After more than 2 months after the beginning of Syrian army’s autumn offensive, with the support of the Russian army and Iranian contingent, the main events are still related to the battle for Aleppo, in which the parties are fighting for the strategic initiative in the Syrian war. Fights come with varying degrees of success – replace offensive counterattack, but on the whole Syrian army still holds the initiative and continues to conduct offensive operations designed to enhance the control zone around the city. A notable feature of these battles is that the main events unfold not in and around Aleppo.
The desire of Turks have an influence in Iraqi Kurdistan against the backdrop of the threat of the creation of an independent Kurdish state is understandable, but such clumsy antics (when under the pretext of protecting the instructors on the territory of the neighboring state are driving a tank battalion) that even with the United States and Iraq did not bother to coordinate, produce very curious impression Turkish policy, which for some time has been preparing the creation of a buffer zone in Syria, and after the escalation of the conflict with Russia, and everything changed no troops entered Syria, and Iraq. It looks like “Syria does not work? Shit. Let’s at least try in Iraq.”
It has been a little over two months now since Russia started its air campaign in Syria. An already complex equation on the ground, this game-changing move was further complicated by events having taken place over recent weeks in the larger Middle-East and in Europe. While it is now more difficult to make any forecast regarding the timeline of possible military developments, a few conclusions can nonetheless be taken away from the latest round of fighting in Syria.
Russian and Eurasian Politics by Gordon M. Hahn Many in that small but not insignificant minority of Western, including American conservatives who to one degree or another support many of […]
The report documents IS use of arms and ammunition from at least 25 different countries, though a large proportion were originally sourced by the Iraqi military from the USA, Russia and former Soviet bloc states. These arms flows were funded variously by oil barter arrangements, Pentagon contracts and NATO donations. The bulk have been seized from or leaked out of Iraqi military stocks.
Among the advanced weaponry in the IS arsenal are man-portable air defence systems (MANPADS), guided anti-tank missiles and armoured fighting vehicles, as well as assault rifles like the Russian AK series and the US M16 and Bushmaster.
Most of the conventional weapons being used by IS fighters date from the 1970s to the 1990s, including pistols, handguns and other small arms, machine guns, anti-tank weapons, mortars and artillery. Soviet Union-era Kalashnikov-style rifles are commonplace, mainly from Russian and Chinese manufacturers.
Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu said Tuesday that Russia attacked the Islamic State (IS) positions in Syria with Kalibr missiles fired by the submarine deployed in the Mediterranean Sea.
According to Shoigu, the missile launch was carried out by the sub from a submerged position, striking two major targets of the IS.
“It was the first time that Kalibr cruise missiles were fired by the Rostov-on-Don submarine from the Mediterranean Sea,” Tass news agency quoted Shoigu as saying during a meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin.
“The chance for a durable Washington-Moscow strategic partnership was lost in the 1990s after the Soviet Union ended. Actually it began to be lost earlier, because it was Reagan and Gorbachev who gave us the opportunity for a strategic partnership between 1985-89. And it certainly ended under the Clinton administration, and it didn’t end in Moscow. It ended in Washington — it was squandered and lost in Washington. And it was lost so badly that today, and for at least the last several years (and I would argue since the Georgian war in 2008), we have literally been in a new Cold War with Russia,”