Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

Syrian conflict.

Recommended Posts




   WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. has no evidence to confirm reports from aid groups and others that the Syrian government has used the deadly chemical sarin on its citizens, Defense Secretary Jim Mattis said Friday.

“We have other reports from the battlefield from people who claim it’s been used,” Mattis told reporters at the Pentagon. “We do not have evidence of it.”






   Serious, experienced chemical weapons experts and investigators such as Hans Blix, Scott Ritter, Gareth Porter and Theodore Postol have all cast doubt on “official” American narratives regarding President Assad employing Sarin.


   These analysts have all focused on the technical aspects of the two attacks and found them not to be consistent with the use of nation-state quality Sarin munitions.

The 2013 Ghouta event, for example, employed home-made rockets of the type favored by insurgents. The White House Memorandum on Khan Sheikhoun seemed to rely heavily on testimony from the Syrian White Helmets who were filmed at the scene having contact with supposed Sarin-tainted casualties and not suffering any ill effects.


   Likewise, these same actors were filmed wearing chemical weapons training suits around the supposed “point of impact” in Khan Sheikhoun, something which makes their testimony (and samples) highly suspect. A training suit offers no protection at all, and these people would all be dead if they had come into contact with real military-grade Sarin.



Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites



   As a result of hitting two aerial bombs on the territory of the logistics center of the 138th brigade of the Syrian army, 7 kilometers west of Damascus, three Syrian soldiers were injured. The fire was quickly located by the fire brigades, Major General Igor Konashenkov, the official representative of the Russian Ministry of Defense, said.

    "The provocative actions of the Israeli Air Force on the evening of December 25, 2018, when six F-16 aircrafts, while in the airspace of neighboring Lebanon, launched an air strike on the territory of Syria, created a direct threat to two passenger aircraft," the Russian military underlined. The report stressed that the attack of the Israeli Air Force was made at the time of landing civilian non-Russian airliners at airports in Lebanon and Syria.

    “To prevent the tragedy, Syrian government forces imposed restrictions on the use of air defense and electronic warfare, which allowed air traffic controllers in Damascus to take a passenger plane from a dangerous area and send it to the alternate Khmeimim airfield,” Konashenkov stressed.


   He also stressed that Israeli aircraft used 16 GBU-39 guided bombs during the attack. Fourteen of them were destroyed by Syrian air defense weapons.

   Earlier it was reported that the means of air defense of Syria repelled a rocket attack in the western part of Damascus. The attack lasted more than two hours. During the shelling, Syrian air defenses were able to shoot down several missiles.


   Claimed to be places that were hit:


Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Turkish forces moving to Syrian border, claimed that number of positions will be established near Manbij and Jarablus. Some of photos made in Northen Turkey.


















   Meanwhile, another claim:




Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Mighty_Zuk said:

2 missiles hit 4 places? Something's not right with that version.

MoD claimed 14 out of 16 bombs, but there were also claims about missiles used. Also, those could be remains of missile/pieces or failed/jammed AA missiles as well.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

#BREAKING: Israeli official to @AP: "Israel carried airstrike in Syria, in which a series of Iranian targets were hit including Iranian storage and logistic targets being used to transfer weapons to the Hezbollah Israel also took out a Syrian anti-aircraft battery near Damascus"


So targets that were confirmed to be hit:






   Second target was a parking lot for military vehicles.



  So putting things together (thanks to discussion on otvaga) - Isreali forces tried to "catch" yet another shipping of weapons from Iranian Boeing that arrived to Damascus. Iranian plane was not directly attacked, so they were aiming at places where weapons could be. 4th Division storage was one of nearest to airport. Not sure about bombings of parking lot.




  Claims that AA position was nearby:



   Israel claimed that AA position was destroyed, but sat photos doesn't show any damage. AFAIK it is equipped with S-125s.



   Mezzeh AB on the other hand was claimed to have those systems:




Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

I will be curious to see how the US pullout occurs.  Does it mean that everyone will leave, or just normal units, with SF still there?  Will the USAF/USN stop performing air strikes?


If the USAF/USN leaves, the SDF may start having even more problems against ISIS remnants.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/25/2018 at 8:37 AM, LoooSeR said:



I figured that was common knowledge, but the amount of people I talked too when it first happened who genuinely believed it is disturbing. Yeah because whenever the government claims someone did X therefore we have to take action they're always 100% and trustful amirite? The amount of people in my country with short term memory when it comes to this kinda of shit is disturbing. 

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎1‎/‎1‎/‎2019 at 6:47 PM, AssaultPlazma said:

The amount of people in my country with short term memory when it comes to this kinda of shit is disturbing.


Not to mention dangerous for the rest of us.


Although, to be perfectly fair, it must be said that the UK is just as bad if not worse.....Have you guys been following the exposure of the rather ironically named 'Integrity Initiative'? 

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:


Not to mention dangerous for the rest of us.


Although, to be perfectly fair, it must be said that the UK is just as bad if not worse.....Have you guys been following the exposure of the rather ironically named 'Integrity Initiative'? 




Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Similar Content

    • By LoooSeR
      Hello, my friends and Kharkovites, take a sit and be ready for your brains to start to work - we are going to tell you a terrible secret of how to tell apart Soviet tanks that actually works like GLORIOUS T-80 and The Mighty T-72 from Kharkovites attempt to make a tank - the T-64. Many of capitalists Westerners have hard time understanding what tank is in front of them, even when they know smart words like "Kontakt-5" ERA. Ignoramus westerners!
         Because you are all were raised in several hundreds years old capitalism system all of you are blind consumer dummies, that need big noisy labels and shiny colorful things to be attached to product X to be sold to your ignorant heads and wallets, thats why we will need to start with basics. BASICS, DA? First - how to identify to which tank "family" particular MBT belongs to - to T-64 tree, or T-72 line, or Superior T-80 development project, vehicles that don't have big APPLE logo on them for you to understand what is in front of you. And how you can do it in your home without access to your local commie tank nerd? 
         Easy! Use this Putin approved guide "How to tell appart different families of Soviet and Russian tanks from each other using simple and easy to spot external features in 4 steps: a guide for ignorant western journalists and chairborn generals to not suck in their in-depth discussions on the Internet".
      Chapter 1: Where to look, what to see.
      T-64 - The Ugly Kharkovite tank that doesn't work 
         We will begin with T-64, a Kharkovite attempt to make a tank, which was so successful that Ural started to work on their replacement for T-64 known as T-72. Forget about different models of T-64, let's see what is similar between all of them.

      T-72 - the Mighty weapon of Workers and Peasants to smash westerners
         Unlike tank look-alike, made by Kharkovites mad mans, T-72 is true combat tank to fight with forces of evil like radical moderate barbarians and westerners. Thats why we need to learn how identify it from T-64 and you should remember it's frightening lines!

      The GLORIOUS T-80 - a Weapon to Destroy and Conquer bourgeois countries and shatter westerners army
         And now we are looking at the Pride of Party and Soviet army, a true tank to spearhead attacks on decadent westerners, a tank that will destroy countries by sucking their military budgets and dispersing their armies in vortex of air, left from high-speed charge by the GLORIOUS T-80!

      The T-80 shooting down jets by hitting them behind the horizont 
    • By LoooSeR
      T-14 ARMATA 
              This thread is about glorious russian MBT T-14, known as "Armada", "T-95", "black eagle", "T-99" and other stupid Western names given to Object 148 (T-14 in some recent documents). Here is number of images connected to that vehicle.

      Official model of unknown "artillery vehicle". Yeah, Putin, we know that this is T-14. Note Gatling gun on turret right side.
      Artist impression of T-14 based on known model, by Fyodor Podporin. 

      T-14 will use Relikt ERA, which is considerable improvement over Kontakt-5 in resisting to tandem HEAT warheads and EFPs.

      Side skirts would be thicker on a real vehicle, i think. Relikt have AFAIK bigger size than Kontakt-5 ERA build-in blocks.

      Whole album with renders: 
      Video of same render from same artist:

            People expect that tank would have turret weapon system like what you see on the BMP-3 "Bakhcha-U" turret - a lot of weapons in one turret for one gunner to work with. T-14 is rumored to be equipped with 30 (or even 57) mm autocannon, 4-6 barrel gatling type MG/HMG, new 125 (2A82) or even 152 mm (2A83) smoothbore cannons. Turret is unmanned, crew of 3 would be located in frontal part of hull, behind very serious frontal armor inside of compartment, well protected from all directions. Cannon would be loaded by new autoloading device. I hope that Burevestnik is working on them, those guys managed to make 100 mm Naval gun with RoF of 300 shots per minute.
            I really like how turret looks, but i don't understand why there is such a big turret "busket" for unmanned turret with all ammo placed inside of hull in special armored housing. Also, i don't see gunner sight and proposed FSC radar on 3D model (i assume that panoramic sight is for commander). Laser sensors on 3D model are from T-90A variant of "Shtora".
            Some officials mentioned works on new active protection system, that consist of powerfull radar station, that can work on "long ranges" and engage incoming projectiles (missiles) with that gatling MG. Will this system survive development stage and be presented on serial tanks is unknown. Although turret for T-15 Armata-based IFV already was shown with new APS "Afganit".
            If you pay attention you may see that artist used T-80 rollers for Armata chassis, and this is not a mistake - according to some sources Armata heavy chassis will use T-80 or T-80-like rollers to save weight. And looking at rear part of that tank you may notice a engine deck from gas-turbine equipped version of the T-80, which can be mistake becuase MoD want Armata with new ~1500 HP diesel engine. 
    • By Darjeeling
      Greetings, I have been studying in the battle of Afrin since it started. Yet I still lack some information that can clearly analyse the opposite plan, war progress and order of battle of both side (Turkey army clear but YPG isn’t).
      I am spectacular interested in the process of the battle as it revealed the true strength of the 2nd largest NATO army. Also, the performance of YPG/YPJ militant against the regular modern army is meaningful to modern warfare study too.
      Hence, any kind man can help me on this field or even just give out a reading list?
  • Create New...