Posted on 03/05/2016 3:27:38 PM PST by marvel5
The Russian task force in Syria has demonstrated remarkable efficiency and professionalism, according to a German magazine citing confidential NATO analysis.
(Excerpt) Read more at rt.com ...
Yeah, it does appear that the Russian forces are doin’ some smokin’ up.
Pretty sure the USAF still leads the Russians in the number of sorties per destroyed empty pickup truck.
Consistent high number of sorties is also impressive.
Better to over estimate your enemy than to underestimate your enemy.
Any bombing of islam by whomever is a good thing. That Ivan is up to bat may bother some cold war relics, but lees islamos is always good.
Really? The Russians do not drop leaflets first, and they just love their cluster bombs. Meanwhile, US planes return with 80% undropped ordinance; Russians return empty and rearm. US needs legal OK to drop and must have no civilians within 1 mile; Russians need no stinking lawyers and find lots of targets; civilians? There aren’t any - with so many targets they have to go again.
Russia is not the enemy; the USG and the EUSSR are our enemies.
>>Pretty sure the USAF still leads the Russians in the number of sorties per destroyed empty pickup truck.
Meanwhile, the Russians, who don’t give a rat’s bottom about collateral damage, are taking out high-value targets.
I’m not interested in sending our people to war until the country is ready to really fight a war again. See: WWII for the last time this was done on a large scale.
That’s the detailed version of my previous post.
Russia is playing ball with the Chinese.
The Chinese are getting too threatening to their neighbors, probably because the Chinese regime wants a distraction from economic problems.
Russians are also playing ball with Iran. Which would dearly like to go off conquering with the weapons it’s buying from Russia. And they really do believe in “death to America”, or their leadership does.
If the Russians arent enemies, they are certainly fooling a lot of people.
Details matter.
No, I agree, it was a good post.
/rollseyes
Ivan ought to be glad no one is doing all that much shooting back. He ought to be glad none of these rag bag milita groups has an air force.
Of course, Russia has its own allies and interests. China has just built a few artificial islands in the sea.
Iran hasn’t invaded anyone in ages, although Iraq with US backing did invade it. The US of course is backing and arming our own “evil allies,” Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and the Gulf States, and directly arming jiahdis ourselves, to overthrow to overthrow the legitimate Syrian government, an ally of Russia.
Meanwhile, US has expanded NATO three times by twelve countries right up to the edge of Russia, including not only former Russian satellites but former constituent parts of the old Soviet Union - despite our promise not to do so if the Soviet Union permitted German reunification, as even the establishment CFR’s magazine “Foreign Affairs,” admits.
https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/united-states/2014-10-29/put-it-writing
And, of course, the US illegally bombed Serbia, a kindred nation to Russia, in the 90s and split Kosovo from it and empowered a new jihadi state. We also invaded Iraq, destroying that country and laying the basis for AQ and ISIS, and illegally bombed and overthrew the government of Libya creating a similar mess. Not to mention overthrowing the legitimate government of Ukraine and replacing it with a neo-Nazi friendly/oligarchic coup government.
I think the real threat to world peace is evident. It’s not Russia.
China is asserting control of right of passage through the South China Sea, beginning by denying passage of fishing craft in the area.
It is asserting not just economic rights but territorial rights in an area where nearly all Asian shipping passes. That means a choke on the commerce of all it’s neighbors from Japan to Singapore.
The seriousness of this can’t be understated. The entire Muslim problem is a tiny fraction as significant.
As for NATO - Russia has made itself extremely unpopular with the actual population of its neighbors. Maybe it should look into making friends.
China has no interest in obstructing the commerce of its neighbors and no naval means of so doing if it did as that would bring it into direct collision with the far superior 7th Fleet.
Russia voluntarily gave up its empire and set free the countries of Eastern Europe and those former constituent parts of the old Soviet Union that wanted to leave. Since then, the US/NATO has provoked Russia by expanding NATO and encircling it with military bases and overthrowing the pro-Russia government of Ukraine that sits on its border.
WHY was it that Obama struck that huge ISIS oil production facility within TWO days of Russia opening her very serious air war..?
Cuz up until that point ALL of the expensive US “air war” efort was pure, unadulterated ARTIFICE —decorations for political positions.
In fact the recent impressive US deployment of B-52’s SOUNDS a lot like Bill Clinton’s deployment of Apaches to Bosia:
THEY POLLED WELL AND MADE HIM LOOK TOUGH.
No, China does not want to obstruct the trade of its neighbors - yet, but as of now it wants to lean on them to, for instance, prevent migration of investment such as manufacturing plants, control capital flight, arrest it’s absconding citizens, prevent exploitation of resources in its neighbors economic zones (China claims ALL of the China sea areas and recognizes NONE of its neighbors economic zones). Give it a year or two and we will see demands for treaties of alliance, etc. China has hundreds of aircraft within range and capable of controlling these waters, or at least denying them to civilian use. The USN is a factor only if the US decides to oppose Chinese aggression. It hasn’t so far - see economic zones, fishing etc.
And frankly you are arguing in bad faith in denying all the above.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.