Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Military Analysis: The Turkish 2nd Army. Invasion Force for Syria?
SouthFront: Analysis & Intelligence ^ | 12 Feb 2016 | Brian Kalman

Posted on 02/13/2016 8:57:24 PM PST by amorphous

Recent public comments by the Turkish government have hinted at a possible invasion into Syrian territory to “stabilize” the situation and secure Turkey’s national security. Significant clashes between Turkish army and security forces with elements of the YPG and PKK, which have exacted a costly toll on the Kurdish civilian population have been raging in southern Turkey and northern Syria in recent months. Russian satellite surveillance and human intelligence employed by both Russian and Syria in the region have confirmed the build-up of troops and material on the border.

It is reasonable to believe that Turkey is preparing to salvage its failed policy of supporting Islamic fundamentalist mercenaries and terrorist groups in Syria by invading and establishing a safe area for these groups along its southern border with Syria, while at the same time dealing a crushing blow to the Kurdish forces that have been successful in fighting them. Turkey is not only trying to topple the Assad government in Syrian, but is also trying to liquidate the Kurdish threat both in Iraq and Syria, as well as within its own borders.

Turkey’s membership in NATO complicates its plans of invasion. Unless Turkey is itself attacked, the NATO alliance is not obligated to defend the nation. Turkey will have to engineer a provocation that frames it as the target of an aggression either by Kurdish forces from beyond its borders or by Syrian or Russian forces combating its terrorist allies in Syria. Such a false flag provocation in not outside of the realm of possibility. When a Turkish F-16 shot down a Russian Su-24, claims that the bomber had strayed into Turkish airspace for a number of minutes and ignored radio warnings from the Turkish aircraft were proven to be patently false.

(Excerpt) Read more at ...

TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Government; Russia; Syria
KEYWORDS: isis; kurds; rebels; saudis
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-40 next last

1 posted on 02/13/2016 8:57:24 PM PST by amorphous
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: amorphous

Turkey today attacked Assad’s troops.

Are we going to back ISIS-supporting Turkey (Muslims) over the Christian Russians and stable regime Assad?

2 posted on 02/13/2016 9:01:55 PM PST by TigerClaws
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: amorphous
Russia has announced that they will resist any, any foreign ground force in Syria.

Would Turkey be so dumb as to directly engage Russian forces without NATO cover?

The Russian air force would blow them to hell in Syria. And, every escalation Turkey undertakes digs their smoldering hole a few feet deeper.

The Turkish military doesn't have the ability to establish air superiority over their armor and infantry, making them sitting ducks.

3 posted on 02/13/2016 9:06:18 PM PST by Mariner (War Criminal #18 - Be The Leaderless Resistance)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mariner

This is going to be a bad year in many ways.

4 posted on 02/13/2016 9:08:55 PM PST by laplata ( Liberals/Progressives have diseased minds.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: TigerClaws

ISIS is a pretext for US involvement along with Turkey, SA, and others into what may very well result in full-fledged world war.

5 posted on 02/13/2016 9:13:21 PM PST by amorphous
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: laplata

Need to kick turkey out of NATO.

6 posted on 02/13/2016 9:20:06 PM PST by the_individual2014
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Mariner
I'm pretty sure Turkey's forces will coordinate with SA/Qatar forces, along with US and other support, if not outright boots on ground.

This will force Russia to consider using nuclear weapons to counter such a massive invasion of Syria - something Putin has already warned about.

7 posted on 02/13/2016 9:22:51 PM PST by amorphous
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Mariner

Don’t be so sure re air superiority.
The Turks outnumber the Russian airforce in Syria by 7-10:1
They have their own SAM systems that can keep Russian aircraft off.
And I doubt the Russian SAM system can remain up after suppression. The Turks have a lot of firepower.

8 posted on 02/13/2016 9:22:53 PM PST by buwaya
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: laplata

You can say that again.
It’s early yet.
Many other shoes to drop.

9 posted on 02/13/2016 9:23:37 PM PST by buwaya
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: the_individual2014


10 posted on 02/13/2016 9:29:05 PM PST by laplata ( Liberals/Progressives have diseased minds.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: buwaya

And to make it all worse, we have the worst ‘leadership’ ever. The enemy within.

11 posted on 02/13/2016 9:31:27 PM PST by laplata ( Liberals/Progressives have diseased minds.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: buwaya
"The Turks outnumber the Russian airforce in Syria by 7-10:1

You don't think Russia could easily augment their air power in Syria?

