Turkey Syria - News & Updates

[Eşbah]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

This is a geopolitical catastrophe for Russia.

 

[Eşbah]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

The Syrian government doesn't allow ISIS/DAESH to gain any operational room in Syria.

 

[Foinikas]

This is a geopolitical catastrophe for Russia.

I really think their mistake was not going full in back in 2014-2019. They should have acted like a real ally and behave like a strong country. They left the SAA look like a ragtag militia,when USA would equip the Iraqis,Afghans and some Kurds with modern gear,like ballistic vests,camo,new helmets,armored vehicles and night vision equipment.

They gave focus to Ukraine,well now no Mediterranean.

 

[hyperman]

They should have acted like a real ally and behave like a strong country. They left the SAA look like a ragtag militia

The Ragtag militia is easier to have leverage over. Putin went out of his way to accomodate Israel by not transferring anything of significance, so as to keep Netanyahu happy. The only time they gave something of significance had more to do with Israel making Russia angry over shooting a russian plane. After Which the S-300 system was given to Syria. Other than that nothing significant was transferred.

Even the S-300 was taken back in 2022.

https://www.reuters.com/world/russia-ships-s-300-air-defence-missiles-out-syria-satellite-images-2022-08-29/

 

[Foinikas]

The Ragtag militia is easier to have leverage over. Putin went out of his way to accomodate Israel by not transferring anything of significance, so as to keep Netanyahu happy. The only time they gave something of significance had more to do with Israel making Russia angry over shooting a russian plane. After Which the S-300 system was given to Syria. Other than that nothing significant was transferred.

Even the S-300 was taken back in 2022.

https://www.reuters.com/world/russia-ships-s-300-air-defence-missiles-out-syria-satellite-images-2022-08-29/

It's as if they were keeping them just strong enough to keep some areas in order to control them better. But then again...they didn't think it through. The Americans for example want their allies to be able to defend on their own,their Russians just want them weak.

 

[hyperman]

The Americans for example want their allies to be able to defend on their own

Thats also not true, given what we saw in Afghanistan and Iraq.

In Afghanistan they refused to give heavy weapons to the Afghan army.

In Iraq too, they weren't building an army, they were building counter insurgency policmen with small arms and no strategic weapons.

In Ukraine too, the goal is not to arm Ukraine to the point where it can beat Russia, its to bleed Russia. Thats why you see weapons arrive in a small trickle and the new platforms slowly get introduced, instead of giving everything at once to boost strength immediately.

They told ukraine to not do the Peace Agreement in Istanbul when Ukraine had the upper hand, but at the same time didn't send more weapons until 6 months later, when the advantage had deteriorated.

 

[Foinikas]

Thats also not true, given what we saw in Afghanistan and Iraq.

In Afghanistan they refused to give heavy weapons to the Afghan army.

In Iraq too, they weren't building an army, they were building counter insurgency policmen with small arms and no strategic weapons.

In Ukraine too, the goal is not to arm Ukraine to the point where it can beat Russia, its to bleed Russia. Thats why you see weapons arrive in a small trickle and the new platforms slowly get introduced, instead of giving everything at once to boost strength immediately.

They told ukraine to not do the Peace Agreement in Istanbul when Ukraine had the upper hand, but at the same time didn't send more weapons until 6 months later, when the advantage had deteriorated.

And they still gave way better equipment and weapons to Iraqis and Afghans than Russians gave to the Syrians. And quantity!

 

[hyperman]

And they still gave way better equipment and weapons to Iraqis and Afghans than Russians gave to the Syrians. And quantity!

They didn't give the Iraqis anything other than some Abrams. But those didn't help b/c the army b/c it was a glorified police force, not an army that knows how to fight.

The Afghans just receives some Humvees, no tanks. they were getting outgunned by the taliban.

 

[Foinikas]

They didn't give the Iraqis anything other than some Abrams. But those didn't help b/c the army b/c it was a glorified police force, not an army that knows how to fight.

The Afghans just receives some Humvees, no tanks. they were getting outgunned by the taliban.

They gave Iraqis:

• TOW
• Stinger
• Abrams
• M113s
• Caiman,Cougar,MaxxPro,Oshkosh MRAPs
• Humvees by the thousands
• Armored and unarmored trucks by the hundreds
• M109 SP artillery
• HAWK AA systems,Radars
• Helicopters
• F-16s

Yes,they bought some of those or a lot of those,but they also got a lot of equipment as donations from the US and other countries. In the case of Syria,the Russians only gave them from what I remember 10 BTR-80s,then some BTR-82As(or BTR-80As),some T-90As and T-62s(I think some T-62Ms as well),a handful of Tigr vehicles and a very old S-300PS systems. I think a few Pantsir-S1 as well. This is from memory,they might have given them some artillery pieces as well and definitely more small weapons,but the problem is: it was very small quantities. Also,they didn't do anything to improve the look of the SAA when it comes to personal equipment and gear. For example,the Americans gave the Iraqis

 

[hyperman]

They gave Iraqis:

• TOW
• Stinger
• Abrams
• M113s
• Caiman,Cougar,MaxxPro,Oshkosh MRAPs
• Humvees by the thousands
• Armored and unarmored trucks by the hundreds
• M109 SP artillery
• HAWK AA systems,Radars
• Helicopters
• F-16s

Yes,they bought some of those or a lot of those,but they also got a lot of equipment as donations from the US and other countries. In the case of Syria,the Russians only gave them from what I remember 10 BTR-80s,then some BTR-82As(or BTR-80As),some T-90As and T-62s(I think some T-62Ms as well),a handful of Tigr vehicles and a very old S-300PS systems. I think a few Pantsir-S1 as well. This is from memory,they might have given them some artillery pieces as well and definitely more small weapons,but the problem is: it was very small quantities. Also,they didn't do anything to improve the look of the SAA when it comes to personal equipment and gear. For example,the Americans gave the Iraqis

View attachment 96685

look at the date for delivery of those systems. The F-16s were not delivered until later(2014), and they were under-equipped, and Iraq bought it with their own money. And the only reason it was sold was b/c Iraq was buying Russian equipment and would have likely bought aircraft as well. As well as b/c of the Pressure over Daesh. Before that it wasn't seen as a priority to transfer to Iraq.

Iraq bought a lot of things with its oil money, it wasn't donated.

 

[Foinikas]

look at the date for delivery of those systems. The F-16s were not delivered until later(2014), and they were under-equipped, and Iraq bought it with their own money. And the only reason it was sold was b/c Iraq was buying Russian equipment and would have likely bought aircraft as well. As well as b/c of the Pressure over Daesh. Before that it wasn't seen as a priority to transfer to Iraq.

Iraq bought a lot of things with its oil money, it wasn't donated.

But I did say they bought a lot of stuff themselves. In any case,you can't disagree that Iraqis were way more better-equipped for this kind of war compared to the SAA. I mean come on! You know it!

Edit: Yes,they got a lot of stuff later and the 2014 chaos was equally if not even more dangerous(black caliphate barbarians almost reached Baghdad)as the 2004 insurgency.

 

[hyperman]

But I did say they bought a lot of stuff themselves. In any case,you can't disagree that Iraqis were way more better-equipped for this kind of war compared to the SAA. I mean come on! You know it!

Edit: Yes,they got a lot of stuff later and the 2014 chaos was equally if not even more dangerous(black caliphate barbarians almost reached Baghdad)as the 2004 insurgency.

Iraqis bought from everyone b/c they had money. Syria had no money. US didn't give for free.

Look at the equipment before when the US hadn't done the initial withdrawal. no equiptment. There was no air force no air defense(there still isn't really any air defense), no TOS launchers, just a few abrams and humvees and small arms.

Also in the Afghan they didn't even give tanks.

 

[Foinikas]

Iraqis bought from everyone b/c they had money. Syria had no money. US didn't give for free.

Look at the equipment before when the US hadn't done the initial withdrawal. no equiptment. There was no air force no air defense(there still isn't really any air defense), no TOS launchers, just a few abrams and humvees and small arms.

Also in the Afghan they didn't even give tanks.

Two points:

1.Afghans weren't vital allies of the US. Neither was Iraq,but Afghans were more "useless" in this aspect. In the case of Syria,Russia had way more interests in keeping them safe,being their most loyal Arab friends and giving them naval and airbases in the Middle-East and East Mediterranean. For them it was more important to provide better arms and equipment to them. Even from a propaganda point of view.
2.By 2014,the Iraqi Army and PMU were way better equipped than then even the elite SAA units. Don't forget that it was in 2014 they faced a very dangerous threat.

Also,why the heck do you have to always take a negative stance on whatever I'm saying? You don't believe Russians should or could have equipped and armed the SAA and NDF with more and better equipment?

 

[hyperman]

You don't believe Russians should or could have equipped and armed the SAA and NDF with more and better equipment?

No, what I'm saying is Iraq has oil money, Syria does not(atleast not significantly and b/c the US took over the Oil fields and gave it to the PKK).

Russia also does not have US money to give donations(which again, the US didn't donate the strategic weapons to Iraq, they sold them on an open market, a market in which Iraq also purchased from Russia)

Russia also felt there wasn't a need to give free weapons, and they thought the war was over and also, as I mentioned the Israel thing.

The Russians even when someone like Iran was willing to buy S-300s delayed transfer of S-300s and refused other sales to Iran. the dynamics around that only recently changed for Iran post Ukraine invasion when Russia needed help with Drones. Before that Russians were more than Accommodating towards Israel. Even China has been hesitant, they refused sales of J-10s to Iran, citing Israel and Saudi relations.

Iran learned the hard way that the only way for them to get weapons were to build themselves or to get them from Sanctioned states like North Korea and Libya in the case of ballistic missile tech.

 

[Eşbah]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies