• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Team Obama Moves US Naval Forces Closer to Syria.....

The S-300 is a powerful system indeed, however;
a. It takes at least few months to get it and its team to a fully operational stage e.g training, checking the systems, practice, etc...
b. It would be manned by Syrian soldiers and officers - from personal experience & knowledge of the capabilities of the Arab personnel - I doubt that when needed they would be able to provide an adequate and professional response.
c. These systems would be one of the first targets in any operation conducted by the US navy/air-force, there are simply too few of them to produce any meaningful result against the US forces (It might have been a different story if it was the Israeli, French or British air-force/navy though)

Frankly, I can try and guess what will happen next, simply from analyzing the general info I get from various open and closed sources... but at this point it seems that few world players already decided that al-Assad must go - and it will happen sooner or later.

But most importantly Syria and the ME as we knew them up until 2 -3 years ago, is no more.

Cheers,
Fallen.
 
The S-300 is a powerful system indeed, however;
a. It takes at least few months to get it and its team to a fully operational stage e.g training, checking the systems, practice, etc...
b. It would be manned by Syrian soldiers and officers - from personal experience & knowledge of the capabilities of the Arab personnel - I doubt that when needed they would be able to provide an adequate and professional response.
c. These systems would be one of the first targets in any operation conducted by the US navy/air-force, there are simply too few of them to produce any meaningful result against the US forces (It might have been a different story if it was the Israeli, French or British air-force/navy though)

Frankly, I can try and guess what will happen next, simply from analyzing the general info I get from various open and closed sources... but at this point it seems that few world players already decided that al-Assad must go - and it will happen sooner or later.

But most importantly Syria and the ME as we knew them up until 2 -3 years ago, is no more.

Cheers,
Fallen.


Heya FA.....Yep that don't count the 200s they have or all the other Anti Air Missiles. Nor the Pantsyr's 1 and 2s or greater to protect those S 300 systems. They will have round to protect them either. So the response time will be made up for.

Pantsir-S1_Pantsyr-S1_air_defense_missile_system_anti-aircraft_gun_sa-22_greyhound_Russia_Russian_army_006.jpg


0.jpg


 
Heya FA.....Yep that don't count the 200s they have or all the other Anti Air Missiles. Nor the Pantsyr's 1 and 2s or greater to protect those S 300 systems. They will have round to protect them either. So the response time will be made up for.

Pantsir-S1_Pantsyr-S1_air_defense_missile_system_anti-aircraft_gun_sa-22_greyhound_Russia_Russian_army_006.jpg


0.jpg




See line "b" in my previous post....hhhh.
Moreover, we have no idea how much of these weapons are operational or even manned by Syrian personnel.

Syrian forces might shoot down rockets/a plane or even few of them, but it would not have any dramatic consequences on the overall operation or/and on its results - the Syrians are simply too weak to oppose a naval/aerial operation conducted by the US and it's allies.

Cheers,
Fallen.
 
See line "b" in my previous post....hhhh.
Moreover, we have no idea how much of these weapons are operational or even manned by Syrian personnel.

Syrian forces might shoot down rockets/a plane or even few of them, but it would not have any dramatic consequences on the overall operation or/and on its results - the Syrians are simply too weak to oppose a naval/aerial operation conducted by the US and it's allies.

Cheers,
Fallen.

Check it out FA.

While they agree that the S-300s are more accurate and have greater range than Assad’s current weapons systems, they say the Syrian leader is far from powerless without them. “We have seen over the past few years Russia supplying several different air-defense systems,” says Pieter Wezeman, senior researcher in the arms-transfer program of the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, which tracks weapons flows worldwide. “They [Syrian government] have really increased their capability. The missiles are both short and long range. If the S-300s do arrive, that would top it all off.” <<<<< Which we know they arrived.

Among the missiles already in place are two regiments of S-200 surface-to-air missiles, which have a range of about 150 miles, “with no less than 240 missiles ready to be fired in a matter of minutes,” says Igor Sutyagin, a Russian military scientist and senior researcher at the London think tank, Royal United Services Institute. Sutyagin, who was jailed in Russia on charges of spying for the U.S. and freed as part of a spy-prisoner swap in 2010, says Assad “has a lot” of air-defense systems acquired from Russia, including between 12 and 20 short-range missile systems called Pantsyr-S, which have a range of about 7.5 miles and which can be mounted on vehicles. Those were delivered to Syria about a year ago, in what he believes is the latest confirmed arms shipment from Moscow. In addition, Assad has 1,200 air-defense guns and between 4,000 and 8,000 Strela portable shoulder-fired missiles. “That IS the GREAT stockpile of Russian air defense weaponry.

Since Syrian rebels have no airplanes for Syrian forces to shoot down, Assad’s impressive air-defense arsenal has little bearing on the grueling war that has ravaged large parts of the country and killed an estimated 90,000 Syrians. But the antiaircraft weapons would be crucial if the U.N. voted to impose a no-fly zone over Syria or if Israel expands its sporadic strikes on Syria into a sustained bombing campaign. At that point, the S-300 missiles, which have a longer range and greater accuracy than Assad’s current weaponry, could inflict bigger losses and strike deep into Israel in retaliation — hence, Israel’s fury over the arms deal. With the S-300s in place, says Wezeman, “If Israel starts an air campaign, they would maybe lose a few more planes than they have until now. It is not a system which cannot be destroyed, but it would be a bigger campaign,” he says.

Syria’s military arsenal presents the West with a far different calculus, in part explaining why no Western country has intervened militarily so far. While Gaddafi had huge stocks of weaponry, including Russian and Chinese antiaircraft missiles, much of it was discovered after Gaddafi was killed in October 2011, lying unused in warehouses. That suggested that the Libyan military did not know how to install the new weapon systems or had not had time to do so, according to military analysts. And Assad could also have learned some lessons from Gaddafi’s spectacular defeat. Gaddafi lacked long-range missiles capable of combating the high-altitude bombing strikes that NATO fighter jets conducted over Libya. “It’s against these types of operations that, for example, the S-300s or other SAMs [surface-to-air missiles] could be used with some efficiency,” Wezeman says. “In Libya the systems were old and out of date, and the Libyans did not really know how to operate them. It would be much more difficult for outsiders to intervene in Syria, in the way that took place in Libya.”.....snip~

http://world.time.com/2013/06/03/sy...-the-russian-missiles-keeping-assad-in-power/
 
Also from the link already you already had up.

The S-300 is Russia's top-of-the-range air-defense system," says Robert Hewson, the London-based editor of "IHS Jane's Air-Launched Weapons." "It is a surface-to-air missile system that's capable of shooting down any modern combat aircraft or missiles, including cruise missiles. In a way, it is the Russian equivalent to the U.S. Patriot system. And what it does for Syria is it adds a whole new level of capability on top of the existing Syrian air defenses. Syria already has a lot of Russian [surface-to-air] missiles, but the S-300 would be the most advanced.".....snip~

Then from this.....we can also assess that Iran has sent some Operators in. Which they would have their Air Defense topped out. ;)

s-300-missile-system.jpg
 
Check it out FA.

While they agree that the S-300s are more accurate and have greater range than Assad’s current weapons systems, they say the Syrian leader is far from powerless without them. “We have seen over the past few years Russia supplying several different air-defense systems,” says Pieter Wezeman, senior researcher in the arms-transfer program of the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, which tracks weapons flows worldwide. “They [Syrian government] have really increased their capability. The missiles are both short and long range. If the S-300s do arrive, that would top it all off.” <<<<< Which we know they arrived.

Among the missiles already in place are two regiments of S-200 surface-to-air missiles, which have a range of about 150 miles, “with no less than 240 missiles ready to be fired in a matter of minutes,” says Igor Sutyagin, a Russian military scientist and senior researcher at the London think tank, Royal United Services Institute. Sutyagin, who was jailed in Russia on charges of spying for the U.S. and freed as part of a spy-prisoner swap in 2010, says Assad “has a lot” of air-defense systems acquired from Russia, including between 12 and 20 short-range missile systems called Pantsyr-S, which have a range of about 7.5 miles and which can be mounted on vehicles. Those were delivered to Syria about a year ago, in what he believes is the latest confirmed arms shipment from Moscow. In addition, Assad has 1,200 air-defense guns and between 4,000 and 8,000 Strela portable shoulder-fired missiles. “That IS the GREAT stockpile of Russian air defense weaponry.

Since Syrian rebels have no airplanes for Syrian forces to shoot down, Assad’s impressive air-defense arsenal has little bearing on the grueling war that has ravaged large parts of the country and killed an estimated 90,000 Syrians. But the antiaircraft weapons would be crucial if the U.N. voted to impose a no-fly zone over Syria or if Israel expands its sporadic strikes on Syria into a sustained bombing campaign. At that point, the S-300 missiles, which have a longer range and greater accuracy than Assad’s current weaponry, could inflict bigger losses and strike deep into Israel in retaliation — hence, Israel’s fury over the arms deal. With the S-300s in place, says Wezeman, “If Israel starts an air campaign, they would maybe lose a few more planes than they have until now. It is not a system which cannot be destroyed, but it would be a bigger campaign,” he says.

Syria’s military arsenal presents the West with a far different calculus, in part explaining why no Western country has intervened militarily so far. While Gaddafi had huge stocks of weaponry, including Russian and Chinese antiaircraft missiles, much of it was discovered after Gaddafi was killed in October 2011, lying unused in warehouses. That suggested that the Libyan military did not know how to install the new weapon systems or had not had time to do so, according to military analysts. And Assad could also have learned some lessons from Gaddafi’s spectacular defeat. Gaddafi lacked long-range missiles capable of combating the high-altitude bombing strikes that NATO fighter jets conducted over Libya. “It’s against these types of operations that, for example, the S-300s or other SAMs [surface-to-air missiles] could be used with some efficiency,” Wezeman says. “In Libya the systems were old and out of date, and the Libyans did not really know how to operate them. It would be much more difficult for outsiders to intervene in Syria, in the way that took place in Libya.”.....snip~

Syria's Air-Defense Arsenal: Russian Missiles Keeping Assad in Power | TIME.com

I'm familiar with similar assessments as I heard them from other sources before - based on what I know, read and heard I simply don't agree with them.

Moreover, the following quote from the article makes me doubt Vivienne's expertise on the subject;
"At that point, the S-300 missiles, which have a longer range and greater accuracy than Assad’s current weaponry, could inflict bigger losses and strike deep into Israel in retaliation — hence, Israel’s fury over the arms deal." It is technically possible, however has no strategic sense - in order for S-300 to be applied effectively towards the Israeli air-space these systems must be deployed very near to the Golan Israeli-Syrian border, thus making them very vulnerable = basically useless.

Like I already said, few US shot down planes are not going to make a big difference in the overall picture - If this was the Israeli/French/British military the impact (both moral and military wise) would be much greater.

Cheers,
Fallen.
 
I'm familiar with similar assessments as I heard them from other sources before - based on what I know, read and heard I simply don't agree with them.

Moreover, the following quote from the article makes me doubt Vivienne's expertise on the subject;
"At that point, the S-300 missiles, which have a longer range and greater accuracy than Assad’s current weaponry, could inflict bigger losses and strike deep into Israel in retaliation — hence, Israel’s fury over the arms deal." It is technically possible, however has no strategic sense - in order for S-300 to be applied effectively towards the Israeli air-space these systems must be deployed very near to the Golan Israeli-Syrian border, thus making them very vulnerable = basically useless.

Like I already said, few US shot down planes are not going to make a big difference in the overall picture - If this was the Israeli/French/British military the impact (both moral and military wise) would be much greater.

Cheers,
Fallen.

Well more than like she was going by Israel's response in the News over the transfer and sale thereof. Mute point now as the Russians have upped the ante, again.

Myself.....I think we will see a whole lot more of Assad breaking out what he has. Once any outside move is made. I think the Russians even set the play with Assads Military after the Shooting down of the Turks plane that had strayed over. If you recall.....even back then Assad said it was Automated fired that took that plane out.
 
if you think back on all the twists and bends used by the right wing to force us into Iraq.

If you think back on the two recent republican primaries ...where Ron Paul on stage with the republican talked about pre-emptive wars ....how he provoke boos and hiss from the republican crowd.

If you think back on all that ....one have to wonder ...why the right wing suddenly turn tail and want no part of Syria?

This is yet again ....another ...if Obama is for it ..I'm against it ...and if Obama is against it...I'm for it.....strategy from the right.

No plans ...no ideas...not even occasional thinking ...just oppose the president in each and very way strategy!!
The right wing is such an empty party.
 
Well more than like she was going by Israel's response in the News over the transfer and sale thereof. Mute point now as the Russians have upped the ante, again.

Myself.....I think we will see a whole lot more of Assad breaking out what he has. Once any outside move is made. I think the Russians even set the play with Assads Military after the Shooting down of the Turks plane that had strayed over. If you recall.....even back then Assad said it was Automated fired that took that plane out.

There is nothing in the Syrian inventory, from anywhere, that would provide much capability against USAF and USN weaponry, both manned and unmanned. Checkers vs chess.:peace
 
There is nothing in the Syrian inventory, from anywhere, that would provide much capability against USAF and USN weaponry, both manned and unmanned. Checkers vs chess.:peace

We went into Iraq ...to save the people Saddam gassed ....20 years before we invaded that country. To the right wing ....that argument made perfect sense.

And now suddenly ...we should sit back and watch ASSAD use WMD on his people ....today??

How stupid is the right wing ideology? :doh
 
There is nothing in the Syrian inventory, from anywhere, that would provide much capability against USAF and USN weaponry, both manned and unmanned. Checkers vs chess.:peace

Heya JH. :2wave: You need to recheck the assessments. Even our own thru DOD. Evidently.....there is more of an high concern than previously thought. As you will note in the change in their PDF.
 
We went into Iraq ...to save the people Saddam gassed ....20 years before we invaded that country. To the right wing ....that argument made perfect sense.

And now suddenly ...we should sit back and watch ASSAD use WMD on his people ....today??

How stupid is the right wing ideology? :doh

I'm not aware of significant opposition to hitting Asad. I can't speak for the "right wing," whoever you think that might be.
 
Heya JH. :2wave: You need to recheck the assessments. Even our own thru DOD. Evidently.....there is more of an high concern than previously thought. As you will note in the change in their PDF.

I stand by my previous statement.
 
Back
Top Bottom