Utopia Talk / Politics / Su22 vs f18

Sam Adams Member	Sun Jun 18 19:44:00 Lol that aint even fair.
Forwyn Member	Sun Jun 18 20:27:54 Syrian forces attack Syrian insurrectionists in Syrian airspace, so they get shot down by jets with no permission to be there. "The U.S. military statement said it acted in "collective self defense" of its partner forces and that the U.S. did not seek a fight with the Syrian government or its Russian supporters." LOL It's honestly too bad 9/11 hijackers didn't crash all four jets into the Pentagon. http://www...rian-plane-20170618-story.html
Forwyn Member	Sun Jun 18 20:30:10 Wonder if the US will shoot down Turkish jets that bomb SDF? Probably not, gotta appease swingin' dick Erdogan.
obaminated Member	Sun Jun 18 20:39:15 We agreed to no fly zones after Assad jets used gas on civilians. Just because you forgot doesn't mean everyone else did.
Forwyn Member	Sun Jun 18 22:32:27 Those NFZs include US jets as well, and there's no indication that this shootdown was preempted by an incursion into a NFZ; rather, the US has chosen their proxy group and will defend it with lethal force.
Forwyn Member	Sun Jun 18 22:33:48 Also; "Assad jets used gas on civilians." - unproven
tumbleweed the wanderer	Sun Jun 18 22:55:31 Iran says it launched missiles into Syria, targeting ISIS fighters in retaliation for June 7th attacks in Tehran their tourism industry must be in the toilet
Im better then you 2012 UP Football Champ	Sun Jun 18 23:52:25 Their tourism industry is a toilet.
jergul large member	Mon Jun 19 01:04:53 Tail of the snake is what matters in aircombat. Launching missiles is trivial after you have been fed the ambush vectors. With that said; the f-18 is a league above Syrian Su-22s and would have won anyway.
Rugian Member	Mon Jun 19 07:01:52 If al-Raqqah falls fast, the government can say goodbye to eastern Syria forever. Assad had better be happy with ruling over a rump state.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Mon Jun 19 07:20:56 Raqqah was never really a viable option for Assad. Deir e zor on the other hand will secure much of the oil fields in eastern Syria and his claim to the east. We shall see how much interference the US will play in that arena.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Mon Jun 19 07:22:45 And Raqqah has been bombed into very tiny pieces, the question is who want to hold on the eastern parts of Syria anyway? Poor tribal peasants and the largest city now in ruins.
Rugian Member	Mon Jun 19 09:48:50 Official US policy is still that Assad needs to go, and the SDF has demonstrated that it's willing to dislodge the SAA out of its isolated enclaves like al-Haskarah. Al-Raqqah's importance lies in that it's fall clears the way for some large land-grabs that include oil fields. Assad will be lucky if he gets a token acknowledgement of his nominal authority of SDF-held areas when all is said and done. Military conquest is off the table permanently.
Aeros Member	Mon Jun 19 10:30:15 There is no way this war doesn't end in partition Yugoslavia style. All sides know it, which is why they are desperately trying to shore up where the borders will ultimately fall.
murder Member	Mon Jun 19 11:23:55 Someone remind me again ... when was this invasion of Syria approved?
obaminated Member	Mon Jun 19 11:27:17 Invasion of Syria eh?
Rugian Member	Mon Jun 19 11:29:28 The same day that Obama shat all over the War Powers Resolution and wasn't impeached as a result.
Rugian Member	Mon Jun 19 11:36:13 And as long as Russia retains fleet basing rights at Tartus, jergul will be happy with whatever division of territory happens.
werewolf dictator Member	Mon Jun 19 12:12:04 http://spu...s-syria-deconfliction-channel/ From June 19, Russia is halting all interactions with the US within the framework on the memorandum of incident prevention in Syrian skies, the Russian Defense Ministry said on Monday following the US-led coalition's downing of a Syrian army's jet near Raqqa. Russian missile defense will intercept any aircraft in the area of operations of the Russian Aerospace Forces in Syria, the ministry said. "In areas where Russian aviation is conducting combat missions in the Syrian skies, any flying ojects, including jets and unmanned aerial vehicles of the international coalition discovered west of the Euphrates River will be followed by Russian air and ground defenses as air targets," the Russian Defense Ministry announced.