They could bring in 500 aircraft in 72 hours. And they could augment it with a full mechanized division, 300 helicopters and another dozen S-400 batteries.

And they could send 4 armored divisions to the Turkish border in the Caucasus. Sure, the Armenians might not be pleased but they would not attempt to stop it.

12 posted on 02/13/2016 9:33:28 PM PST by Mariner (War Criminal #18 - Be The Leaderless Resistance)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: TigerClaws

From the same source:

Contrary to the diplomatic tradition of not saying anything important or specific in public, Lavrov in his big interview with Moskovskiy Komsomolets openly said that 1) Russia offered the US to fulfill several “simple” conditions to implement the Syria ceasefire; 2) the situation can now evolve into one of three variants: negotiated compromise, Assad’s military victory, and a large war with the participation of all the outside actors. Lavrov also made it clear that in spite of all the threats issued by NATO and Turkey, the US and EU are not ready for the third variant, the only question now is who will force whom to accept their terms at the negotiations concerning Syria’s fate; 3) Turkey, in spite of all of its threats, is unlikely to dare start a full-scale intervention in Syria now that Russian Aerospace Forces are deployed there.

1. “Without revealing too details, I’ll note that unlike those, including our US colleagues, who constantly demand an immediate ceasefire which is something that US allies in the region are against because they insist the question of ceasefire can be discussed only after Bashar Assad leaves, we have proposed to Washington a specific scenario which they have taken under consideration. Secretary of State Kerry has referred to it in his interview. I hope that our simple proposals will not take Washington too much time to consider.”

Having surrounded Aleppo with Assad and Iranian forces, Russia now holds a gun to the terrorists’ head and, addressing the terrorists’ panicking bosses, it listed several conditions for the negotiations. They are quite simple—call off your terrorists, leave Assad’s political opposition, and let them work out the details of constitutional reforms and, more cynically, of dividing Syria into spheres of influence while maintaining the country’s sovereignty and integrity. If the terms are not accepted, the encirclement will close, Aleppo will be cleared of terrorists, the border with Turkey taken under control—and then your militants will be deprived of your aid.

2. “The famous Russian scholar of the East, Vitaliy Naumkin, recently told me that he sees three possible scenarios for Syria: compromise in Geneva, military victory by Syria’s government forces, and a large war with direct participation by several outside powers. Do you agree with that assessment? If so, which of them seems most probable to you?
Lavrov: I agree, all of that is on the table. If the negotiations are not successful or they are not allowed to even begin, then the emphasis will be put on military solutions.”

Having agreed with Naumkin’s assessment, Lavrov made it understood that the only alternatives to a compromise in Geneva is a complete military victory by Assad or a full-scale war with NATO participation. Because both Turkey and Saudi Arabia underscore that they will send their forces into Syria only as part of a US-led coalition. That sounds menacing, but it actually means that they will not go into Syria without the US. Here one has to remember that both the US and NATO launch military interventions only against those who were weaker by a couple of orders of magnitude and could not inflict heavy losses. Russian Aerospace Forces’ presence in Syria radically changes the situation and is the main obstacle to an intervention. The “emphasis on military solutions” may be what they want, but words and actions are not the same thing.
3. (Answering the question concerning what Russia would do in the event of a full-scale Turkish invasion into Syria) “I don’t think that will happen, because small-scale provocations which I already mentioned (tent cities, fortifications 100-200m into Syrian territory several kilometers in length) are not the same as a full-scale invasion. I don’t think the US-led coalition which includes Turkey will allow such irrational plans to materialize…We have taken all the necessary security measures: our bombers no longer fly without fighter cover. We’ve deployed S-400s and other air defense systems, which guarantee the airspace used by our pilots will be protected.

Acknowledging that NATO and Turkey are issuing one threat after another, are conducting preparations for an invasion, commit minor border violations and—attention—are discussing with ISIS what to do next, as well as are preparing corridors between Kurdish forces in order to supply the militants, Lavrov is confident that in spite of all that Turks and their masters will not dare start a full-scale land war on Syria’s territory. He also implied his confidence is not baseless, but rather founded on the presence of Russian air defense systems. I believe that’s a wholly reasonable reason to be confident.

By calling spade a spade, Russia on the one hand grabbed the Western terrorists by the threat and warned them that a direct Turkish intervention in support of the terrorists will lead to losses, and on the other it is offering the US negotiations on its terms. Negotiations which are open to compromise on internal Syrian matters, but categorical when it comes to the principle of the matter: first the terrorists are expelled from Syria, then we decide Syria’s fate.

Lavrov made another important point which did not address a specific international issue but was universal in its character: the choice between sausage and honor. Remember these words, those of you gentlemen who criticize the contemporary Russian state, so that in the future you will not write nonsense and won’t be saying that you don’t understand Russia’s foreign policy principles:

“You could say that you want a piece of bread with sausage and jam with your tea because “who cares about Crimea and what’s happening to the Russians there or about the coup.” Or you choose a different path. I will never be in favor of entirely ignoring economic interests, the necessity to establish favorable conditions for our economic development and growth. A country like Russia cannot “spin like a weathervane” depending on what is desired by the world’s powers-that-be who believe they decide the fate of all countries and peoples on this planet.”

That’s why the “powers that be” want to destroy us. Just as they did during the tsarist and Soviet times. Even thought we are prepared for compromises among equals, we are not a weathervane and cannot be bought with sausage. Period.

13 posted on 02/13/2016 9:34:13 PM PST by amorphous
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: TigerClaws
Canadian Prof Michel Chossudovsky:

"Washington's strategy consists in spearheading a broader regional war by inciting Turkey, Saudi Arabia as well as Israel to do the "dirty work for us".

Until recently, Syrian Government Forces together with their allies (Russia, Iran, Hezbollah) have been confronting so-called "opposition rebels" largely composed of "moderate" terrorists and mercenaries, with US-NATO intelligence and special forces forces operating covertly within their ranks.

The Al Qaeda affiliated terrorists and the Islamic State (ISIS) forces are supported by US-NATO-Israel and their Persian Gulf GCC allies. Turkey and Saudi Arabia, in close liaison with Washington have played a central role in the recruitment, training and financing of the terrorists.

Sofar, this proxy war has unfolded without a direct confrontation between US-NATO allied forces and Syrian government forces, which are supported militarily by Russia and Iran.

A major transition is now occurring in the conduct of the war on Syria. The terrorists are being defeated by Syrian government forces with the support of Russia. The proxy war (under the formal banner of the "war on terrorism") has reached its climax.

The Syria Proxy War against the Islamic State (ISIS) Has Reached its Climax. Military Escalation, Towards a US-NATO Sponsored Ground Invasion?

14 posted on 02/13/2016 9:40:54 PM PST by amorphous
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Mariner

No, they are constrained by basing, infrastructure and logistics. It takes more than flying in a plane.
They certainly couldn’t bring in a mechanized division. They expect to sail the transports right past Istanbul?
They would be lucky to preserve the docks at Latakia, if they plan to supply it from the Baltic. That’s a long long trip right past all of NATO.
They certainly can’t fly them in over Turkish air space. They can maybe stage through Iran and over Iraq, but that will be very dangerous. Jordan and Saudi are too close.
They have to conquer Georgia or Azerbaijan or both, and both are hostile; then get the Armenians to play ball - maybe another hostile bunch- then they will have to build the currently near-nonexistent logistics - roads, depots - all the way through to the Turkish border, and then, a few months from now when theyve sorted all that out, then they can bring in their four divisions.

15 posted on 02/13/2016 9:57:58 PM PST by buwaya
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: buwaya
The Russians can fly the aircraft and logistics in. They have enormous airlift capacity.

One thing is apparent, we are going to find out.

16 posted on 02/13/2016 10:01:13 PM PST by Mariner (War Criminal #18 - Be The Leaderless Resistance)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Mariner

They have no way to fly them in to Syria/Latakia if nearly all the airspace they could traverse is hostile, and it will be.
And I doubt very much that they have the airlift capacity to do this. The US doesn’t.

17 posted on 02/13/2016 10:06:55 PM PST by buwaya
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Mariner

You severely overestimate Russian capabilities: their new airbase is almost within artillery range of the Turkish border, and Turkey has good air defense systems.

18 posted on 02/13/2016 10:13:11 PM PST by pierrem15 ("Massacrez-les, car le seigneur connait les siens")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: buwaya
" if nearly all the airspace they could traverse is hostile, and it will be."

Iran, Iraq and Syria have already given them overflight permission. They would come in over the Caspian.

19 posted on 02/13/2016 10:16:25 PM PST by Mariner (War Criminal #18 - Be The Leaderless Resistance)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

Lets fill'er up folks...
20 posted on 02/13/2016 10:16:31 PM PST by DoughtyOne (the Free Republic Caucus: what FReepers are thinking, 100s or 1000s of them. It's up to you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-40 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson