Tag Archives: Russia

Russian Military News: New Exoskeleton Unveiled After Stunning Footage Of Strategic Bomber Crash

(ZeroHedge) The Russian army has developed an exoskeleton which has already been field tested Syria, according to Sergei Smaglyuk, president of Moscow-based “GB Inzhiniring,” which developed the suit along with TsNIITochMash, according to RIA Novosti.

https://www.zerohedge.com/s3/files/inline-images/exo1b.jpg?itok=HlIySlFS

Weighing in at around 15 lbs, the carbon fiber and metal suit allows a soldier to carry heavy mortars and a 700-round belt-fed machine gun long distances without fatigue. According to the report, the suit can also be used to help evacuate wounded people in disasters, and will allow troops to march much further without getting tired.

https://www.zerohedge.com/s3/files/inline-images/exo1c.jpg?itok=r5aJpQJp

Based on recommendations from the Russian military, GB Inzhiniring incorporated the ability for the suit to eject its cargo in an emergency. They also developed a special backpack for the machine gun which feeds ammunition through a special sleeve.

https://www.zerohedge.com/s3/files/inline-images/exo1a.jpg?itok=1FG2KbHZ

Other modifications under consideration for future versions of the suit include a more flexible chassis and a more heavily armored version. A battery will also allow soldiers to use and charge various equipment while on the move, such as a communications, an electronic commander’s tablet and navigation gear.

https://www.zerohedge.com/s3/files/inline-images/1549730141_0_255_2048_1407_600x0_80_0_0_7acf633591b03f1562fc8836de782692.jpg?itok=WN7KUuGt

The exoskeleton is set to enter mass production soon, while foreign buyers have reportedly expressed interest in the device once it receives an export passport.

According to Smaglyuk, “This is already much closer to the science fiction. In the future, such equipment will increase the strength and speed of the serviceman. As soon as this happens, the very next day, a boom of exoskeleton of very different designs and purposes will begin. Today we are considering the concept of feeding an active exoskeleton from an onboard network, for example, a truck. machine with ammunition, the soldier puts “suit” that can be connected to the car battery and starts unloading. Such a project could be useful logistics unit.”

***

Stunning Footage Of Deadly Russian Strategic Bomber Crash Surfaces Online

A horrific video of a Russian Tu-22M3 strategic bomber in Murmansk – a crash that left two of the fighter’s crew members dead and two badly injured – was caught on video.  And the footage has now emerged online.

Highlighted by RT, the video shows the strategic bomber’s approach to an air base in near-zero visibility and the moment it slammed into the airstrip and burst into flames. The video was recorded by a Russian serviceman at the base, which is located near the city of Olenegorsk, and was recently leaked online.

The video shows the heavy fog that was covering the area during the incident, which took place on Jan. 22.

During the crash-landing, the bomber literally broke apart, with its cabin engulfed in flames while tumbling on the ground.

The plane crashed during what the Russian Ministry of Defense said was a routine training mission. Though initially the ministry said there were no weapons aboard the jet at the time of the crash, later reports indicated that it had been armed with one Kh-22 long-range anti-ship missile and several hundred rounds aircraft cannon ammo. The bomber that was involved in the crash was built 33 years ago, but underwent an overhaul in 2012.

Source: ZeroHedge

Advertisements

Putin Tests Latest Kalashnikov Sniper Rifle

According to Russia Today, Putin visited the Kalashnikov Concern’s shooting range and tested the company’s brand new sniper rifle in Kubinka on Wednesday. After inspecting the experimental samples of the rifles, Putin shot five times with an SVCh-308 (Chukavin sniper’s rifle) rifle at a target from a distance of 600 meters. Three of the president’s shots successfully hit the target. According to Kalashnikov, the SVCh-308 rifle is designed to engage the enemy’s manpower at small and medium distances. It can be used in conditions of combined arms combat as well as for keeping a cover. The rifle’s small dimensions allow the shooter to do without additional weapons, which increases mobility. The SVCh was initially called SVK. Recently, Kalashnikov has renamed the rifle to include the designer’s last name (Chukavin) into the designation of this firearm and revealed more details. Now the rifle is called Chukavin Sniper Rifle or SVCh (Снайперская Винтовка Чукавина – СВЧ) wrote the Firearm Blog.

 

Provocations Have A History Of Escalating Into War

Can War Be Avoided and the Planet Saved?

(Paul Craig Roberts) The Russian Government and President Putin are coming under pressure not from US sanctions, which are very good for Russia as they force Russia into independence, but from Russian patriots who are tiring of Putin’s non-confrontational responses to Washington’s never-ending insults and military provocations. Russian patriots don’t want war, but they do want their country’s honor defended, and they believe Putin is failing in this job. Some of them are saying that Putin himself is a West-worshiping Atlanticist Integrationist.

This disillusionment with Putin, together with Putin’s endorsement of raising the retirement age for pensions, a trap set for him by Russia’s neoliberal economists, have hurt Putin’s approval ratings at the precise time that he will again be tested by Washington in Syria.

In many columns I have defended Putin from the charge that he is not sufficiently Russian. Putin wants to avoid war, because he knows it would be nuclear, the consequences of which would be dire. He knows that the US and its militarily impotent NATO allies cannot possibly conduct conventional warfare against Russia or China, much less against both. Putin also understands that the sanctions are damaging Washington’s European vassals and could eventually force the European vassal states into independence that would constrain Washington’s belligerence. Even with Russia’s new super weapons, which probably give Putin the capability of destroying the entirety of the Western World with little or no damage to Russia, Putin sees no point in so much destruction, especially as the consequences are unknown. There could be nuclear winter or other results that would put the planet into decline as a life-sustaining entity.

So, as I have suggested in many columns Putin is acting intelligently. He is in the game for the long term while protecting the world from dangerous war.

Whereas I endorse Putin’s strategy and admire his coolness as a person who never lets emotion lead him, there is nevertheless a problem. The people in the West with whom he is dealing are idiots who do not appreciate his statesmanship. Consequently, each time Putin turns the other cheek, so to speak, the insults and the provocations ratchet upward.

Consider Syria. The Syrian Army with the help of a tiny part of the Russian Air Force has cleared all areas of Syria but one of the American-instigated-financed-and-equiped forces sent by Washington to overthrow the Syrian government.

The remaining US proxy force is about to be eliminated. In order to save it, and to keep a Washington foothold that could permit a restart of the war, Washington has arranged yet another false flag “chemical attack” that the presstitute and obedient Western media will blame on Assad. President Trump’s National Security Adviser, a crazed, perhaps insane, Neoconservative, has told Russia that Washington will take a dim view of the Syrian/Russian use of chemical weapons against “Assad’s own people.”

The Russians are fully aware that any chemical attack will be a false flag attack orchestrated by Washington using the elements it sent to Syria to overthrow the government. Indeed, Russia’s ambassador to the US explained it all yesterday to the US government.

Clearly, Putin hopes to avoid Washington’s orchestrated attack by having his ambassador explain the orchestration to the American officials who are orchestrating it. https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-08-30/russian-ambassador-gave-intel-us-officials-showing-planned-chemical-provocation
This strategy implies that Putin thinks US government officials are capable of shame and integrity. They most certainly are not. I spent 25 years with them. They don’t even know what the words mean.

What if, instead, Putin had declared publicly for the entire world to hear that any forces, wherever located, responsible for an attack on Syria would be annihilated? My view -— https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2018/08/29/a-book-for-our-time-a-time-that-perhaps-has-run-its-course/ — and that of Russian patriot Bogdasarov— https://www.fort-russ.com/2018/08/a-russian-response-to-a-new-us-attack-on-syria-should-include-sinking-the-carriers-not-just-shooting-at-their-missiles/ — is that such an ultimatum from the leader of the country capable of delivering it would cool the jets of Russophobic Washington. There would be no attack on Syria.

Bogdasarov and I might be wrong. The Russian forces deployed around Syria with their hyper sonic missiles are more than a match for the US forces assembled to attack Syria. However, American hubris can certainly prevail over facts, in which case Putin would have to destroy the sources of the attack. By not committing in advance, Putin retains flexibility. Washington’s attack, like its previous attack on Syria, might be a face-saver, not a real attack. Nevertheless, sooner or later Russia will have to deliver a firmer response to provocations.

I am an American. I am not a Russian, much less a Russian nationalist. I do not want US military personnel to be casualties of Washington’s fatal desire for world hegemony, much less to be casualties of Washington serving Israel’s interests in the Middle East. The reason I think Putin needs to do a better job of standing up to Washington is that I think, based on history, that appeasement encourages more provocations, and it comes to a point when you have to surrender or fight. It is much better to stop this process in its tracks before it reaches that dangerous point.

Andrei Martyanov, whose book I recently reviewed on my website, recently defended Putin, as The Saker and I have done in the past, from claims that Putin is too passive in the face of assaults. https://russia-insider.com/en/russia-playing-long-game-no-room-instant-gratification-strategies-super-patriots/ri24561 As I have made the same points, I can only applaud Martyanov and The Saker. Where we might differ is in recognizing that endlessly accepting insults and provocations encourages their increase until the only alternative is surrender or war.

So, the questions for Andrei Martyanov, The Saker, and for Putin and the Russian government is: How long does turning your other cheek work? Do you turn your other cheek so long as to allow your opponent to neutralize your advantage in a confrontation? Do you turn your other cheek so long that you lose the support of the patriotic population for your failure to defend the country’s honor? Do you turn your other cheek so long that you are eventually forced into war or submission? Do you turn your other cheek so long that the result is nuclear war?

I think that Martyanov and The Saker agree that my question is a valid one. Both emphasize in their highly informative writings that the court historians misrepresent wars in the interest of victors. Let’s give this a moment’s thought. Both Napoleon and Hitler stood at their apogee, their success unmitigated by any military defeat. Then they marched into Russia and were utterly destroyed. Why did they do this? They did it because their success had given them massive arrogance and belief in their “exceptionalism,” the dangerous word that encapsulates Washington’s belief in its hegemony.

The zionist neoconsevatives who rule in Washington are capable of the same mistake that Napoleon and Hitler made. They believe in “the end of history,” that the Soviet collapse means history has chosen America as the model for the future. Their hubris actually exceeds that of Napoleon and Hitler.

When confronted with such deluded and ideological force, does turning the other cheek work or does it encourage more provocation?

This is the question before the Russian government.

Perhaps the Russian government will understand the meaning of the orchestrated eulogies for John McCain. It is not normal for a US senator to be eulogized in this way, especially one with such an undistinguished record. What is being eulogized is McCain’s hatred of Russia and his record as a warmonger. What Washington is eulogizing is its own commitment to war.

FBI Uncovered Russian Bribery Plot Before Obama Approved Uranium One Deal, Netting Clintons Millions

https://i0.wp.com/www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user230519/imageroot/2017/10/17/2017.10.17%20-%20Clinton%20Cash_0.JPG

As the mainstream media continues to obsess over $100,000 worth Facebook ads allegedly purchased by Russian spies in 2016 seeking to throw the presidential election, we’re almost certain they’ll ignore the much larger Russian bombshell dropped today in the form of newly released FBI documents that reveal for the very first time that the Obama administration was well aware of illegal bribery, extortion and money laundering schemes being conducted by the Russians to get a foothold in the atomic energy business in the U.S. before approving a deal that handed them 20% of America’s uranium reserves…and resulted in a windfall of donations to the Clinton Foundation.

As we pointed out last summer when Peter Schweizer first released his feature documentary Clinton Cash, the Uranium One deal, as approved by the Obama Administration, netted the Clintons and their Clinton Foundation millions of dollars in donations and ‘speaking fees’ from Uranium One shareholders and other Russian entities.

Russian Purchase of US Uranium Assets in Return for $145mm in Contributions to the Clinton Foundation – Bill and Hillary Clinton assisted a Canadian financier, Frank Giustra, and his company, Uranium One, in the acquisition of uranium mining concessions in Kazakhstan and the United States.  Subsequently, the Russian government sought to purchase Uranium One but required approval from the Obama administration given the strategic importance of the uranium assets.  In the run-up to the approval of the deal by the State Department, nine shareholders of Uranium One just happened to make $145mm in donations to the Clinton Foundation.  Moreover, the New Yorker confirmed that Bill Clinton received $500,000 in speaking fees from a Russian investment bank, with ties to the Kremlin, around the same time.  Needless to say, the State Department approved the deal giving Russia ownership of 20% of U.S. uranium assets 

Now, thanks to newly released affidavits from a case that landed one of the Russian co-conspirators, Vadim Mikerin, in jail, we learn that not only was the Obama administration aware the Russians’ illegal acts in the U.S. but it may have also been fully aware that “Russian nuclear officials had routed millions of dollars to the U.S. designed to benefit former President Bill Clinton’s charitable foundation during the time Secretary of State Hillary Clinton served on a government body that provided a favorable decision to Moscow.”  Per The Hill:

Before the Obama administration approved a controversial deal in 2010 giving Moscow control of a large swath of American uranium, the FBI had gathered substantial evidence that Russian nuclear industry officials were engaged in bribery, kickbacks, extortion and money laundering designed to grow Vladimir Putin’s atomic energy business inside the United States, according to government documents and interviews.

Federal agents used a confidential U.S. witness working inside the Russian nuclear industry to gather extensive financial records, make secret recordings and intercept emails as early as 2009 that showed Moscow had compromised an American uranium trucking firm with bribes and kickbacks in violation of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, FBI and court documents show.

They also obtained an eyewitness account — backed by documents — indicating Russian nuclear officials had routed millions of dollars to the U.S. designed to benefit former President Bill Clinton’s charitable foundation during the time Secretary of State Hillary Clinton served on a government body that provided a favorable decision to Moscow, sources told The Hill.

Of course, when Schweizer’s book first made Uranium One a political hot topic in 2015, both the Obama administration and the Clintons defended their actions and insisted there was no evidence that any Russians or donors engaged in wrongdoing and there was no national security reason for anyone to oppose the deal.  That said, we now know that the FBI was aware of wrongdoing going back to at least April 2009 even though the deal wasn’t approved until October 2010.

But FBI, Energy Department and court documents reviewed by The Hill show the FBI in fact had gathered substantial evidence well before the committee’s decision that Vadim Mikerin — the main Russian overseeing Putin’s nuclear expansion inside the United States — was engaged in wrongdoing starting in 2009.

The first decision occurred in October 2010, when the State Department and government agencies on the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States unanimously approved the partial sale of Canadian mining company Uranium One to the Russian nuclear giant Rosatom, giving Moscow control of more than 20 percent of America’s uranium supply.

In 2011, the administration gave approval for Rosatom’s Tenex subsidiary to sell commercial uranium to U.S. nuclear power plants in a partnership with the United States Enrichment Corp. Before then, Tenex had been limited to selling U.S. nuclear power plants reprocessed uranium recovered from dismantled Soviet nuclear weapons under the 1990s Megatons to Megawatts peace program.

And guess who ran the FBI’s investigation into this particular Russian plot?  As The Hill notes, the Mikerin probe began in 2009 under Robert Mueller, now the special counsel in charge of the Trump case, and ended in late 2015 under the controversial, former FBI Director James Comey who was relieved of his duties by President Trump.

Ironically, when the DOJ finally arrested Mikerin in 2014, following 5 years of investigations in a massive international bribery and money-laundering scheme, rather than publicly celebrate, they seemingly swept it under the rug.  In fact, there was no public release concerning the case at all until a full year later when the DOJ announced a plea deal with Mikerin right before labor day.

