Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Czar Wars
I don’t mean to ruin anyone’s morale, but I’m going to, anyway. I understand that some of you may be thinking, “Why not let Putin fight ISIS? Better him than us, wouldn’t you say? Especially since all we seem to be able to do is make more of them. Right?”
Well, sure, if that’s what he were doing. But it’s not.
MiG-31 Foxhound interceptor fighter jets, Su-30 fighters, Su-25 attack planes, Su-24 bombers, Su-34 bombers, Su-27 Flanker interceptor fighter jets, an Il-20 spy plane, armored vehicles, and SA-15 and SA-22 surface-to-air missiles? As David Axe puts it (understatedly) that’s “not really optimal for attacking lightly armed insurgent fighters.” And as he further notes, correctly, “Surface-to-air missiles are only good for destroying enemy aircraft, which Syrian rebels do not possess. And the Su-30s are best suited for tangling with other high-tech forces.”
In other words, folks, Putin’s there to wage war on us, not ISIS. Get it?
Or at the very least, he’s there to make sure there won’t be a safe zone along the border from Jarablus to Azaz. Sending interceptor fighter jets to Syria makes no sense unless you’re planning to intercept jets. ISIS, Nusra, and Ahrar al-Sham don’t have jets to intercept. QED.
It gets worse. David Ropkoth is right about this:
When Iran’s president, Hassan Rouhani, met with journalists in New York last Friday, he took pains to note that Iran and Russia were not joining together in a “coalition” in Syria. They were sharing intelligence. They were discussing strategy. They were in constant communication. But a coalition? No.
Two days later, the Iraqi government announced it too was sharing intelligence with Russia, Iran, and Syria. So perhaps Rouhani was being literal in a different way when he disavowed being in a coalition with Russia — because what he was actually involved in was a coalition with Russia, Iraq, and Syria.
And it gets worse still if you imagine what logically comes next. What if Iran decides to openly sprint for a Bomb? What if they just throw off all pretense of compliance and go for it? And why wouldn’t they, given that Putin’s now declared himself Czar and Protector of the Shia axis? Think even the next president would try to stop that? Direct conflict with Iran and Russia? As Trump might say, “I’m the most militaristic person there is” — but that wouldn’t be militaristic, that would be stupid. And suicidal.
And also by the way, that above-linked DHS report is full of cheering news:
Despite a year of U.S. and allied airstrikes, the group has held most of its territory and continues to replenish its ranks with outside recruits. Military officials estimate airstrikes have killed around 10,000 extremists, but new foreign fighters replace them almost as quickly as they are killed. ISIS has also grown from a single terrorist sanctuary to having a direct presence, affiliates, or groups pledging support in 18 countries. The organization is believed to have inspired or directed nearly 60 terrorist plots or attacks against Western countries, including 15 in the United States. Some of these were masterminded by foreign fighters based in Syria, while others were carried out by returnees themselves or homegrown extremists. … When the strikes began, counterterrorism officials estimated the total number of extremists was around 15,000. .. Today the figure stands at 25,000-plus foreign fighters.
Also, as you’ve probably heard, Kunduz fell to the Taliban. First provincial capital to fall to them since 2001.
And sorry to be just a complete Daisy Downer, but it gets even worse. Because Congress can’t pass a budget. (You had one job.) So the military might have to operate under last year’s spending plan.
According to Pentagon spokesman Peter Cook, “hope remains that lawmakers will strike a deal to fund the government when the fiscal year ends Sept. 30.” He “insisted the situation was not yet dire enough to warn defense employees of the potential fallout.” Well, that’s what he should say, we hardly want him shrieking hysterically for the whole world to hear, but we can read between the lines, I reckon:
… So, Mr. President, kind of looks to me like we are rapidly approaching a moment of truth both for ourselves as human beings and for the life of our nation. Now, truth is not always a pleasant thing. But it is necessary now to make a choice, to choose between two admittedly regrettable, but nevertheless *distinguishable*, postwar environments: one where you got twenty million people killed, and the other where you got a hundred and fifty million people killed. … Mr. President, I’m not saying we wouldn’t get our hair mussed. But I do say no more than ten to twenty million killed, tops. Uh, depending on the breaks. …
If you think I’m being unduly pessimistic, feel free to correct me. I’d love to feel better about this, but I just can’t see why I should.
Published in Foreign Policy, General, Military
Just more of that “flexibility after my election” that Obama was talking about. The US citizens voted for it twice now. The American public has spoken and decided that Syria and the rest of the world is on their own, we need to respect that.
But with what?
On the one hand, Obama seems to be gleefully attritting our military stockpiles. On the other hand, he appears to be intent on reducing the effectiveness of manpower by reducing its manliness.
So this is what the decline and fall of a civilization looks like….
Get this to the candidates and let’s see who uses it against whom.
Keep in mind that some versions of the -30, the MK and MKK have significant ground attack capabilities and are sophisticated enough to avoid small AAA and MANPADs (shoulder fired SAMS.)
