Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

The Limits of Russia's Air Power Exposed


Claire.

Recommended Posts

On 8/30/2016 at 6:23 AM, Leto_loves_melange said:

Yeah the rules of engagement for American pilots were very restrictive. Negating American airpower to the point that it was little more than a public relations junket. One has to question why. were the RoE that restrictive in A'stan and Iraq? i don't think so. So why were they in Syria? And how could an inferior Russian force achieve so much in so short a period...

I think I'm representative of a lot of informed Americans and can say that we are CLUELESS what this president is planning or why.  He basically does as he likes, asks no one and forces his opposition to use the courts to stop him (eventually).  As to the inferior force accomplishing so much, have they?  Sure, they've destroyed a lot of buildings and killed many rebels but they've probably killed as many - maybe more - civilians in the bargain.  Assad is still entrenched, true, but the war goes on and on and... well, you get the point.  Russian air power was supposed to be a game changer that brought a swifter end to this meat grinder.  It hasn't turned out that way yet though.  I'll consider Putin to have gotten serious about ending this thing when I some air borne and Motor Rifle divisions being brought on task.  I think he is content for now to fight this on the cheap and use air power to prop up Assad.  If Obama had bombed Assad's military infrastructure to rubble just after the chemical weapons use then Putin would probably have written off Assad altogether.  I seriously doubt Obama would have refused Putin the continued use of Tartus.  Mind you, I'm not saying the outcome of such bombing would have meant a better solution, just a different one.  I don't believe there IS any good solution to this blood bath, in fact I'm not sure there ever was.  We have a very savage, ancient hatred by religious fanatics who are armed with modern weapons and supplied by others of the same beliefs as well as the whole conflict being used by geopolitical power players to make gains by proxy.  It sounds like an efficient way to stumble into another global war.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
3 hours ago, and then said:

I think I'm representative of a lot of informed Americans and can say that we are CLUELESS what this president is planning or why.  He basically does as he likes, asks no one and forces his opposition to use the courts to stop him (eventually).  As to the inferior force accomplishing so much, have they?  Sure, they've destroyed a lot of buildings and killed many rebels but they've probably killed as many - maybe more - civilians in the bargain.  Assad is still entrenched, true, but the war goes on and on and... well, you get the point.  Russian air power was supposed to be a game changer that brought a swifter end to this meat grinder.  It hasn't turned out that way yet though.  I'll consider Putin to have gotten serious about ending this thing when I some air borne and Motor Rifle divisions being brought on task.  I think he is content for now to fight this on the cheap and use air power to prop up Assad.  If Obama had bombed Assad's military infrastructure to rubble just after the chemical weapons use then Putin would probably have written off Assad altogether.  I seriously doubt Obama would have refused Putin the continued use of Tartus.  Mind you, I'm not saying the outcome of such bombing would have meant a better solution, just a different one.  I don't believe there IS any good solution to this blood bath, in fact I'm not sure there ever was.  We have a very savage, ancient hatred by religious fanatics who are armed with modern weapons and supplied by others of the same beliefs as well as the whole conflict being used by geopolitical power players to make gains by proxy.  It sounds like an efficient way to stumble into another global war.  

Well I think most Americans and the rest of the world are probably just as bewildered as you and I as to why American foreign policy has placed such a high emphasis on pleasing the undemocratic leaders of Saudi Arabia a Turkey above a clear and coherent policy on Syria.

Totally agree with you... America has a military advantage over the rest of the world including Russia and if Russian results in Syria have been positive to date one can only imagine what true American resolve could have achieved. Russia has only tipped the balance in the regimes favour like you said so I take it that both sides are stalling the war. 

Obama needs a foreign policy legacy and Putin needs his bases. But just so many players to please must make any future agreement temporary at best. 

Chemical weapons were used by both sides and that is what saved Assad. Russia convincing Assad to destroy his stock piles and Turkey getting caught out faking a chemical attack turned into a farce letting the Russians into Syria and prolonging the war as you have pointed out. All very Byzantine...

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/2/2016 at 5:34 AM, Silver_Lyre said:

Link in Russian is a cop out. 

Right from the horse's mouth. Not my problem, Russian official are giving interviews in Russian...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/29/2016 at 0:06 PM, Taun said:

Don't you just hate it when you rattle the saber... and the saber breaks...

Somebody should frame that and send a million copies to that kimmy jong undone kid, then drop a few copies off in Beijing too with the words right under it saying  什么   Dude !   什么   ! , (  wtf dude what gives! )

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9 September 2016 at 4:06 AM, bmk1245 said:

Right from the horse's mouth. Not my problem, Russian official are giving interviews in Russian...

k.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 29/08/2016 at 9:57 PM, DarkHunter said:

It's easy to have more results when instead of requiring precision bombing .

 

Kind of funny since many casualties from Drone strikes in Pakistan by the US were not the intended target. Just an example.

 

https://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/2014/01/23/more-than-2400-dead-as-obamas-drone-campaign-marks-five-years/

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.