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Mon Jun 19 12:13:41 This can only end well.
werewolf dictator Member	Mon Jun 19 12:15:16 even the western puppet propagandists at syrian observatory for human rights won't support blatant usa aggression on this one http://www.syriahr.com/en/?p=68314 The fate of the pilot of regime’s warplane is still unknown, where its warplane was dropped in the southern countryside of Al-Raqqah, the warplane was shot down over Al-Resafa area of which the regime forces have reached to its frontiers today, and sources suggested to the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights that warplanes of the International Coalition targeted it during its flight in close proximity to the airspace of the International Coalition’s warplanes, which caused its debris to fall over Resafa city amid an unknown fate of its pilot, the sources confirmed that the warplane did not target the Syria Democratic Forces in their controlled areas located at the contact line with regime forces’ controlled areas in the western countryside of Al-Tabaqa to the road of Al-Raqqah – Resafa.
Rugian Member	Mon Jun 19 12:16:35 I'll believe that Russia is willing to attack a US jet when I see it. jergulian propaganda notwithstanding, the US is light years ahead of Russia in terms of conventional military capability, and Russia should be smart enough to know it.
Rugian Member	Mon Jun 19 12:18:41 And given that the entire Beltway establishment is downright apoplectic about Russia these days, DC is not going to back down from a conflict if Russia offers one.
werewolf dictator Member	Mon Jun 19 12:45:45 russia can destroy half of usa any time they want and theres nothing loudmouths in dc could do about it [unless they want to lose even worse].. russia is sitting on full house while lindsey graham and usa company is sitting on pair of twos
Nimatzo iChihuaha	Mon Jun 19 12:54:03 Iran retaliated the attack inside Iran. Four missiles launch from Kermanshah, hitting Al-Madain in Syria.
Paramount Member	Mon Jun 19 13:02:31 Rugian, "I'll believe that Russia is willing to attack a US jet when I see it. jergulian propaganda notwithstanding, the US is light years ahead of Russia in terms of conventional military capability," Yeah, but Russia has Trump. If offered a good deal Trump could simply give the order to not strike at Russia.
jergul large member	Mon Jun 19 13:22:27 Ruggy Russia will only shoot down an aircraft in self defence. The ambush relied on perfect information on Russian aircraft positions as provided by the memorandum of understanding. Russia is simply creatubg imperfect information. The US does not want to shoot down Russian planes either. Engaging Syrian aircraft in the future now has an inherent risk of engaging Russian aircraft by mistake. Tracking US aircraft everywhere in Syria is part of that package. Hopefully the Americans can turn off the volume on their radar target alert systems.
jergul large member	Mon Jun 19 13:23:40 Whats with the hysteria about a plane being shot down, anyway?
Paramount Member	Mon Jun 19 13:25:34 "Engaging Syrian aircraft in the future now has an inherent risk of engaging Russian aircraft by mistake." And bombing terrorists has a risk of engaging US aircraft.
murder Member	Mon Jun 19 13:29:08 "Invasion of Syria eh?" Are our forces inside of Syria and shooting at government forces? Yeah, invasion.
Rugian Member	Mon Jun 19 13:35:01 ^exactly. And Assad doesn't like taking no for an answer; he'll continue making bombing runs whether the US approves or not. And if the US wants to stop him, we're now risking triggering an open conflict with Russia. wd, not without nukes you cant. And Putin won't be using nukes.
Rugian Member	Mon Jun 19 13:35:19 @aj4a
jergul large member	Mon Jun 19 13:44:02 Ruggy Nukes provide Russia with blanket security for their Syrian operations. There are escalation scenarios that will lead to nuclear weapons being used. The US et al will simply have to step down aerial activity at this point. That in turn may call for the draw-down of special forces (it depends on how comfortable they are acting without systematic air support.
