Russian missiles 'hit IS in Syria from Caspian'
Source: BBC
Russia has launched rocket strikes on Islamic State targets in Syria from its warships in the Caspian Sea, Russian Defence Minister Sergei Shoigu says.
Mr Shoigu was quoted by Russian media as saying four warships launched 26 sea-based cruise missiles on 11 targets, destroying them.
President Putin praised the Russian military, saying the targets were about 1,500km (932 miles) away.
Russia denies claims that its week-long strikes have hit non-IS targets.
Read more: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-34465425
bemildred
(90,061 posts)Edit: remember last Spring when Assad started withdrawing from E. Syria to the coastal strip? That was when this started, that was to get his forces out of the way of the coming offensive. I have long hoped that Syria would prove to be a honey-trap for takfiris, and it appears that Putin intends to make it so.
KoKo
(84,711 posts)The Russian air force may in some respects be behind its most advanced Western contemporaries, but it certainly has the capacity to mount an effective air campaign. So what then exactly is its mission in Syria?
It is here that there are perhaps the greatest differences between the Russian and US-led air campaigns.
A fundamental weakness afflicting the US and its allies is the absence of credible forces on the ground. Air power can achieve a lot in concert with troops to occupy and hold territory, but in the absence of ground power its impact is limited.
Not so for the Russians. The Syrian government army may not be what it was, having suffered serious losses and defections, but in local terms it is still a force to be reckoned with. Bolstered with new Russian equipment and now backed up by Russian air power, it could hold its own against most of the opposition forces.
Russia does not have the elaborate intelligence-gathering panoply of the US. But much of its targeting will be based upon tactical intelligence obtained from Syrian units on the ground.
This then is the key to Russia's strategy. It is to consolidate the Assad regime, to relieve the pressure points and to ensure that its ally remains a factor in any future diplomatic settlement.
To this end - and there are strong indications of this even from Russia's initial air strikes - Moscow will hit any opponents of the Syrian regime where necessary.
Russian air power is not there to roll back the opposition forces and enable the Assad regime to regain control over the large areas of the country that it has lost. It is about buying President Assad time; changing the regional and diplomatic calculations. And to this extent Russian air power could prove a decisive factor.
Wars never go as planned, Putin probably has several plans in mind. There is much to be said for flexibility about ones planning, things change.
I think that is the "not going well" version of Putins plans.
harun
(11,348 posts)Driving up the price of oil.
He is demonstrating Russia's equipment works.
He is demonstrating Russia will do what it wants, like the U.S. and doesn't need permissions.
Showing the Iraq and Iran regimes that Russia may be a better ally than the U.S. and will back them up if needed.
Shining a light on how dysfunctional the politics in the U.S. has become. Obama is running out the clock and Congress wouldn't pass a bill that says the sky is blue on Obama's watch.
bemildred
(90,061 posts)I can think of more.
Jesus Malverde
(10,274 posts)The Egyptians dictator might notice, that.
bemildred
(90,061 posts)Which may or may not be forthcoming, Russia doesn't export wheat unless domestic supply is sufficient, and the weather is iffy. The Syria mess started with food problems..
PeoViejo
(2,178 posts)US isn't the only one with precision guided munitions. Nothing like a little live-fire practice to get the home team pumped-up.
bemildred
(90,061 posts)pampango
(24,692 posts)bemildred
(90,061 posts)pampango
(24,692 posts)Pentagon officials say some 6,000 more bombing runs have been flown over both Iraq and Syria against the self-declared Islamic State, also known as ISIS or ISIL.
http://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2015/08/07/430151358/after-a-year-of-bombing-isis-u-s-campaign-shows-just-limited-gains
bemildred
(90,061 posts)Do we want to get ISIS or not?
Do we want to stem the refugee river or not?
bemildred
(90,061 posts)In early 2012, it was an anonymous patch of desert in the north of Jordan but by the end of 2013, it was a city of 156,000 Syrian refugees, the fourth biggest population center in the country.
Now it has shrunk to almost one third of its former size as Syrians desperate for a better future migrate to other parts of the Middle East or attempt the dangerous journey to Europe.
For those who made a successful business amid the despair, depopulation has hit them hard. Shadi Arour, a refugee from the southern Syrian city of Daraa says his business, which sells candies, nuts and cigarettes, has fallen by 75% in the last two years. Before there was movement, people, now we stop during the week, people only buy tea and cigarettes, and the only traffic is on Fridays. Almost one out of two shops has closed, he says.
Arours stall is in the camps main thoroughfare, nicknamed the Champs-Elysées after a glamorous avenue in Paris, where camp residents could buy anything from food to televisions and bridal gowns.
http://time.com/4063674/zaatari-camps-empty-syria/
Jesus Malverde
(10,274 posts)Israel is blocked, Syria and Iraq war zones. Is Saudi Arabia giving them flights to turkey? Interesting...
Igel
(35,300 posts)They transit Syria. It's not like the entire thing is a war zone. Parts aren't and can be transited nicely to get to either Turkey or Lebanon. There's always Latakia.
bemildred
(90,061 posts)We believe Russia has the wrong strategy. They continue to hit targets that are not ISIL. This is a fundamental mistake, Carter said, using one of the acronyms for the Islamic State.
In the past, the Obama administration has publicly held out hope however faint that Moscow might cooperate in the military campaign against the Islamic State.
In his most hard-line comments to date about Russia, Carter rejected the possibility of teaming up with the Russians in that regard. He said the Pentagon still wanted to talk with Moscow about finding ways to manage the crowded airspace above Syria and avoid any hostile or inadvertent encounters. Thats it, he said flatly.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/syrian-activists-russian-air-strikes-pound-rebel-zones-in-latest-blows/2015/10/07/fb3be168-5cf3-4e38-98f3-f6b75ed53871_story.html
Jesus Malverde
(10,274 posts)pampango
(24,692 posts)They are pretty much all Muslims down there! What could go wrong? Except for what just happened in Kunduz. That is an example of when it would have been better to 'return with their bombs' even if it increased the that 75% figure to 76%.
It will be interesting to find out how often if Russian planes return with their bombs.
Even a 25% "bomb rate" still amounts to 1,500 missions, hardly an inconsequential number.
bemildred
(90,061 posts)Nato leaders meet today in Brussels to respond to Russias intervention in the Syrian conflict. It is unlikely that they can reverse the perception and reality that the Russians have left them, and specifically the US, on the sidelines in this crucial battleground. In a few days, the Russian intervention notably its eye-catching deployment of Cruise missiles from the Caspian Sea, nearly a thousand miles away has changed the balance of the conflict.
As Robert Fox observes in his commentary today, the Russian action, allied to a fresh offensive by President Assads forces and their Shiite allies, has begun to reverse the Syrian Armys recent setbacks.
In response, Nato is taking a very tough line on the integrity of the Baltic States and on Russian incursions into Turkish airspace. The Nato Secretary General, Jens Stoltenberg, says the alliance is prepared to defend its allies. As a response to the Russian air strikes this is woefully inadequate. Yet the problem for Nato, as Nick Clegg points out on this page, is that its air strikes are not in support of ground forces. And its support of the Free Syrian Army and other non-IS opponents of President Assad has been dismally unproductive and resulted in some US arms falling into the possession of IS. The US and Nato have done nothing to prevent the genocide of the Yazidis by IS more than a year ago or the rape of Palmyra. By contrast, the Russian approach is at least coherent.
The priority, as Mr Clegg also says, must be to redouble efforts to secure some common diplomatic ground between the Western allies and other parties, including Russia and Iran. This may be unpalatable but it is necessary if we are not to have to air campaigns in Syria operating at cross purposes and necessary to address the root causes of this conflict.
It may also be necessary to swallow the unpalatable need to leave the odious President Assad in power for now in order to secure some settlement which would involve him leaving office in the medium term. The Russian president has already offered the US and Nato the option of a grand alliance against IS; we should reopen those negotiations.
http://www.standard.co.uk/comment/comment/evening-standard-comment-nato-s-dilemma-in-face-of-russian-airstrikes-a3085676.html
ozone_man
(4,825 posts)Our impotence at getting rid of them was most likely planned, looking the other way as Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Qatar funded ISIS.
