Russia brings the fight to ISIS in Syria!!!

#1,276
#1,276
Crap storm coming. Syria and Russia claiming today that a US air strike killed somewhere between 30-80 Syrian soldiers engaged in battle with ISIS. Claiming that it is a sign we support ISIS.

US air operations are confirmed by US military to have occurred in the area today. Stay tuned.
 
#1,277
#1,277
The ISIS part is of course a bunch of nonsense, but if this about the air strike is true - and it seems likely it is - we have managed the Syrian conflict about as well as a Butch Jones' coached offense.
 
#1,279
#1,279
volprof said:
Crap storm coming. Syria and Russia claiming today that a US air strike killed somewhere between 30-80 Syrian soldiers engaged in battle with ISIS. Claiming that it is a sign we support ISIS.

US air operations are confirmed by US military to have occurred in the area today. Stay tuned.
Click to expand...

:popcorn:
 
#1,283
#1,283
Rasputin_Vol said:
:popcorn:
Click to expand...

You do realize that Russia has bombed Syrian soldiers as well, correct?

And glad to see you don't have me on ignore anymore. I'm a very interesting poster. I always thought it was a shame you were missing out on my genius these last two to three years.
 
#1,284
#1,284
According to the US, Russian authorities were notified in advance of American bombing runs to be conducted against ISIS in the exact area of the incident yesterday.

If true, and I suspect it is since we haven't attempted to cover it up (unlike what a certain country that rhymes with "Smussia" would try to do), that begs the following questions: did Russia knowingly allow its Syrian ally to be bombed, and, if so, why? Also, if this run was a part of the recent American-Russian "cooperation" in Syria, then did Russian authorities hand American military forces bad intel? If so, then why?
 
#1,285
#1,285
So, a day after calling an emergency meeting of the UN Security Council to lambast and embarrass the US for the same thing it has done in the past (accidentally bombing and killing Assad forces), what does Russia do?

Goes out and bombs a UN aid convoy, killing at least 12 UN aid workers.

You can't make this stuff up. This is like our presidential campaign. Just when one side gains the rhetorical/propaganda upperhand, it then decides to go completely wet the bed, handing the ball back over to the other side for them to then wet the bed.
 
#1,286
#1,286
US and Russia have been playing tag through countries in the Middle East for so long, it's gonna come to blows, it has to right?
 
#1,288
#1,288
The Kremlin denying it is responsible for the deaths of the UN aid workers, just a day after showing its ass to the entire world at a UN emergency security council meeting.

US fesses up when it makes mistakes. Meanwhile, Kremlin gonna Kremlin.

And that, my friends - authoritarian lovers and democracy lovers alike - is the difference between our society and theirs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#1,289
#1,289
Russian aircraft carrier Admiral Kuznetsov sailing to the eastern Med to support Russian warships; and possibly onward to Syria. It's good to see that Russian carrier propulsion is still stuck in the 1940s.
 
#1,290
#1,290
carlos86 said:
Russian aircraft carrier Admiral Kuznetsov sailing to the eastern Med to support Russian warships; and possibly onward to Syria. It's good to see that Russian carrier propulsion is still stuck in the 1940s.
Click to expand...

its shocking looking at how far back their 1 carrier is. we have ships on semi-permanent drydock more fit for combat than that thing is. and it is literally half the size and half the carrying capacity of our mothballed Nimitz class.

also according

they can't find 50 capable pilots. (41 aircraft capacity with some spares)

hile the Russian government has not stated exactly why the Kuznetsov’s deployment is being delayed, one the of reasons is likely due to the lack of pilots qualified to takeoff and land from an aircraft carrier.
Click to expand...

yeah, right.

ave been fitted with the Gefest SVP-24 bombing sights, which the Russians claim increases the accuracy of gravity bombs to the level of precision-guided munitions (PGM)
Click to expand...
"drop a bomb in a fish barrel" anyone?
 
#1,291
#1,291
LouderVol said:
its shocking looking at how far back their 1 carrier is. we have ships on semi-permanent drydock more fit for combat than that thing is. and it is literally half the size and half the carrying capacity of our mothballed Nimitz class.

also according

they can't find 50 capable pilots. (41 aircraft capacity with some spares)



yeah, right.

"drop a bomb in a fish barrel" anyone?
Click to expand...
Their carrier is a piece of crap.
 

Attachments

  • image.jpeg
    image.jpeg
    51.7 KB · Views: 0
#1,292
#1,292
There is so much wrong/lacking with that ship. did they ever officially decommission its sister? we have 10 aircraft carriers. each with twice the capacity of that POS.

heck its equivalent to our Marine "Carriers".
 
#1,293
#1,293
LouderVol said:
There is so much wrong/lacking with that ship. did they ever officially decommission its sister? we have 10 aircraft carriers. each with twice the capacity of that POS.

heck its equivalent to our Marine "Carriers".
Click to expand...

I think they resurrected it a couple years ago with the intent to refurbish it. The U.S. Should have 12 carriers soon. Hell the new America class amphibious assault ship beats their carrier.
 
#1,294
#1,294
carlos86 said:
I think they resurrected it a couple years ago with the intent to refurbish it. The U.S. Should have 12 carriers soon. Hell the new America class amphibious assault ship beats their carrier.
Click to expand...

yeah the Ford has been floating around for a couple years, supposed to be officially commissioned this year.

it is a little absurd how far ahead we are in that department. except for subs and the sneakiness factor there is not a navy I am actually worried about.
 
#1,295
#1,295
LouderVol said:
There is so much wrong/lacking with that ship. did they ever officially decommission its sister? we have 10 aircraft carriers. each with twice the capacity of that POS.

heck its equivalent to our Marine "Carriers".
Click to expand...

Russia and China have spent money and technology towards combatting carriers and Aegis-class cruisers...

The Aircraft carrier is approaching obsolete, if not already..
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#1,296
#1,296
Pacer92 said:
Russia and China have spent money and technology towards combatting carriers and Aegis-class cruisers...

The Aircraft carrier is approaching obsolete, if not already..
Click to expand...

until a war gets fought and then it is the most important thing you can have. for America. any war not fought on our borders we need force projection, air craft carriers are it. how well could either of those countries fight away from their borders?

and I guarantee we have spent more money in that arms race. and our stuff is generally battle tested. IF the Russian carrier launches aircraft in Syria it will be the literal first time a Russian carrier has been in combat. same goes for most of their navy. they have launched cruise missiles.....ooohhhh. real impressed.

our forces and tech are not standing still either. i can't wait for the rail guns to start showing up. i have no clue how you counter that at all. and yes the Ford is supposed to be capable of supporting the rail gun system.
 
#1,297
#1,297
The Russians don't need aircraft carriers for the same reason we need dozens of bases "surrounding" Russia. It's a country that is 1/8th the world's landmass, spans 11 time zones, and is situated strategically, right smack dab in the middle of Europe and East Asia - the two most geopolitically significant regions in the world. Russians don't need aircraft carriers to position aircraft to these regions, because they can just use their own bases on the border. Likewise, American bases can't help but "surround" Russia because Russia is already next to all the parts of the world that really matter. The Americas don't matter, Africa doesn't matter, and Australia doesn't matter.
 
#1,298
#1,298
A First Look at America?s Supergun - WSJ

The Navy developed the railgun as a potent offensive weapon to blow holes in enemy ships, destroy tanks and level terrorist camps. The weapon system has the attention of top Pentagon officials also interested in its potential to knock enemy missiles out of the sky more inexpensively and in greater numbers than current missile-defense systems—perhaps within a decade.
Click to expand...
 
#1,299
#1,299
The Kremlin has changed its story on the aid convoy attack four times now. First, it said the convoy "caught fire," a most ridiculous explanation. Then, it said that jihadists were responsible. Not convinced that was sufficient enough excuse, it said later that the convoy was carrying weapons and was dispatched as such. Now, realizing the implicit admission of guilt in such a statement, it is saying that a US drone was responsible.

You stay classy, Chekists.
 
#1,300
#1,300
volprof said:
The Russians don't need aircraft carriers for the same reason we need dozens of bases "surrounding" Russia. It's a country that is 1/8th the world's landmass, spans 11 time zones, and is situated strategically, right smack dab in the middle of Europe and East Asia - the two most geopolitically significant regions in the world. Russians don't need aircraft carriers to position aircraft to these regions, because they can just use their own bases on the border. Likewise, American bases can't help but "surround" Russia because Russia is already next to all the parts of the world that really matter. The Americas don't matter, Africa doesn't matter, and Australia doesn't matter.
Click to expand...

Someone has never played Risk before. the part of Asia that Russia occupies is next to worthless except for its mass. it has never been exploited. until that happens it might as well be a big desert, which some of it already is.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top