Crisis in Syri� #29: From counting victims to counting massacres

quote:

Op maandag 17 juni 2013 17:42 schreef Djibril het volgende:
@Aloulou
Het is jammer dat je vindt dat de jihadi’s mogen moorden en doen wat ze niet kunnen laten om alleen maar Assad een kogel in zijn achterhoofd te geven. Nou Assad vermoordt ook iedereen om alleen maar de jihadi’s een kogel in zijn achterhoofd te geven. Ze verschillen niet veel van elkaar he?

quote:

Sean O'Connor wrote in 2010 that "Of all the Middle Eastern nations, Syria has one of the most robust SAM networks.... Early warning for the Syrian air defense network is handled by 22 Early Warning radar sites... Syrian strategic SAM deployment is concentrated in six areas. These areas are around the cities of Hims, Halab, and Damascus, Tiyas air base, the Mediterranean coastal area, and the area adjacent to the Golan Heights... All of the SAM systems in the Syrian inventory have a single-target engagement capability. Some of the S-200 sites have been noted with multiple 5N62 SQUARE PAIR engagement radars, allowing those sites to engage multiple targets (one per engagement radar), but the S-75, S-125, and 2K12 sites can only engage one target per site. This leaves the Syrian air defense network susceptible to saturation.... Syrian reliance on aging and well-known Soviet-era SAM systems is a serious defensive liability.... reliance on Soviet-era legacy SAM systems will provide a serious handicap when facing a major air incursion by a modern opponent."

Syria places considerable emphasis on land-based air defenses. The army has more than 2,000 air defence guns and more than 4,100 surface-to-air missiles. In this as in other areas, the army is heavily dependent on Soviet-designed weapons. The Air Defense Command, which operates under the command of the air force, operates longer-range surface-to-air missiles such as the Almaz Volga-M (SA-2), S-125 Neva (SA-3) and Antey S-200 (SA-5).

The Air Defense Command (ADC) has a strength of about 60,000 [more than the Air Force strength of 40,000] and controls two anti-aircraft divisions, (AADs), the 24th and the 26th AAD, comprising a total of 25 air defense brigades operating an estimated 130 surface-to-air missile batteries. Most are equipped with SA-2/SA-3 surface-to-air missiles (SAMs); eight batteries are equipped with SA-5 SAMs. In addition, a significant number of SA-6 mobile launchers are deployed, as well as an estimated 4,000 anti-aircraft guns of up to 100mm.

Following the 1973 war, Israel developed a coherent suppression of enemy air defenses (SEAD) doctrine which provided the foundation for their astounding performance in the 1982 Bekaa Valley Operation. Here, following a crucial SEAD operation, the IAF won air superiority, destroying 80 to 90 Syrian aircraft during twomonths of fighting with the loss of three to six Israeli aircraft. Air superiority and this lopsided victory were made possible by a well-coordinated SEAD operation destroying SAM and AAA sites in the Bekaa Valley. Before the actual attacks, Israeli reconnaissance aircraft and unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV) detected and located the Syrian air defense sites. Just prior to the air attack, a commando raid destroyed/neutralized a control center, beginning the paralysis of Syrian C3.

During the attack the Israelis dominated the electronic spectrum. First, they used Samson decoy drones to trick the Syrians into activating their acquisition and tracking radars. Second, reconnaissance drones reported the frequency and location of the radars. Third, Israel used a wide array of intense electronic warfare operations to confuse and deceive Syrian communications, and to blind Syrian SAM radar units. Finally, long-range artillery, surface-to-surface rockets, surface-to-surface anti-radiation missiles (ARM), and air-launched ARMs pounded the SAM and AAA radar sites.

Once blinded, the surviving missile batteries were vulnerable to and subsequently destroyed by cluster munitions. Ten of the 19 Syrian SAM batteries were knocked out within the first 10 minutes, and the Israelis claim to have destroyed 17 batteries and damaged two others during the attack without losing a single aircraft. The Syrians pushed more SAM units into the Bekaa Valley (over night), but to noavail. On day two, the IAF destroyed 11 more missile batteries.

Following the drastic aircraft losses it suffered as a result of Israel's air superiority during the latter's invasion of Lebanon in 1982, Syria extensively re-organized its air defense network. The network was re-structured on the basis of a Soviet-supplied command and control system, with three computerized air defense centers coordinating missile batteries and interceptor fighters. Major improvements were made to radar systems, electronic warfare capabilities and the level of integration of the air defense forces generally. Nevertheless, the system is considered to pose only a limited threat to Israeli air superiority, and would be vulnerable to the kind of countermeasures available to advanced, US-designed Israeli aircraft.

Particular priority is given to the anti-aircraft defense detection network covering Lebanon and Israel, but Syria has also been expanding its air defense resources in the northeast, to prepare for any attack from Iraq or an attack on its rear by Israel. Syria also take advantage of its military presence in Lebanon to site air defense radar installations there.

Syria has one of the most sophisticated Soviet-designed air defense systems outside of the former Eastern Bloc countries. However, it does not include the most advanced air defense and sensor systems developed by the Soviets. The Syrian system appears flawed and some analysts doubt the reliability and efficiency of the computer control network. Israeli sources claimed that by the late 1990s parts of the computerized system sometimes failed to function and then had to be operated manually. The sources claimed that Israel could neutralize Syria's air defense system in 48 hours.

According to some reports, in 2007 the Israelis took out the Syrian air defense system with a cyber attack before bombing a partially constructed (North Korean designed) Syrian nuclear facility. Richard A. Clarke, a former adviser to the National Security Council, wrote in his 2010 book, Cyber War, that Israel’s attack on the suspected Syrian reactor in 2007 may have involved some clever cyberjamming. Clarke says that the Israelis transmitted computer data packets that fooled the Syrian air defense network in an almost Stuxnet-like way. “Those packets made the system malfunction, but they also told it not to act [like] there was anything wrong with it,” Clarke wrote. “The sky would look just like it had when it was empty, even though it was, in actuality, filled with Israeli fighters.” [a more prosaic explanation is that Syrian air defenses are concentrated in the Western part of the country, and Al Kibar / Dair Alzour reactor was in the eastern part of the country that is essential devoid of air defenses]

Media reported in 2007 that Damascus had agreed to sell some of the Pantsyr short-range air defense missile-gun systems it was buying from Russia to Tehran. Russia did not approve the alleged sale of its Pantsyr-S1 mobile air defense system from Syria to Iran, a first deputy prime minister said 23 May 2007. "We have received no requests from Syria for supplies to Iran, not a single bullet," Sergei Ivanov said at a news conference in Moscow. "Russia engages in military-technical cooperation with all states that strictly abide by international law... For any arms that Russia sells to its foreign partners, contracts are signed only after the receipt of a certificate from the end user. These weapons cannot then be re-exported and supplied to third countries without the permission of the seller, in this case the Russian Federation."

The Russian army is currently acquiring the latest version, the Buk-M2 (SA-17), and a large export contract of Buk-M2E to Syria is in the pipeline. The provision of a more capable surface-to-air missile system such as Russia’s medium-range Buk M1 and M2 (NATO SA-11 Gadfly/SA-17 Grizzly) - should it have occurred - would mark a significant increase in the potential SAM threat. The system has a maximum engagement range in excess of 30 kilometers. The overall system, however, consists not only of the tracked missile-launch vehicle, but also target acquisition radar and command post vehicles, and as such also brings with it a substantial training requirement.

quote:

Op maandag 17 juni 2013 18:30 schreef Terminator2000bc het volgende:
Mocht Amerika haar eigen doodsvonnis tekenen en Syri� binnenvallen

quote:

vraag ik mij af of Syri� op militair gebied terug zou kunnen slaan.

quote:

Op maandag 17 juni 2013 18:44 schreef waht het volgende:
Wat is dat toch de hele tijd met die achterlijke Amerika-haat? Is het zo moeilijk de zaken eens objectief te bekijken?

quote:

Op maandag 17 juni 2013 18:44 schreef waht het volgende:
Wat is dat toch de hele tijd met die achterlijke Amerika-haat? Is het zo moeilijk de zaken eens objectief te bekijken?

quote:

'Dozens dead' in Aleppo car bomb attack
At least 60 Syrian regime soldiers reported killed in a town near northern city's international airport.
A car bomb has struck near the Syrian northern city of Aleppo, killing at least 60 members of President Bashar al-Assad's troops, activists have told Al Jazeera.

Monday's blast, carried out by a jihadi group affiliated with al-Qaeda, hit near a military complex in the town of al-Douwairinah near Aleppo's international airport, Mohammad al-Hadi, an activist in the city, said.

"The car was filled with six tonnes of explosives," he told Al Jazeera.

The blast was one of the largest attacks targeting regime forces. Activists posted a video on social media that purports to show the moment of the explosion. However, the authenticity of the video could not be verified.

It came hours after a car bomb attack targeting a checkpoint near a military airport in Damascus, the Syrian capital.

The UK-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said there were 20 casualties in the blast on Sunday night in the western Damascus district of Mazzeh, but did not state how many were killed or injuried in the attack.

Syrian state media confirmed the blast that occurred late on Sunday, but have not released the number of those killed and injured.

Mazzeh is an upscale neighbourhood of Damascus that houses several embassies and a military airport.

At least 93,000 people have been killed in Syria's two-year-old conflict.

quote:

Op maandag 17 juni 2013 18:49 schreef Terminator2000bc het volgende:

[..]

Ik heb geen Amerika haat hoor. Wat mij betreft was Amerika, binnenlands, een van de mooiste landen ter wereld. Alleen jammer dat ze hun eigen idealen sinds begin 2000 zijn gaan verloochenen.

En hun lange-termijn buitenlandbeleid staat al decennialang haaks op wat zij openlijk naar de wereld toe uitdragen.

Laat ik het zo zeggen. Ik sta 100% achter echte Amerikanen, zoals Ron Paul.

quote:

Op maandag 17 juni 2013 19:00 schreef Chooselife het volgende:

[..]

Ik haat Amerika ook niet.

Het is alleen de puber aan het hoofd van het gezin. En dat leidt tot een heel egocentrisch, wispelturig en onbeschaafd beleid. Totaal geen rekening houdende met de gevolgen van haar handelen.
Over de VS heb ik al eens gezegd: het heeft alles in zich om de wereld voorbeeldig te leiden. Het is een multiculturele samenleving waar een ieder -wereldwijd- zich op een manier wel in herkent en het is een mooi merk. Het moet alleen rijpen, naar volwassenheid. Naar wijsheid en ratio. Zonder bemoeienissen en ondoordacht wapengekletter. In mijn ogen een kwestie van tijd, van eeuwen want de VS zijn een relatief jong land. Nederland heeft zich ooit net zo gedragen als de VS. Welk land je eigenlijk ook opnoemt. Allemaal hebben ze hun zonden. Vroeger maakte ik me druk om de recente geschiedenis van de VS (Vietnam, midden/zuid Amerika, e.d.). Maar in het licht van een bredere geschiedenis -de afgelopen duizend jaar-, waarbij we zelf ook een rol spelen, lijken de VS daarin geen uitzondering te zijn. Dat ligt dus niet specifiek aan de VS.
Met de verkiezing van Obama had ik heel sterk de indruk dat hij dit proces zou versnellen. Maar dat bleek een illusie.

Als de VS zich in het Syri� conflict de verstandigste durven te tonen door zich er niet (militair) mee te bemoeien, is dat wat mij betreft direct een driepunter.

quote:

Reports in Syria: Israel attacked another airport
Opposition sources say massive blast at military airport near Damascus result of Israeli airstrike; Assad says rebels behind attack
Roi Kais
Published: 06.17.13, 17:30 / Israel News

News outlets affiliated with the Syrian opposition estimated that a massive explosion heard Sunday night at the Al-Maza military airport west of Damascus area was the result of an Israeli attack.

The reports quoted opposition activists as saying that the blast at the Al-Maza neighborhood bore the hallmarks of an explosion that rocked the outskirts of Damascus in May. Foreign news agencies said that explosion was part of an Israeli airstrike.

"My house overlooks the airport. At a certain point we saw armored vehicles enter the airport," an opposition source said. "They were probably equipped with mobile radar systems. Then we heard the sound of a missile striking the vehicles. It was the same sound we heard in Mount Qasioun (site of the alleged airstrike in May)."

Another eyewitness said: "The explosion was like a volcano. The flames reached the sky. The sound was the same one that was heard in Qasioun."

Various reports published Sunday night said the explosion in Al-Maza occurred when rebels detonated two car bombs. The Syrian regime said it was an attempt by "terrorists" to attack the military airport.

According to foreign reports, Israel attacked Syria twice within a few days in the beginning of May. President Bashar Assad's regime claims the airstrikes targeted a military research center, but the West believes Israel targeted Iranian weapons systems that were designated for Hezbollah in Lebanon. Since then, senior Syrian officials said the country would retaliate immediately in case Israel attacks again.

quote:

Assad must not win

Op-ed: If Syrian army defeats rebels, US will lose remainder of its credibility, deterrence power in the Middle East

Neither the Sunni rebels nor the Assad-led Shiites who are involved in the Syrian civil war are friends of the United States or Israel. Israel and the US’s best strategy should be to help maintain the status quo where neither Assad nor the rebels are strong enough to defeat the other militarily.

In this context, the Obama administration’s decision to finally help arm the rebels was the correct decision even though it was as a response to Assad’s forces crossing the red line and using chemical weapons on their own people. But the main reason to heavily arm the rebels should be to counter balance Hezbollah and Iranian involvement and reverse recent Assad territorial gains in the strategic city of Qusair on the border of Syria and Lebanon, which has served as the rebels’ supply corridor from Lebanon.

It must be clear that both the US and Israel’s strategic interests would be compromised if the Americans allow Assad and his allies to win.

At the center of the Shiite mobilization is Iran, which is seeking to preserve its regional influence by funding and supplying a Shiite network of armed support for the Syrian government, which is dominated by Assad’s Alawite sect, an offshoot of Shiite Islam. It includes thousands of experienced combatants from the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, and the Lebanese militia Hezbollah as well as Iraqi Shiites. It also include a paramilitary militia of thugs and gangs known as the Shabiha, whose 50,000 members primarily consist of Alawites loyal to Assad and who are believed to be responsible for undertaking the Sunni massacres and other sectarian atrocities.

On the other side, the Syrian rebels’ disorganized opposition consists mainly of several major Arab-Sunni rebel factions. The biggest umbrella group is the Saudi and Qatar backed groups who are not hard core Islamists. The second largest rebel coalition is dominated by hardcore Salafist Muslims, a more extreme offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood. The most dangerous group in the mix is the Jabhat al – Nasra, which is an offshoot of al–Qaeda in Iraq. The Sunnis consider the Alawites and the Shiites greater infidels than Christians or Jews. The opposition is in control of vast areas in the north and northeast of Syria.

Contrary to most experts’ opinion over the last two years, Bashar Assad will never step down or leave Syria to save himself because he is an Alawite protecting the Alawite minority - which consists of only 12% of the Syrian population - from genocide by the Sunnis. His top military leaders who are Alawites will fight to the end to secure the center of major cities and the west coast where most Alawites reside.

While the Assad regime has conventional military superiority including jets, ballistic missiles, and artillery, it also can count on a steady supply of arms and ammunition from loyal allies such as Iran and Russia. At the same time, the rebel force has received until now only sporadic supplies of relatively low caliber weapons from its regional Arab allies. Supplying heavy weapons to the rebels such as long range missiles and imposing a no- fly zone over rebel-controlled areas will result in a war of attrition for years to come, similar to the war between Iran and Iraq, while both sides survive in a divided Syria.

Hezbollah is already taking significant casualties in Syria and the sectarian nature of its military involvement will likely open another front for them in Lebanon from the Sunnis. As the group’s forces and resources are drawn into the fight, its ability and willingness to confront Israel will be reduced.

Those in the administration, who claim that it is unclear what national interest the US has in preventing an Assad victory, ignore the following.

First, if Assad wins, the US will lose the remainder of its credibility and its deterrence power in the Middle East. It took six months after chemical weapons were first used by the Assad regime against the rebels for the US to acknowledging that fact, despite the fact that the UN, Britain and France had already confirmed its use. Moreover, Obama’s hesitancy to help the rebels for over two years has encouraged thousands of Hezbollah fighters to cross the border from Lebanon into Syria and to publicly declared a month ago their intention to fight on behalf of Assad despite Obama’s warnings against outside intervention. It was Hezbollah forces who drove the rebels out of Qusair and Assad’s forces are now advancing on the rebel dominated area of Aleppo.

Second, If Assad wins, Russia’s military and diplomatic loyalty to Assad will make Moscow once again an attractive ally too many of the Gulf Sunni nations who are already suspicious of Obama after his betrayal of Mubarak, and who are worried about Iranian ambitions.

Third, Iran will become stronger than ever. A weakened Assad will owe everything to Iran, and become its puppet. Moreover, Iran will doubt Obama’s resolve in preventing them from developing nuclear weapons.

Fourth, Hezbollah will become stronger by sharing Syria’s dangerous arsenal and by influencing a weakened Assad to be more militant against Israel. Syria’s last war against Israel was in 1973, but since then Israel has had at least two wars with Hezbollah.

Fifth, the sectarian war will spread. Hezbollah military’s involvement against the Sunnis has transformed it from a revolutionary force to a sectarian one. A Shiite victory will pose a threat to Jordan and Iraq as well as the Gulf States.

An Assad win over the rebels will unravel decades of American influence in the Middle East and endanger Israel in the process.

Shoula Romano Horing is an attorney. Her blog: www.shoularomanohoring.com

quote:

Op maandag 17 juni 2013 19:39 schreef waht het volgende:

[..]

Ok�, dat kan ik begrijpen.

[..]

Irak en in mindere mate Afghanistan waren dan strategische fouten maar daar zijn duidelijk lessen uit getrokken, sowieso met betrekking tot Syri�. De voornaamste buitenlandse inmenging in Syri� komt uit Libanon en Iran, en dat zal wel zo blijven.

quote:

Op maandag 17 juni 2013 20:10 schreef deleriouz het volgende:

[..]

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4393586,00.html

quote:

Op maandag 17 juni 2013 21:13 schreef Slayage het volgende:

[..]

quote:

Op maandag 17 juni 2013 21:38 schreef Shreyas het volgende:

[..]

[..]

Wat is het nut van het posten van quotes zonder er een toelichting/mening bij te geven? Dit is een forum, geen dagblad ofzo. Enkel nieuws lezen kunnen we ook elders.

quote:

Op maandag 17 juni 2013 22:12 schreef UpsideDown het volgende:

[..]

Het is toch mooi dat de nieuwsberichten omtrent het onderwerp centraal in 1 topic weergegeven worden tussen de discussie door? Iemand zijn mening is meestal niet zo relevant voor een inhoudelijke discussie. Het is vrij kansloos om bijvoorbeeld partij te kiezen in dit conflict zoals sommigen doen, en vervolgens deze partij proberen op te hemelen om de andere partij zwart te maken. Wat win je daar mee, niets.. De mening van anderen zal veelal niet veranderen en het conflict gaat gewoon door hoor. Een mening over bijvoorbeeld strategische politieke zetten van landen of troepenbewegingen is veel interessanter.

quote:

Op maandag 17 juni 2013 21:38 schreef Shreyas het volgende:

[..]

[..]

Wat is het nut van het posten van quotes zonder er een toelichting/mening bij te geven? Dit is een forum, geen dagblad ofzo. Enkel nieuws lezen kunnen we ook elders.

quote:

Op maandag 17 juni 2013 22:13 schreef Shreyas het volgende:

[..]

Neem dan in ieder geval de moeite om zo een lap tekst in het Engels te voorzien van een Nederlandse samenvatting

quote:

Op maandag 17 juni 2013 22:12 schreef UpsideDown het volgende:

[..]

Het is toch mooi dat de nieuwsberichten omtrent het onderwerp centraal in 1 topic weergegeven worden tussen de discussie door? Iemand zijn mening is meestal niet zo relevant voor een inhoudelijke discussie. Het is vrij kansloos om bijvoorbeeld partij te kiezen in dit conflict zoals sommigen doen, en vervolgens deze partij proberen op te hemelen om de andere partij zwart te maken. Wat win je daar mee, niets.. De mening van anderen zal veelal niet veranderen en het conflict gaat gewoon door hoor. Een mening over bijvoorbeeld strategische politieke zetten van landen of troepenbewegingen is veel interessanter.

quote:

Op maandag 17 juni 2013 22:40 schreef Slayage het volgende:

[..]

wie ben jij dan om hier te verkondigen wat users volgens jou zouden moeten doen

quote:

Op maandag 17 juni 2013 22:43 schreef Shreyas het volgende:

[..]

Zie ondertitel