Now it's time to see how getting rid of ISIS is achieved by those who actually want to get rid of them.
bemildred
(90,061 posts)At least the parts he wants.
And we can't do Jack Shit about it without starting WWIII.
And even that will be hard to do without our friends in the EU, who like what Putin is doing at the moment just fine.
And we don't have a legal leg to stand on, and Putin does.
uawchild
(2,208 posts)And here is what our Nato ally was up to just now...
"Turkey Dragged A Kurdish Man Behind An Armored Vehicle. Then It Got Worse.
The images reignite doubts about the government's fight against Kurds."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/turkey-dragged-kurdish-man-video_56142087e4b022a4ce5fc79e
--------
ISIS, Assad, Turkey, Saudia Arabia, Shiites, Sunnis --- all one steaming pile of ethnic and religious hatred.
I honestly think its beyond our ability to straighten this mess out.
PeoViejo
(2,178 posts)Just like the good old days.
KoKo
(84,711 posts)The clashes have squelched any hope of a peace process between Ankara and the PKK in the near future.
Turkish President Recep Erdogan's allies suffered a stinging defeat in recent elections, as some typically conservative Kurdish voters joined with secular Turks to rebuke Erdogan's party, the AKP. Erdogan has since used the specter of the PKK to wage war against the Kurdish region of the country, in a move that Turkey watchers say is intended to win him votes from ultra-nationalist Turks and fracture the nascent coalition of urban Turks and rural Kurds that routed him at the polls. After launching his assault, Erdogan called for new elections, which will be held Nov. 1.
Max Hoffman, a Turkey analyst at the Center for American Progress, told The WorldPost he believes the controversy over the images spells trouble for Erdogan's hopes to bolster anti-Kurdish sentiment and win a November victory.
"While many Kurds will tell you this sort of thing happens all the time and just doesnt get out, images do tend to take on more power than mere verbal/written accounts," Hoffman wrote in an email. "I think this is a meaningful moment."
Jesus Malverde
(10,274 posts)The optics aren't good for a nato member.
uawchild
(2,208 posts)The ethnic Turkish government is afraid of breakaway tendencies in its eastern provinces from ethnic Kurd majorities there.
Though both groups are sunni, Kurds and Turks have different languages and cultural histories.
NickB79
(19,233 posts)The US can't operate precision drone strikes without blowing up hospitals, weddings and sheep herders; I seriously doubt the Russians will do any better.
Jesus Malverde
(10,274 posts)these strikes are hitting civilians.
7962
(11,841 posts)No real need to use cruise missiles when there is no credible AA available to the rebels, so this is just real life practice for the Navy
Sunlei
(22,651 posts)refugees.
coyote
(1,561 posts)This is a humiliating blow to the US. Looks like the emperor has no clothes
Sunlei
(22,651 posts)coyote
(1,561 posts)Assad asked for Putin to come in there to cleanup the mess the US made. It looks to me that there is a new sheriff in the Middle East and it certainly isn't us. This is the end of the petrodollar.
Sunlei
(22,651 posts)bemildred
(90,061 posts)7962
(11,841 posts)frizzled
(509 posts)nt
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)Russia hasn't done shit but blow stuff up and try and prop up their dictator. If that's what you call winning, I'm glad my emperor has no clothes.
frizzled
(509 posts)nt
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)between al assad and isis, I hope they kill each other. But I see you're one of those putin lovers who think swinging a dick around is foreign policy.
frizzled
(509 posts)At least Putin has some clarity about desirable outcomes here, and that doesn't include a failed state.
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)who wants us to stay out of that clusterfuck in Syria? Sure, cupcake. Whatever you say (as I back away from the insane person). Try not using words when you have no idea what they mean. It makes you look foolish.
Jesus Malverde
(10,274 posts)A failed Syria really only benefits one state in the region. It's the white and blue elephant in the room.
http://www.mccain.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/floor-statements?ID=e460be36-c488-e7de-8c38-64c3751adfce
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)Israel for the fact that al assad was a murderous dictator, that his own people turned against him (perhaps from his killing so many of their friends and families) and that the US and its allies are so concerned about civilian casualties they have let isis run fucking wild in Syria. That's all the fault of Israel. And you expect to be taken seriously. Sometimes this place is embarrassing. This is one of those times.
ozone_man
(4,825 posts)Iraqi militia, Iran, Hezbollah, what is left of Assad's army.
You are right, the air campaign alone won't do it.
Sunlei
(22,651 posts)bemildred
(90,061 posts)Cruise missiles are a very expensive way to blow things up, but they are great for filling the Rubes with "Shock and Awe".
Sunlei
(22,651 posts)If Iran and Iraq authorized and allowed that, we should pull out all support to Iraq and let Iran be turned into slag lands.
bemildred
(90,061 posts)Their attitude is that order needs to be restored, and that it is already a catastrophe and needs to be cleaned up. The Opposition can surrender, leave, or die where they stand, and collateral damage will just be denied.
Comrade Grumpy
(13,184 posts)...because why?
Do you have the same concerns about US cruise missiles?
Sunlei
(22,651 posts)They still may if Putin has another 'mistake' and takes out another passenger plane or a major city in another country he sends missiles over.
bemildred
(90,061 posts)Swell thinking.
Sunlei
(22,651 posts)main seaport and the one main airport. That is what Russia is interested in, air port and sea port use.
Helping Assad kill off the rest of the syrian people (who oppose Assad) is just a nice realistic training exercise for Putin's troops. Assad probably doesn't even have to pay for the 'help', just promise that seaport and airport use in future. When this is 'over' do you think Assad will invite back the 2 million refugees to come back 'home'?
Putin will start back on his "Ukraine" with those same troops and weapons, someday soon.
bemildred
(90,061 posts)What he is going to do, I think, is cement the Shi'ia Crescent into place more or less permanently as a buffer for his Southern Borders, thus protecting permanently the soft underbelly fo the Eurasian heartland.
And it looks like China will join in. I was skeptical about that, but it looks like it may happen:
Putin's boost in battle against ISIS: China preparing to 'team up with Russia in Syria'
http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/610286/China-preparing-to-team-up-with-Russia-in-Syria-Boost-for-Putin-in-battle-against-ISIS
Sunlei
(22,651 posts)in 'Assad's' Sea port.
One would think if IS was truly a "powerful force", they would be in Russia now creating local chaos. Russia's border is totally porous by land and sea. One would think IS would be using their youtube and beheading Russians, but its weird how they are not.
I am not sure what is with that? unless IS is an Assad backed gov. creation???
bemildred
(90,061 posts)Thanks, I'd been looking for something I could give some credence to about the Chinese. It seemed far-fetched to me, but now I see that they think they have a stake too.
I don't think Assad will stay, I'm not sure he wants to stay.
Putin has his clients in place in the C. Asian states, that is what keeps the jihadis out. They are well paid for their service. Best buddies.
And the other advantage he has is popular support. That is very important when outsiders want to come in and make trouble. Edit: an advantage Assad did not have BTW, and it will be interesting to see if Putin can fix that in Syria, I would think its risky business, which is one reason I would not occupy most of it. The Baathists are not popular outside their home turf, and I doubt the Kurds will accept Baathist rule again either without a fight.
As far as ISIS, if they work for Putin, I'd say they picked the wrong boss, because I do believe he means them harm.
Jesus Malverde
(10,274 posts)Interesting observation as to the goals.
bemildred
(90,061 posts)Jesus Malverde
(10,274 posts)Series of bombs in southwest China kills at least seven
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/09/30/us-china-blast-idUSKCN0RU17420150930
bemildred
(90,061 posts)Comrade Grumpy
(13,184 posts)Things are becoming clearer.
Your logic is impressive. You seem to be saying that if an errant Russian cruise missile fell on Tehran or Baghdad (they are only overflying Iran and Iraq), your Israeli buddies would destroy Iran. That really makes no sense at all.
And speaking of passenger airliners shot out of the sky, let's not forget:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Air_Flight_655
Iran Air Flight 655 was an Iran Air civilian passenger flight from Tehran to Dubai. On 3 July 1988, the aircraft operating on this route was shot down by the United States Navy guided missile cruiser USS Vincennes under the command of William C. Rogers III. The incident took place in Iranian airspace, over Iran's territorial waters in the Persian Gulf, and on the flight's usual flight path. The aircraft, an Airbus A300 B2-203, was destroyed by SM-2MR surface-to-air missiles fired from Vincennes. All 290 on board, including 66 children and 16 crew, died.[1] The cruiser Vincennes had entered Iranian territorial waters after one of its helicopters drew warning fire from Iranian speedboats operating within Iranian territorial limits.[2][3]
According to the United States government, the crew incorrectly identified the Iranian Airbus A300 as an attacking F-14A Tomcat fighter, a plane made in the United States and operated at that time by only two forces worldwide, the United States Navy and the Islamic Republic of Iran Air Force. While the Iranian F-14s had been supplied by manufacturer Grumman in an air-to-air configuration only in the 1970s,[4][5] the crew of the Vincennes had been briefed when entering the region that the Iranian F-14s carried unguided bombs as well as Maverick missiles and unguided rockets.[6] The Vincennes crew made ten attempts to contact the crew of the flight on military and civilian radio frequencies, but received no response.[7] The International Civil Aviation Organization said that the flight crew should have been monitoring the civilian frequency.[8][9][10]
According to the Iranian government, Vincennes negligently shot down the civilian aircraft: the airliner was making IFF squawks in Mode III (not Mode II used by Iranian military planes), a signal that identified it as a civilian craft.[11][12] The event generated a great deal of criticism of the United States amongst those who were able to learn of it. Some analysts blamed the captain of Vincennes, who had entered Iran's waters, for reckless and aggressive behavior in a tense and dangerous environment.[13][7]
The United States government did not formally apologize to Iran.[14] In 1996, the United States and Iran reached a settlement at the International Court of Justice which included the statement "...the United States recognized the aerial incident of 3 July 1988 as a terrible human tragedy and expressed deep regret over the loss of lives caused by the incident...".[15] As part of the settlement, the United States did not admit legal liability but agreed to pay on an ex gratia basis US$61.8 million, amounting to $213,103.45 per passenger, in compensation to the families of the Iranian victims.
Iran Air continues to use flight number 655 on the Tehran to Dubai route as a memorial to the victims. This event ranks eighth among the deadliest disasters in aviation history; the incident retains the highest death toll of any aviation incident in the Persian Gulf.
Sunlei
(22,651 posts)will not take to much 'crap' from any ME power or country before they fight back Ferociously.
uawchild
(2,208 posts)from your post: "If Iran and Iraq authorized and allowed that, we should pull out all support to Iraq and let Iran be turned into slag lands."
Um, if we pull out all support to Iraq, how would we influence their behavior? Won't pulling out all support to Iraq create yet another power vacuum in the region to be exploited by even worse extremists?
bemildred
(90,061 posts)If we leave, that will be it.
Purveyor
(29,876 posts)bemildred
(90,061 posts)Purveyor
(29,876 posts)bemildred
(90,061 posts)I saw the Charlie Rose interview and the UN speech ...
Violated my usual rule and watched for a while.
Purveyor
(29,876 posts)geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)frizzled
(509 posts)With promising results so far.
bemildred
(90,061 posts)BEIRUT Russian missiles fired from Caspian Sea warships traveled more than 900 miles to strike targets in Syria on Wednesday as Syrian government forces opened a ground offensive into areas that include rebel factions, officials said.
The bombardment marked the first naval salvos in Russias week-old military intervention and another sharp escalation of Moscows firepower in Syrias multi-faction civil war.
A map from Russias Defense Ministry showed the path of the cruise missiles crossing Iran and Iraq which would apparently require coordination from both nations and draw them indirectly into the Russian military intervention as gateways for attacks.
Like Moscow, Iran is a key backer of Syrias embattled President Bashar al-Assad. Iraqs leadership has close ties with Iran, but also depends on support from the United States and Western allies.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/syrian-activists-russian-air-strikes-pound-rebel-zones-in-latest-blows/2015/10/07/fb3be168-5cf3-4e38-98f3-f6b75ed53871_story.html
Comrade Grumpy
(13,184 posts)I can just imagine the coordination needed:
"Hey, we're gonna shoot some cruise missiles over your territory and into Syria. Don't do anything."
"Okay."
7962
(11,841 posts)bemildred
(90,061 posts)pampango
(24,692 posts)in naval power - you might as well use them now that you finally have something anywhere near the Caspian Sea that needs a missile targeted at it. Those ships are destined to grow old and rust in the Caspian Sea. This way they get a little 'excitement'.
Monk06
(7,675 posts)middle east and the Levant under complete control and within the national boundaries of Russia and Iran
The area of the Caspian occupies an area of 143,244 mi²
The Great Lakes on the other hand is a fresh water system and has no strategic value. The Lakes occupy an area of 94,249.9 mi²
The Caspian is an inland sea for all intents and purposes which is out of navigational range of US warships.
Any engagement of the Russian Caspian fleet by US warships would automatically be an act of war.
Monk06
(7,675 posts)from asserting international influence let alone challenging US military dominance.
Guess that idea is permanently fucked.
Anyone who watches cartoons would know how that would turn out
bemildred
(90,061 posts)Last edited Thu Oct 8, 2015, 02:32 AM - Edit history (1)
History is full of people who met their match because they got swelled heads and didn't know when to stop and enjoy their winnings and leave other people alone.
happyslug
(14,779 posts)The Map cuts off the Persian Gulf, but it clearly shows the Persian Gulf is within range of Russian Cruise missiles from the Caspian sea. Cruise missiles use a combination of GPS AND ground navigation radar to get to their targets. Iran is a mountainous country, so it is possible to fly cruise missiles on a zig zag course around those mountains so the mountains block US Radar till the missiles are over the Persian Gulf itself (By which time it may be to late to do anything about the missiles).
Remember the Caspian Sea is a SEA not a LAKE. Under international law that is an important difference. Any country that borders any sea has the right to sail its ships within 12 miles of any other country's borders. With lakes the limit is the line between one's one border across the lake. i.e on that map Russia could NOT sail it ships further south then where the word "Caspian Sea" appears on the Caspian Sea. That is a HUGE difference for f the US attacks Iran, Russia does NOT have to have Iranian permission to sail its ships to be off the coast of Iran. The US can NOT object for Iran does NOT have to give permission and thus such a Russian move is NOT an Act of War on the part of Russia against the US in such a scenario.
Yes, this has implications more then just ISIS, the Persian Gulf and the Defence of Iran are also factors.
GreatGazoo
(3,937 posts)We are getting pushed out rapidly now. Russia will soon start bombing inside Iraq.
"We believe that this center will develop in the near future to be a joint operation command to lead the war against Daesh in Iraq," said Zamili, using a derogatory Arabic acronym for Islamic State, which is also known as ISIS or ISIL.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/10/07/us-mideast-crisis-iraq-russia-idUSKCN0S112120151007
Adrahil
(13,340 posts)Those assholes perpetrated the worst international blunder in American history. And that's sayin' somethin'.
MowCowWhoHow III
(2,103 posts)Washington (CNN) A number of cruise missiles launched from a Russian ship and aimed at targets in Syria have crashed in Iran, two U.S. officials told CNN Thursday.
Monitoring by U.S. military and intelligence assets has concluded that at least four missiles crashed as they flew over Iran. One official said there may be casualties, but another official said this is not yet known.
It's unclear where in Iran the missiles landed. The Russian ships have been positioned in the south Caspian Sea, meaning the likely flight path for missiles into Syria would cross over both Iran and Iraq.
The Russians have been firing a relatively new cruise missile called "Kaliber," using it for the first time in combat.
http://edition.cnn.com/2015/10/08/politics/russian-missiles-syria-landed-iran/index.html