Rugian Member	Mon Jun 19 14:11:49 Jerggy, There is nothing in Syria itself that the US can't attack without risking nuclear war. Planes and bases in Syrian territory getting shot up are not sufficient reason for Putin to start selecting attractive females to breed with in the fallout shelter. Attacks on Russian home territory would of course be off limits barring significant escalation, so nukes are similarly off the table. As for drawing down, that's usually what would likely happen, but in this political climate both the Democrats and Republicans have a hard on for spilling Russian blood en masse. Russophobia has been steadily building up in DC, ever since Ossetia in 2008, and it's threatening to reach a level where hatred of Putin outshadows any rational risk-vs-reward analysis of US interests in Syria. Putin would be playing with serious fire if a US jet ended up getting shot down.
Rugian Member	Mon Jun 19 14:15:00 We have politicians talking about how Russia is trying to kill democracy in America and won't stop until it has destroyed the entire Western world. And it's not just hawk asshole like Mccain now, the entire DC establishment has gone off the deep end. Putin seriously better not try it.
jergul large member	Mon Jun 19 14:21:13 Ruggy, bro. Neither Russia, nor the US will accept losing a major engagement to the other party. Both parties rest secure in a nuclear option always giving a spectacular draw. As to drawdown. That is up to trump, not congress.
jergul large member	Mon Jun 19 14:22:55 In sum, you should ask who's resolve better not be tested: Trump's or Putin's?
Aeros Member	Mon Jun 19 14:28:10 Implying Russia has leverage short of nukes if we entered a cycle of escalation in Syria. The U.S. could bring way more firepower much faster then Russia could hope too. This is assuming they can even make good on their threat to shoot down U.S. aircraft. The f16 and f18 have obliterated every Russian model in every instance of them dogfighting since they rolled off the production line in the 70s
Rugian Member	Mon Jun 19 14:31:27 Jerggy, fam. Everything that Putin does is actually eminently rational, with his actions geared toward MRGA and exploiting opportunities to expand or protect its strategic interests wherever possible, but only when they are sensible and have a realistic chance of success. In short, it's easy to understand where he's coming from, and he can be trusted to act in a certain reasonable, albeit undesirable, manner. Can you say the same of the American gocernment?
jergul large member	Mon Jun 19 14:37:51 I am not implying "short of nukes". I am saying that some cycles of escalation will lead to nukes. Nuclear weapons are underpinning the whole operation in Syria. Russia could not have deployed without their blanket security. Russia has more than enough radar coverage over Syria to down aircraft. Beyond horizon combat relies on off-aircraft support. Planes are really just missile range extenders.
jergul large member	Mon Jun 19 14:44:19 Ruggy The entire premise for their Syrian operation rests on nuclear weapons. I do not think Putin will step back from that fundamental tenant. You seem to think he will. Just like the US would allow its European forces to be overrun if the alternative was using nukes. US nuturing an element of irrationality to its advantage has been a known since Kissinger. It just boils down to what you think Putin and Trump will do in certain circumstances.
Aeros Member	Mon Jun 19 14:45:09 The Qatar weapons deal is echibit A for showing the US Administration does not have positive control over the US Military. In many respects, the DoD seems to be running on autopilot.
jergul large member	Mon Jun 19 14:49:36 Anyway, we will see really soon. Russia has said it will be targeting all aircraft. I do not know of any US doctrine that accepts that aircraft on combat missions are targeted by radar installations. The US will either have to curtail combat missions, or neutralize the radars. Or change their doctrine to accept being continually targeted.
Rugian Member	Mon Jun 19 14:56:39 jergul, Putin won't be using nukes in response to anything that doesn't represent an existential threat. Nuclear warfare benefits neither Russia generally or him personally. The US won't be using nukes either obviously, it will just take actions that won't be enough to invoke MAD. Which could potentially mean neutralizing Russian aircraft and military installations in Syria, coupled with crippling economic measures. If that happens, Putin will grit his teeth and opt to live to fight another day.
jergul large member	Mon Jun 19 14:58:44 Ruggy, Wrong. But of course, the US knows that, and will be curtailing operations. The push just came to a shove. Russia is targeting all aircraft over Syria. Whatya going to do about it?
jergul large member	Mon Jun 19 15:03:40 The equation has not changed since the election, but do you really think Putin will accept losing a war to Trump? Anyway, your logic still holds after Russia has used nuclear weapons to stabilize Syria on a more equal footing. A US counterstrike would not benefit the USA or Trump personally.
Rugian Member	Mon Jun 19 15:05:32 jergul, The day a Russian missile brings down a US aircraft is the day the Russian military ceases to exist in Syria. And the US is not going to back down from targeting government aircraft that threaten SDF positions. So we'll see who's bluffing soon enough.
Aeros Member	Mon Jun 19 15:06:10 targeting =/ shooting at. They will just ignore it.
jergul large member	Mon Jun 19 15:07:23 Rofl. No.
jergul large member	Mon Jun 19 15:09:56 The last was at Ruggy. Aeros So the US will just step down until procedures and doctrine can be revamped to meet the novel circumstance of flying combat missions while being targeted by hostile radar?
Aeros Member	Mon Jun 19 15:23:04 That would require guidance Jergul, to change existing standing procedures. And at this point Trump has not appointed the neccessary civilian leadership at the Pentagon. As consequence power is devolved to the field commanders and I guarantee you they will open fire if attacked.
Aeros Member	Mon Jun 19 15:23:49 Trump will have to react after the shit hits the fan. He does not have positive control over what the military is doing atm.
jergul large member	Mon Jun 19 15:33:12 The procedure is to degrade targeting capability prior to engaging in combat operations. So either step down, or engage. The military is not going to throw down the gauntlet. They know as well as I do what underpins Russian combat operations in Syria. You do know the US military hates nuclear weapons right? With good reason. They destroy conventional advantages.
jergul large member	Mon Jun 19 15:34:41 I am not buying that silent insurrection theory of yours btw. Exhibit A is pretty weak.
Aeros Member	Mon Jun 19 15:40:25 Its not an insurrection though. The military is following strict guidelines and rules of engagement as established. But an unplanned for provocation by Russia would require immediate response from the White House to halt the counter force attack. A response that won't come because the White House is too consumed with its own internal shenanigans to worry about what some Air Force colonel orders his fighter wing to do when it gets shot at. Its not a silent insurrection. Its open administrative incompetence.
Rugian Member	Mon Jun 19 15:52:14 jergul, You seem to have confused US reluctance to stand up to Russia in certain situations over the last decade with a refusal to engage Russia ever. In crises like South Ossetia, Crimea and Syria, there was little the US could or would do for several reasons: -By the time the US could react, the situation was already a fait accompli in Russia's favor; -No American personnel was at risk; -The US lost little from not intervening; -Support for engaging Russia militarily was insufficient in DC. In this case, none of those factors are at play. The US is not going to be bullied out of supporting SDF units, and the day US personnel start dying at Russian hands is the day the Russian military presence in Syria ceases to exist. As for nukes. You are very good at arguing an idea with a high degree of confidence, but all the bravado in the world doesn't mask the fact that Putin won't use nukes over Syria. Even if Russia could "win" a nuclear war with the US, the cost would be way too high. And Russia can't win a nuclear war.
Rugian Member	Mon Jun 19 15:52:33 jergul, You seem to have confused US reluctance to stand up to Russia in certain situations over the last decade with a refusal to engage Russia ever. In crises like South Ossetia, Crimea and Syria, there was little the US could or would do for several reasons: -By the time the US could react, the situation was already a fait accompli in Russia's favor; -No American personnel was at risk; -The US lost little from not intervening; -Support for engaging Russia militarily was insufficient in DC. In this case, none of those factors are at play. The US is not going to be bullied out of supporting SDF units, and the day US personnel start dying at Russian hands is the day the Russian military presence in Syria ceases to exist. As for nukes. You are very good at arguing an idea with a high degree of confidence, but all the bravado in the world doesn't mask the fact that Putin won't use nukes over Syria. Even if Russia could "win" a nuclear war with the US, the cost would be way too high. And Russia can't win a nuclear war. So to parrot you, ROFL no.
murder Member	Mon Jun 19 16:18:26 "The push just came to a shove. Russia is targeting all aircraft over Syria." jergul: You can't be serious. Nukes? That's werewolf dictator level dumb. Long before Putin would even consider actually firing on a US jet, he sell better shit to Syria and Iran. And we haven't even reached that stage.
