In Syria

[Roman Alymov]

47 minutes ago, Daan said:

I find it interesting that Israel always seems to wait until the ship has delivered its goods onto the quay, instead of sinking it in transit. This latter option would probably provoke Iranian retaliation against Israeli owned shipping.

As for me, the simplest explanation is transportation (both by plane or by ship) is controlled by Iranians, and Israel intelligence got no access to this data until cargo is offloaded. From this moment, locals (heavily infiltrated by US intelligence) got access to the data and Israelis are informed.

I think we in Russia should learn from Israelis. Western weapons offloaded in Ukraine  is quite logical target.

[Mighty_Zuk]

Israel does target weapons when still at sea. But the problem is that Iran typically smuggles its systems in a way that prevents Israel from attacking them. For example in passenger planes or just generally near civilians. They know Israel will avoid killing civilians even if it means Hezbollah gets another shipment of drone components.

If and when there is the liberty, Israel would rather act when the maximum effort was already put in by Iran. Why destroy a new production facility if it wasn't completed yet, let alone equipped with machines? Why destroy a new assembly line if there's still work to be done on it.

Iranians are try-hards and we need to exploit it to the maximum.

[Daan]

The containers were still burning today:

Also interesting is the route the Iranian ships take to reach Syria:

 

Edited December 29, 2021 by Daan

[Daan]

More detailed imagery:

[sunday]

On 12/28/2021 at 8:12 PM, Daan said:

I find it interesting that Israel always seems to wait until the ship has delivered its goods onto the quay, instead of sinking it in transit. This latter option would probably provoke Iranian retaliation against Israeli owned shipping.

Could be there a legal reason for that? Avoiding acts that could be interpreted as high-seas piracy, perhaps?

[Daan]

It probably has to do with fears of mutual escalation and undesired attention from and posturing by outside powers. Currently, the conflict between Israel and Iran receives little coverage in the world's media even though it has involved thousands of individual actions over the last few years. Sinking a merchant ship, a rather unusual event, may push the other to make a similar move, leading to a steepening of the vicious spiral detrimental to both, thus a more profound lose-lose outcome in their prisoner's dilemma.

In addition, the world's attention would be drawn to the conflict, such as that of the US and Russia. The party sinking the ships may be held to account, even if only by condemnation. Some early news items and commentators hinted at a prior Russo-Israeli agreement over the strike or at least Russian acquiescence, which took place surprisingly close to Russian facilities. For reasons of Russia not being overly charmed by diverging Iranian policy objectives in Syria and Iran's pathological tendencies to destabilize a country that is gradually coming out of a ruinous civil war. As this strike with its prolonged fire in the aftermath drew more attention, today we learned that Russia did not interfere 'because of a Russian plane landing at its nearby airbase'  at the time of the strike i.e. unwanted posturing by a non-involved power from the Israeli perspective. If Russia is further publicly embarrassed by Israeli air strikes on its de facto protectorate, it may not be so cooperative next time or even actively oppose Israeli actions. Therefore, Israeli attacks near the Russian base areas in Latakia have been rather rare thus far. The targets of the recent strike must have been judged as high value.

 

 

Edited December 29, 2021 by Daan

[Mighty_Zuk]

15 hours ago, sunday said:

Could be there a legal reason for that? Avoiding acts that could be interpreted as high-seas piracy, perhaps?

Maximizing Iranian efforts before their systems are gone, and avoiding an ecological disaster similar to the one that happened a few months ago when an Iranian ship started spilling oil along Israel's coastline.

[Roman Alymov]

Two PzIVs on Syrian training ground

https://ren.tv/video/embed/932184?fbclid=IwAR00lk0_3Zcf_NbnFrll9or15FGJtg5kEL4kcy6aR8O0lKqO7OnzFSUWlfM#autoplay=1

[Dark_Falcon]

I think these Bradleys should be in Poland, not Syria, but what do I know?

 

 

[Roman Alymov]

27 minutes ago, Dark_Falcon said:

I think these Bradleys should be in Poland, not Syria, but what do I know?

 

 

Pro-Russians expect attack on Russian contingent in Syria as part of Ukraine events. 

[Dark_Falcon]

3 minutes ago, Roman Alymov said:

Pro-Russians expect attack on Russian contingent in Syria as part of Ukraine events. 

Using IFVs for that would be stupid, even if the task force commander foolishly said "There’s nothing in this theater that could stand against this company of Bradleys."  Because he ought to know how badly an IFV company would fare if attacked by Mi-28s and SU-25s.

To be clear, I don't think anything will happen between the US and Russia in Syria but if it did bringing Bradleys into range of Russian ground attack aircraft would be utterly foolish.

Article, for reference:

Additional armored vehicle capability arrives in Northeast Syria

[Roman Alymov]

1 hour ago, Dark_Falcon said:

Using IFVs for that would be stupid, even if the task force commander foolishly said "There’s nothing in this theater that could stand against this company of Bradleys."  Because he ought to know how badly an IFV company would fare if attacked by Mi-28s and SU-25s.

To be clear, I don't think anything will happen between the US and Russia in Syria but if it did bringing Bradleys into range of Russian ground attack aircraft would be utterly foolish.

Article, for reference:

Additional armored vehicle capability arrives in Northeast Syria

Have i said Bradleys would be used in direct attack? No, of course there is plenty of other options (even simple naval and air blockade) - and Bradleys are just tools to take the ground lost by Syrian Gov and Russian forces.

[Dark_Falcon]

23 minutes ago, Roman Alymov said:

Have i said Bradleys would be used in direct attack? No, of course there is plenty of other options (even simple naval and air blockade) - and Bradleys are just tools to take the ground lost by Syrian Gov and Russian forces.

Fair enough.  I'm not annoyed with you; I'm annoyed with the task force commander who made such a cartoonish statement. I try to be a professional at my job and words as unprofessional as his annoy me.

[R011]

4 hours ago, Dark_Falcon said:

Using IFVs for that would be stupid, even if the task force commander foolishly said "There’s nothing in this theater that could stand against this company of Bradleys."  Because he ought to know how badly an IFV company would fare if attacked by Mi-28s and SU-25s.

To be clear, I don't think anything will happen between the US and Russia in Syria but if it did bringing Bradleys into range of Russian ground attack aircraft would be utterly foolish.

Article, for reference:

Additional armored vehicle capability arrives in Northeast Syria

Russian aircraft would bneed to get past the USAF before they could dominate ground forces.

[Roman Alymov]

Trilateral talks were held in Moscow between the Defense Ministers of the Russian Federation, the Syrian Arab Republic and the Republic of Turkey.

Ways to resolve the Syrian crisis and the refugee problem, joint efforts to combat extremist groups in Syria were discussed.

Following the meeting, the sides noted the constructive nature of the dialogue held in this format and the need to continue it in the interests of further stabilization of the situation in the Arab Republic and the region as a whole.

Yandex-translated from https://t.me/mod_russia/22993

[Mighty_Zuk]

 

 

[glenn239]

MZ, what's this about? 

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/world/jordan-king-warns-of-red-lines-in-jerusalem-as-netanyahu-returns-to-office/ar-AA15KfP9?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=32a88c2990234baeb7c5e23a366276e5

 

King Abdullah II told CNN’s Becky Anderson in an exclusive interview this month that there is “concern” in his country about those in Israel trying to push for changes to his custodianship of the Muslim and Christian holy sites in Israeli-occupied East Jerusalem, warning that he has “red lines.”

[Mighty_Zuk]

11 hours ago, glenn239 said:

MZ, what's this about? 

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/world/jordan-king-warns-of-red-lines-in-jerusalem-as-netanyahu-returns-to-office/ar-AA15KfP9?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=32a88c2990234baeb7c5e23a366276e5

 

King Abdullah II told CNN’s Becky Anderson in an exclusive interview this month that there is “concern” in his country about those in Israel trying to push for changes to his custodianship of the Muslim and Christian holy sites in Israeli-occupied East Jerusalem, warning that he has “red lines.”

I think ties with Jordan are important, but their custodianship of these sites has proven detrimental, stoking public disorder rather than averting it. Therefore it should be cancelled. Additionally, I believe access of foreign forces to Israel should be given to truly friendly nations like the US and western Europe. Jordan is most definitely not on friendly terms with Israel.

However, there is no indication of the status quo changing any time soon. If the status quo were to change, I'd suggest Jordan offer Israel something to make the relations more mutually beneficial.

[glenn239]

Huh, I didn't realize Isreali-Jordanian relations had slid, and look to continue to slide.  

[Mighty_Zuk]

2 hours ago, glenn239 said:

Huh, I didn't realize Isreali-Jordanian relations had slid, and look to continue to slide.  

They didn't change, and that's the problem. The relations were always cold, with Jordan antagonizing Israel while Israel basically keeps it alive with water supply and military support. 

Relations need to evolve, and if one side refuses to let them evolve, they need to devolve.

Israeli trade with the UAE in just the first year of normalization vastly surpassed Jordan's, and did far more to deal with the Palestinian issue than Jordan, which arguably has only caused harm in that regard.

[Strannik]

Turkish Syrian rapprochement is coming and US better get on this train quickly...

https://warontherocks.com/2023/01/a-new-path-for-syrias-kurds/

Edited January 18, 2023 by Strannik

[Strannik]

New missile attack against [illegal] U.S. base in Syria - no casualties reported.

Previous drone attack (blamed on "Iran backed forces") killed American contractor, injured troops.

US carried out airstrikes in response.

[Josh]

3 hours ago, Strannik said:

New missile attack against [illegal] U.S. base in Syria - no casualties reported.

Previous drone attack (blamed on "Iran backed forces") killed American contractor, injured troops.

US carried out airstrikes in response.

Kinda like all those missile attacks against the [illegal] Russian bases in Ukraine.

[Strannik]

An addition for "All you need to know about UN " collection - UN deputy secretary Farhan Haq gets owned by a journo and shows himself to be a complete goon.

 

Edited March 30, 2023 by Strannik

[sunday]

Ah, the precious "rules-based order"...