Bringing down a major Russian nuclear corruption scheme that had both compromised a sensitive uranium transportation asset inside the U.S. and facilitated international money laundering would seem a major feather in any law enforcement agency’s cap.

But the Justice Department and FBI took little credit in 2014 when Mikerin, the Russian financier and the trucking firm executives were arrested and charged.

The only public statement occurred an entire year later when the Justice Department put out a little-noticed press release in August 2015, just days before Labor Day. The release noted that the various defendants had reached plea deals.

By that time, the criminal cases against Mikerin had been narrowed to a single charge of money laundering for a scheme that officials admitted stretched from 2004 to 2014. And though agents had evidence of criminal wrongdoing they collected since at least 2009, federal prosecutors only cited in the plea agreement a handful of transactions that occurred in 2011 and 2012, well after the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States’s approval.

The final court case also made no mention of any connection to the influence peddling conversations the FBI undercover informant witnessed about the Russian nuclear officials trying to ingratiate themselves with the Clintons even though agents had gathered documents showing the transmission of millions of dollars from Russia’s nuclear industry to an American entity that had provided assistance to Bill Clinton’s foundation, sources confirmed to The Hill.

Perhaps this is what the “most transparent” President in history meant when he told Medvedev that he would have “more flexibility” after his 2012 election.

Below are the affidavits released today:

https://www.scribd.com/document/361782806/Indictment-Affidavit#from_embed

https://www.scribd.com/document/361783782/Mikerin-Plea-Deal#from_embed

https://www.scribd.com/document/361783782/Mikerin-Plea-Deal#from_embed

https://gunnyg.files.wordpress.com/2017/10/obamaputinlaughgangsterpix.jpg?w=585&zoom=2

https://gunnyg.files.wordpress.com/2017/10/650-101717-obama-and-the-clintons.jpg?w=640&zoom=2


BREAKING NEWS: Senate Judiciary OPENS PROBE into Clinton-Obama era Russian nuclear bribery case …


The Obama Administration’s Uranium One Scandal

https://i1.wp.com/c5.nrostatic.com/sites/default/files/styles/original_image_with_cropping/public/uploaded/uranium-one-deal-obama-administration-complicit-not-just.jpg

Source: ZeroHedge

General Asapov Died In Syria Because Russian Officers Lead From The Front

Unlike Western armies the Russian army still requires senior officers like General Asapov to lead their men into battle

https://dxczjjuegupb.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/Lieutenant-General-Valery-Asapov-680x496_c.jpg

The death of Lieutenant General Valery Asapov and two Russian colonels who were with him in Syria highlights the fundamentally different military command philosophies of the US and Russian militaries.

Putting aside the question of whether or not General Asapov was deliberately targeted, the key point about his death is that he was a high ranking general (commander at the time of his death of Russia’s 5th Red Banner Army) who was killed whilst carrying out personal reconnaissance on the front line in Deir Ezzor in Syria, where he exposed himself to shelling.

Though his death was big news in Russia, it has been received there calmly, with none of the displays of dismay or panic, or the feverish post-mortems, or the angry cries for vengeance, which would assuredly have happened if a US officer of similar rank had been killed in the same way.

Nor is there the slightest sign of General Asapov’s death having caused any change in the battlefield strategy followed by the Russians in Syria.

Thus offensive military operations by the Syrian army as advised and directed by the Russians in the area where General Asapov was killed continue with undiminished vigour, with – as reported by The Duran – Russian engineers just completing a road bridge across the Euphrates to enable the Syrian army to get across.

All this highlights a key point about the Russian army’s system of command: Russian commanders – including the most senior commanders – are expected to lead from the front, making themselves visible to their men, whilst at the same through direct observation gaining a ‘feel’ for the battle.

By contrast US military practice prefers to keep commanders out of harm’s way, expecting them to control the battle from their headquarters in the rear.

The result is that Russian commanders run a far greater risk of being killed or injured than their US counterparts do.

Back in 2008 General Anatoly Khrulyov, commander of Russia’s 58th Army, was wounded during the war with Georgia during a firefight with Georgian Special Forces.  Khrulyov’s wounding was reported in the West as a blow to the Russians. The Russians however were unfazed, going on to win the war against Georgia – in which General Khrulyov’s 58th Army played the leading part – in just five days.

After the war General Khrulyov continued to command the 58th Army until his retirement in 2010, when he became  – with the agreement of the Russian government – the Chief of Staff of the military of the breakaway former Georgian republic of Abkhazia, which through his contribution to the battle in 2008 he had helped to save.

By contrast when US Major General Harold Greene was killed in Afghanistan in 2014 as a result of an insider attack by an Afghan soldier, it was the first time a US general had been killed in combat for more than forty years.  To see what an unusual occurrence that was, consider how the BBC reported General Greene’s death

Gen Greene is not only the highest ranking US military official to have been killed since the start of the war in Afghanistan, his death also marks the first time in more than 40 years that a general has been killed in combat….

“It was once common for generals to share the fate of the ordinary soldier,” says Boston University political scientist Andrew Bacevich. “There was once a common used phrase – ‘fighting generals’ – those who stayed on the front lines.”

Lt Gen Simon Bolivar Buckner Jr was killed in the final days of the Battle for Okinawa during World War Two. Posthumously promoted to the rank of four-star general, Gen Buckner became the highest-ranking military officer killed on the battlefield during that war.

“In the US Civil War, it was quite common for generals to be killed. In World War Two, the odds were substantially lower,” says Stephen Biddle, a military expert with the Council on Foreign Relations.

“As weapons’ ranges increased, the headquarters tended to move to the rear, to get them further out of harm’s way.”

Maj Gen John Albert B Dillard Jr was killed during the Vietnam War when his helicopter was shot down in 1970. According to data compiled by the Associated Press, Gen Dillard was the last army general killed in action overseas before the death of Gen Greene.

As military technology and tactics changed in Vietnam, so did the nature of the war. Because of the lack of distinct frontlines, many commanders would lead their battalions from helicopters above the battlefield, radioing commands to their soldiers below…..

Lt Gen Timothy Maude became the highest-ranking officer killed by foreign action since Gen Buckner when a passenger plane crashed into the Pentagon on 9/11.

Following the Vietnam War, high ranking officers were rarely placed in vulnerable positions, such as on the battlefield. Instead, they occupied more strategic positions in places like the Pentagon.

“In modern times, the American military has become more bureaucratised,” says HW Brands, a historian at the University of Texas.

“These days it takes a long time to become a general – 25 years – whereas in the Civil War, people became generals after three months in battle. The army will not put someone with 25 years training on the field.”

Note that this very low level of combat deaths of US generals – Dillard and Greene are the only two to have been killed in combat since 1970 – has happened notwithstanding that the US military has been engaged in fighting in one place or another almost continuously since that year.

This is completely different from Russian military practice, in which the commander is expected – including by his own soldiers – to lead from the front, something which inevitably exposes senior Russian officers to much greater risk of death or injury in battle by comparison with senior US officers.

The reason the Russian military is able to brush off losses of its senior commanders such as those of Generals Khrulyov and Asapov in a way that the US military almost certainly would not be able to do is because the command and staff systems of the Russian army are specifically designed in anticipation of such losses.

This has practical consequences in the way US and Russian officers conceive of their command roles during a battle.

A US commander directs the battle from his headquarters in the rear, relying on reports and intelligence (including increasingly from drones) to keep him accurately informed about what is going on.  By way of example, in 2003 General Tommy Franks directed the whole invasion of Iraq from his headquarters located far away to the rear in Qatar.

By contrast a Russian commander is supposed to lead from the front.  General Khrulyov was wounded in 2008 because he advanced with his men into South Ossetia, and General Asapov has just been killed because he was carrying out personal reconnaissance on the front line in Deir Ezzor in Syria.

Reports and intelligence from drones and from other technical means obviously are sent to Russian headquarters, just as they are to US headquarters, and are processed by the staff there and provided to the commander and to the supreme headquarters in Moscow.  However the burden of assessing this intelligence and these reports, and informing and advising the commander about them, falls upon the chief of staff, whose role in the Russian army goes far beyond the organisational and planning tasks the chief of staff tends to have in the US army.

Which is the better system as a civilian I am in no position to judge.

The Russians would doubtless say that the US system turns commanders from warriors into managers, robbing them of their ‘feel’ of the battle, and causing them to lose the qualities of aggression and inventiveness which are essential to achieve victory.

The Americans would doubtless respond that the Russian system is outdated, being more suited to the Napoleonic battlefield than the modern battlefield, and that sending valuable officers into harm’s way where they might get injured or killed is not only wasteful, but by distancing the officers from their headquarters, actually limits their knowledge of the state of the battle.

Regardless of who is right, on the specific subject of General Asapov’s death, I suspect that as a Russian officer he would be baffled by some of the things which have been said about it.

I am sure that he would say that death is an occupational hazard for a soldier, and that there was therefore nothing untoward or remarkable about his death, and that the proper way to respond to it is not to seek ‘revenge’ – which I suspect he would consider futile and pointless – but to complete successfully the mission for which he gave his life.

As to his being ‘martyred’, I suspect that he would simply say that death in battle was the price he was always willing to pay for his service as a Russian soldier.

By Alexander | Russia Feed

Did USA.gov Declare War On Russia Yesterday?

Syria – U.S. CentCom Declares War On Russia

Yesterday three high ranking Russian officers were killed in an “ISIS attack” in eastern Syria. It is likely they were killed by U.S. special forces or insurgents under U.S. special forces control because ISIS is a proxy army, created and financed by USA.gov and her allies to grab as much land as possible in this region. The incident can be understood as a declaration of war.

The U.S. Central Command in the Middle East wants the oil fields in east-Syria under control of its proxy forces to set up and control a U.S. aligned Kurdish mini-state in the area. The Syrian government, allied with Russia, needs the revenues of the oil fields to rebuild the country.

https://i1.wp.com/www.moonofalabama.org/images5/syriaoilmap20170917.jpg

Last week the Russians issued sharply worded statements against U.S. coordination with al-Qaeda terrorists in Idleb province and warned of further escalation.

Yesterday the Russian Ministry of Defense accused the U.S. military in east-Syria of direct collaboration with the Islamic State:

US Army special units provide free passage for the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) through the battle formations of Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL) terrorists, the ministry said in a statement.“Facing no resistance of the ISIS militants, the SDF units are advancing along the left shore of the Euphrates towards Deir ez-Zor,” the statement reads.

The newly released images “clearly show that US special ops are stationed at the outposts previously set up by ISIS militants.”

“Despite that the US strongholds being located in the ISIS areas, no screening patrol has been organized at them,” the Russian Ministry of Defense said.

This map marks the currently relevant conflict area – (U.S. proxies – yellow, SAA – red, ISIS – black):

Map by Weekend Warriorbigger

The accusations are plausible. Large parts of ISIS in Deir Ezzor consist of local tribal forces from eastern Syria. U.S. special envoy Brett McGurk recently met tribal leaders who had earlier pledged allegiance to ISIS. Deals were made. As we wrote:

The U.S. diplomat tasked with the job, Brett McGurk, recently met with local tribal dignitaries of the area. Pictures of the meeting were published. Several people pointed out that the very same dignitaries were earlier pictured swearing allegiance to the Islamic State.

https://i1.wp.com/www.moonofalabama.org/images5/isismcgurk-s.jpg

bigger

Just like during the “Anbar Awaking” in its war on Iraq the U.S. is bribing the local radicals to temporarily change over to its side. This will help the U.S. to claim that it defeated ISIS. But as soon as the payments stop the very same forces will revert back to their old game.

The local criminal Ahmad Abu Khawla, circled in the pictures above, who had earlier fought for ISIS, was suddenly installed as commander of a newly invented “Deir Ezzor Military Council”, set up under U.S. special force control.

Last night a Russian three-star general and two colonels were killed in a mortar attack while they visited a Syrian army headquarters in Deir Ezzor:

Lieutenant-General Valery Asapov, of the Russian armed forces, has been killed after coming under shelling from Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL) militants near Deir ez-Zor, the Russian Defense Ministry has announced.In its statement, the ministry said that Asapov was at a command outpost manned by Syrian troops, assisting commanders in the liberation of the city of Deir ez-Zor.

Lieutenant-General Valery Asapov is the highest-ranking Russian officer to be killed in the Syrian campaign. He was a commander of the 5th Army in Russia’s Eastern Military District, one of the four strategic commands in the Russian Armed Forces. The army is based in Russia’s Far East, in the city of Ussuriysk, some 98 km (61 miles) from Vladivostok.

For three years ISIS had besieged Syrian troops in Deir Ezzor city and its airport. It had not once managed to successfully attack the Syrian headquarters or to kill high ranking officers. Now, as U.S. proxy forces “advised” by U.S. special forces, have taken position north of Deir Ezzor, “ISIS” suddenly has the intelligence data and precision mortar capabilities to kill a bunch of visiting Russian officers?

That is not plausible. No one in Damascus, Baghdad, Tehran or Moscow will believe that.

The Russian military, as usual, reacts calmly and officially attributes the attack to ISIS. Doing so avoids pressure to immediately react to the attack. (The U.S. will falsely interpret this as a face-saving Russian retreat.) 

But no one in Moscow will believe that the incident is independent of other recent maneuvers by the U.S. forces and independent of the earlier accusations the Russian military made against the U.S. forces.

Nominally the U.S. and Russia are both in Syria to fight the Islamic State. The Russian troops are legitimately there, having been invited by the Syrian government. The U.S. forces have no legal justification for their presence. So far open hostilities between the two sides had been avoided. But as the U.S. now obviously sets out to split Syria apart, openly cooperates with terrorists and does not even refrain from killing Russian officers, the gloves will have to come off.

U.S. Central Command has declared war on the Russian contingent in Syria. A high ranking Russian general was killed. This inevitably requires a reaction. The response does not necessarily have to come from Russian forces.  Moscow has many capable allies in the area. The response does not necessarily have to come in Syria.

“Accidents” and “incidents”, like an “ISIS mortar attacks”, or unintentional bombing of troop concentration of the other side, can happen on both sides of the front. Cars can blow up, bridges can collapse. Any U.S. officer or civilian official in the larger Middle East should be aware that they too are now targets.

Source: Moon Of Alabama

 

Russia Kills 800 ISIS Terrorists, US There To Rescue Survivors

 

The US has long been accused of colluding with Daesh to provide safe passage and logistic support to the members of the Takfiri group in conflict zones.

Russian forces killed over 800 ISIS terrorists in Syria over the weekend as US troops airlifted the remaining survivors to safety, according to eyewitnesses

Syrian troops supported by Russian warplanes conducted one of the biggest operations against ISIS to-date, with over 800 ISIS militants, 13 tanks, and 39 pickup trucks equipped with machine guns completely destroyed, the Russian Defence Ministry confirmed.

Abna24.com reports: “On August 27, 2017, the [Syrian] government forces’ units have annihilated ISIS’s most battle-tested and well-armed group with massive support of the Russian Aerospace Forces in the Euphrates River valley near the city of Tell Ghanem al-Ali.”

“Currently, a grouping of Syrian government troops is rapidly carrying out an offensive along the eastern shore of the Euphrates River, moving toward Deir ez-Zor. The goal is to unblock this city and destroy the last stronghold of ISIS in Syria,” the Defense Ministry said.

The Syrian army and self-defense units supported by the Russian Aerospace Forces have significantly advanced toward Deir ez-Zor from three directions, the Russian General Staff said earlier this week.

The lifting of siege of Deir ez-Zor will lead to the complete defeat of the most combat-effective formations of ISIS terrorist group in Syria, the chief of the Russian General Staff’s Main Operational Directorate said on Friday.

Source: New World Order Report