ISIS/ISIL conflict in Syria/Iraq (No OpEd, No Politics)

Tell me one thing

There is a lot of different aircraft from different country's attacking different groups on the ground

What will USAF pilots do if they see Russian aircraft attacking US allied groups on the ground? Will they warn will they engage what will they do

USAF is supporting the groups Russia is attacking this is going to lead to a confrontation between America and Russia ??? And I mean a direct confrontation

Turkey is attacking Kurds in pretext under ISIS, Russia is attacking moderate groups fighting Assad under ISIS pretext and in all of this USAF is supporting the Kurds

Didn't I always say this is going to get worse before it gets better? now watch what happens I have a bad feeling about this

asif iqbal said:

Tell me one thing

There is a lot of different aircraft from different country's attacking different groups on the ground

What will USAF pilots do if they see Russian aircraft attacking US allied groups on the ground? Will they warn will they engage what will they do

USAF is supporting the groups Russia is attacking this is going to lead to a confrontation between America and Russia ??? And I mean a direct confrontation

Turkey is attacking Kurds in pretext under ISIS, Russia is attacking moderate groups fighting Assad under ISIS pretext and in all of this USAF is supporting the Kurds

Didn't I always say this is going to get worse before it gets better? now watch what happens I have a bad feeling about this

Click to expand...

In every past conflict with Russia(USSR) and America on opposing sides, once one of the two has publically engaged, the other is prevented from also going so as the risk of that leading to total war is just far too high.

So unless America is willing and able to put boots on the ground on the front lines of this fight before Russian ground forces engage, then it is advantage Russia.

As soon as one side's ground forces publically engages, that option goes off the table for the other.

I think this is where the Russians and Syrians hold the advantage. Both America and Russia knows that to directly attack each other's forces is a red line that will lead to a shooting war at the minimum between the two.

As such, both sides would have strict ROEs about not attacking the other side directly.

I expect the Russians to clearly and visibly embed their ground forces with the Syrians, and have a point of having CAP close by.

That will make it next to impossible for the Americans to launch effective air strikes against Assad's forces.

The American supported rebels would have no such cover unless America is willing to put boots on the ground, which it is not going to do.

Every time American and Russian supported forces go head to head, the Russians will be bombing at will knowing the Americans won't be willing to start a war over those insurgents, while the American jets would be prevented from striking at the advancing pro-Assad forces because of the presence of Russian ground forces.

As such, the pro-US insurgents won't have a prayer. Their only option would be to melt into the civilian population and wage a insurgency war.

It's looking increasingly unlikely that China will be participating in the Russian operation.

Saudi Arabia is concerned about the civilian casualties due to Russian bombing in Syria. Saudi bombing in Yemen causes very many civilian casualties, so many that the Netherlands proposed investigation of war crimes in that country in the UN Commission on Human Rights. However Saudi Arabia objected and the Netherlands retracted its proposal.

solarz said:

It's looking increasingly unlikely that China ... ...

Click to expand...

If Russia somehow becomes weaker or disintegrated,
then China will be the next target of you-know-who.
Guan-Wo-Shen-Me-Shi-thinking is absolutely very self defeating.

GreenestGDP said:

If Russia somehow becomes weaker or disintegrated,
then China will be the next target of you-know-who.
Guan-Wo-Shen-Me-Shi-thinking is absolutely very self defeating.

Click to expand...

I don't believe there is such a compelling case for China to send it's military to Syria. I think we were all very surprised, if not downright incredulous, when we heard about the possibility. I think some of us, myself included, got a bit carried away with such an imagined scenario, which is understandable since we are a forum about the Chinese military.

However, at the end of the day, the benefits for China to militarily support the Assad regime is rather marginal. Yes, they *might* curtail some Uighur terrorism, but there are ways of accomplishing the same goal without sending troops to a foreign nation thousands of miles away.

Smart bomb (KAB-500S) for Su-34. Iron bombs for Su-24. If Russians drop a lot of iron bombs, reserve smart munitions for high priority targets, and conduct air strikes in close cooperation with ground operations, their operation may look more like the initial phase of US invasion of Afghanistan, less like the current US led aim-less bombing campaign against ISIS.

delft said:

Saudi Arabia is concerned about the civilian casualties due to Russian bombing in Syria. Saudi bombing in Yemen causes very many civilian casualties, so many that the Netherlands proposed investigation of war crimes in that country in the UN Commission on Human Rights. However Saudi Arabia objected and the Netherlands retracted its proposal.

Click to expand...

That was a good joke from Saudi Arabia.

I don't think Russia has to worry about how they hit US "allied" anti-Assad rebels. Putin seems to be very keen on how to throw things in the US's face. Even the media noted on Obama's UN speech how he mentioned how evil Assad was to kill his own people yet Obama did nothing when Assad "crossed" the redline he threw down.