Contrarian analysis to cheer you up, Ms.B:
http://www.worldaffairsjournal.org/blog/alexander-j-motyl/putin%E2%80%99s-misguided-move-syria
Excerpt:
“Meanwhile, Russia’s violation of the postwar security order in Europe galvanized a demoralized NATO, turned the United States and Europe against Russia, led to traditionally RussophileGermany’s adoption of an antiRussian stance, forced Putin to grovel before an indifferent China, and transformed Russia into a rogue state whose closest ally now appears to be mighty North Korea.
Russians used to joke that Mikhail Gorbachev’s perestroika was a CIA plot to destroy the Soviet Union. I’m beginning to think Vlad Putin is a sleeper agent of the Company. A few more years of his bumbling, and the Russian state may become history.
The bottom line is that Russia’s security and strength are significantly worse off today than they were two years ago. And Putin, whom Russians adore, is to blame.
To top it off, Putin has decided to jump from the frying pan into the fire by intervening in Syria.
…The Assad regime is either doomed, or it can be saved only with massive outside intervention. Wisely, neither the West nor the Arab states want to send in troops. … Will Russia be able to defeat ISIS? Probably not. Even if it does, the price it’ll pay in lives and money will be high. You’d think that Putin might have learned from the USSR’s misadventure in Afghanistan and America’s in Iraq… “
One B-52 airstrike over Hanoi, during the Linebacker air war operations, dropped about that many bombs. The U.S. hasn’t been conducting a real air war against ISIS. The catalyst for ISIS recruiting is the opposite of the usual MSM fretting -ISIS is winning, that’s the key to their recruiting. If they were being destroyed by an actual air war, do you really think new recruits would be headed to Syria and Iraq?
Putin is humiliating Obama at such a scale the French press becomes nostalgic about W, but, does anyone think Obama has enough self awareness to understand that he’s a grade school kid playing in the middle of a busy freeway?
There’s a different between carpet bombing a city and pinpoint strikes against targets.
And it may not be “real,” but it’s still costing me $10 million every day.
Were you involved with targeting during any part of the air war over North Vietnam?
First, he will not be operating under the same rules of engagement that we were in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Second, he’s got ruthless allies in Iran and Hezbollah.
Third, any success will pay for itself. He already has sold many tens of billions of dollars in weapons to Iran. The Saudis are paying Putin to arm the two Mistral helicopter carriers Egypt bought from France. What will footage of destroyed ISIS Abrams tanks do for sales of Russian weapons? Putin is probably looking for a way to accidentally shoot down a couple of Saudi Strike Eagles to sell Flankers.
Claire,
Where is the American sixth fleet as the Russian fleet sails into the eastern Mediterranean??? In 1973 Nixon gave the command to put the sixth fleet between the Israeli coast and the Russian fleet. With modern missile cruisers the Russian fleet could hit anything inside of Israel in seconds. It won’t be the little fire cracker missiles that Hamas uses. These will have at minimum a large and powerful conventional warhead. Of course, if one was really interested in a first strike one could use nuclear. The Russians aren’t completely incompetent. They may be able to jam the iron dome radar for all I know.
Will President Obama be giving the command to interpose the sixth fleet???????????
Regards,
Jim
Putin in Syria is like Mexicans in the US- doing the jobs Americans won’t do.
OK, out of left field so to speak, is there any chance that Putin is also doing this to counter any possible Israeli air attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities? I’m no expert on anything in the Middle East, but if the Russians start building air bases in Syria and I was an Israeli, I would be concerned, I think.
Mike,
I think too.
Regards,
Jim
Iron Dome is unique to the limited nuisance firing that Hamas does. It can engage one or two short range ballistic rockets at a time. In a real war, one fires hundreds of those at a time.
Iron Dome is likely not useful against any of the longer range things a real military would be firing at Israel.
Other Israeli defensive tiers (e.g., the Arrow ATBM) likely can be saturated either by salvos of medium-long range missiles or short range rockets.
It might be possible to engage a few medium range missiles fired from Northern Lebanon or Iran, but not if you are simultaneously facing a rocket artillery barrage from Gaza and Southern Lebanon.
CT,
Well there you have it. No need for anything as sophisticated as radar jamming. You just fire a whole lot of missiles at once. The Russians especially like to do this anyway. You know nostalgia.
So once again. Where is the American sixth fleet??????????
Regards,
Jim
So the fact that we are being displaced by Russia as the dominant military power in the Middle East is just “made up extra stuff.”
That is reassuring.
Thank you.
Man is this damning of Obama (from the link above): “These planes are hitting areas where Free Syrian Army and other anti-Assad groups are located [not ISIS forces – editorial note], the official said…
Activists and a rebel commander on the ground said the Russian airstrikes have mostly hit moderate rebel positions and civilians. …
According to a U.S. senior official, Presidents Obama and Putin agreed on a process to “deconflict” military operations. The Russians on Wednesday “bypassed that process,” the official said.”
Manfred,
Obama and company have for so long decided that reality was anything they say it is that I’m not really sure they can discern the difference anymore. Josh Earnest actually believes that as long as he can come up with a snappy answer at a controlled event like a press conference the security of Western Civilization doesn’t matter.
Regards,
Jim
You may have some points but probably err on the side of pessimism. When last in Afghanistan the Russians also had no restrictive rules of engagement – and still suffered mightily. As other commentators have opined elsewhere, Assad and Co are the best recruiters for ISIS – let them do their part and we will have a nice internecine (Muslim) war over there between Sunni and Shia. Do you remember how ugly life was in Iraq for US with AQ and their cohorts planting IEDs? Why not expect the same for a decade ahead in this garden plot of Islam’s planting? Remember that cool $1 trillion we sank into our eight years misadventure in Iraq? Do you think Saudi Arabia is going to stand by and let the Russians advantage the hated Assad/Iran without putting the screws to that axis of evil as much as they can?
Damn Fred, that’s a lot of scratch, no wonder you haven’t sprung for a Thatcher membership.
Who comes the closest to saying something accurate about our foreign policy?
I was and am a Romney supporter because his statements have been mostly accurate, or at least as accurate as my understanding and knowledge was and is.
In the great organization chart that our Constitution sometimes resembles, the president is pretty much the only person in the United States empowered to act in foreign policy matters. There are plenty of people in other spots on the chart to wrangle with education, finance, and health care. There’s only one person in the foreign policy block, and so that is all I care about when I’m considering a candidate for president.
I haven’t been impressed with any of the candidates so far. Everything I’ve read just makes me wish Romney were running.
So I ask you most sincerely, which candidate do you like?
Me too. That’s exactly what Iran gets out of the deal.
Good point you brought up, but the answer is not very reassuring (as far as I can tell).
As far as I can tell from the GoNavy site, Carrier Strike Group 12 has been in the Persian Gulf since April, but was scheduled to leave there yesterday. Its replacement, the carrier strike group that includes the CVN-75 Harry S. Truman, is still on a training exercise off North Carolina, and won’t be deploying to the Gulf for a month or two – meaning there is now a window of a couple of months where there will be no carriers in the Gulf at all.
That sounds a little crazy given all that’s going on there, so I searched a little more and found this article:
U.S. Carriers taking a break from fighting ISIS
This seems like spectacularly bad timing – or really good timing on the part of Putin.
You can see the current carrier deployments here at the GoNavy site.
Dan,
NO!! Not the Gulf. The Eastern Mediterranean!! It doesn’t need to be a carrier group. This is close quarters, it can be missile battle cruisers. They need to be in position off the coast of Israel.
NOW!
Regards,
Jim
This is the kind of thing I mean. This hyper-ventilating over Russia.
I mean, there used to be a time when we cared about the government spending money. Especially on wars nobody has even bothered to vote on.
From the always (to me) interesting Michael Ledeen on pjmedia, who adds China to the mix.
http://pjmedia.com/michaelledeen/2015/09/28/a-dandy-little-adventure/?singlepage=true
Meanwhile, the Russians and Chinese are also having their problems, albeit of very different sorts, even though they have a common cause (centralized state-run economy). Russia suffers from low oil prices, and they are now around $40/barrel. China is in the throes of a mass anxiety verging on panic. I’ve been talking to American businessmen (who certainly have no animus vs. the People’s Republic) recently returned from China, and for the first time they are now whispering very nervously about the immediate future of the place. Many of them have been approached by Chinese with money, asking the Americans to open businesses for and/or with them in the U.S., so they can get their cash onto this continent and buy a nice house in which to live when they have to depart.
These are the circumstances in which regimes look for foreign adventures, and if you look at Syria and Iraq, voila’! A dandy foreign adventure. The thing is, if the adventure is successful it’s great for the regime, but if it goes badly, as did the last Russian incursion in that part of the world (Afghanistan), it can be devastating.
It’s all about winning and losing. So far, the numbers don’t seem anywhere big enough to predict victory against whomever it is they are fighting. Is it IS? Al Qaeda? The Kurds? That will sort out fairly soon. Meanwhile our own President Obama seems to have a put-up-or-shut-up option, as per Putin at the UN. What will Obama do? All his nerve endings are on the “shut up” side, but then his beloved Iranians will be telling him to join the party. Can he possibly enter the war with serious forces?
Yes he can. Life is full of surprises. We’ll need a lot of popcorn.
“Battlecruisers” had big guns. The missile era really screwed up the distinctions among classes of ships. Some people called the Soviet Kirov class “battlecruisers” because they were much larger than any other guided missile cruiser.
“Cruisers” were historically ships that could cruise (long range without support). Battlecruisers were their apex.
We still refer to “destroyers”, even though they got that name by destroying smaller torpedo boats. Many are now involved in air defense and become hard to distinguish from modern cruisers.
I would be too. And not just because of the possibility of countering strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities — think about what might be coming out of Syria. About what already has. I reckon they’re hysterical.