Reaction score
- 38
- Country
- Location
Obviously that phrase means u believe it will happen, otherwise why write it. Just to show ur 3rd grade math skills?