obaminated Member	Mon Jun 19 16:32:47 Yeah, Putin isn't a lunatic willing to destroy all life in a nuclear war over Syria.
jergul large member	Tue Jun 20 01:27:07 Obam Less than a dozen nuclear warheads does not a nuclear war make. Just look at it as an Article 5 variant. The US put troops in harms way in Europe to underpin its willingness to use nukes to stop the Soviet jagernaut. Its the same doctrinal context. Russia has a lot of men in hardware in a position it cannot really defend conventionally. If you doubt Russian resolve, then you are actually raising doubt as to US Article 5 commitments. Murder I was quite clear on specifying that only certain escalation ladders will lead to nuclear use. But I am quite serious. Push did come to shove. The US has to either revamp its air supremacy procedures, or take out the radars targeting its forces, or draw down its combat patrols to virtually nothing. I think a combination of the first and last is occuring right now. Russia is rearming Syria and Iran, but that takes years. A spectacular variant might be lending Iran a nuclear arsenal on Turkish-US terms (but there are Iranian constitutional restraints that make that variant unfeasible). It would have made a wonderful statement through :-). Ruggy Putin cannot lose a war in Syria. Nuclear weapons have always underpinned that venture, and I see no obvious way Putin can step away from the fundamental logic of that deployment.
Seb Member	Tue Jun 20 06:01:33 werewolf: "[unless they want to lose even worse]." Nah, Russia won't respond to having 75% of Russia wiped out in retaliation for fear of loosing the remaining 25%.
swordtail Anarchist Prime	Tue Jun 20 08:30:24 Australia halts air strikes in Syria after Russia-US tensions over downed Damascus jet http://www.rt.com/news/393166-australia-halts-flights-syria/
swordtail Anarchist Prime	Tue Jun 20 10:05:23 US Jet Shoots Down Syrian Army Drone In "Dangerous Escalation" http://www...rmy-drone-dangerous-escalation
Aeros Member	Tue Jun 20 10:39:23 Its not an escalation. There is a no fly zone over that area. If the Syrian Army wants to fly things into the zone, they are going to get shot down.
Average Ameriacn Member	Tue Jun 20 15:38:47 Another great air battle won! http://www.../syria-iran-drone-shaheed-129/ A U.S. Air Force fighter shot down an Iranian drone that was nearing friendly forces. The Shaheed 129 drone was the third aircraft downed by U.S. airpower in the past month, following the shootdown of a Syrian Arab Air Force Su-22 ground attack jet and another Shaheed drone. The shootdown happened in the skies over Syria, when a Shaheed 129 operated by "pro-regime forces" flew near a Coalition military base near the Syrian city of Tanf. The base is home not only to Syrian rebel forces but also U.S. Special Forces and, as of last week, U.S.-operated High Mobility Artillery Rocket System (HIMARS) rocket launchers. The U.S. has established a 55-mile "deconfliction zone" around Tanf and has warned any forces that enter it are subject to attack. (In a previous instance, U.S. forces shot down the other Shaheed 129 after it attacked—and missed—U.S.-backed Syrian fighters.) The Iranian Shaheed 129 is a domestically designed and produced drone. A medium-altitude, long-endurance drone, it's roughly akin to the American MQ-1 Predator and strikingly similar to the Israeli Hermes 450 drone. Iran claims the drone can stay aloft for up to 24 hours, has a range of up to 1,056 miles, and carry up to eight Sadid-1 laser-guided air-to-ground missiles. However, Iranian video of Shaheed 129s launching Sadid-1 missiles are suspect, and one expert quoted by War Is Boring believes sanctions are interfering with Iran's ability to manufacture them.
Forwyn Member	Wed Jun 21 01:04:21 Instituting a NFZ in a nation without their permission while you support insurrectionists is kind of the definition of escalation.
swordtail Anarchist Prime	Wed Jun 21 08:24:33 Australia to resume anti-ISIS airstrikes in Syria – defense chief http://www...stralia-isis-airstrikes-syria/
	show deleted posts

Your Name:
Your Password:
Your Message: