Here it comes: Syria

[Heathrow Harry]

99% of the UK population has no idea we have a base in Cyprus and they sure as hell wouldn't go to war over it - and, as I pointed out earlier, you forget the Cypriot Govt are also are a player.

A threat from Russia could/would lead to a request that the UK should leave - or at the every least not use the base. Either would be almost impossible to deflect

and as westernhero said NATO isn't going to go nuclear over say a Russian cruise missile strike on 4 Tornado GR's at the end of the Med...........

[andrewn]

HH - Cyprus has a patchy history recently of being both pro-Western and pro-Russia, but since the financial crash they've been noticeably less pro-Russia and a lot less vocal on foreign affairs in general. There might be a little posturing for a domestic audience, but I wouldnt expect any significant flak from them, for example over the use of Akrotiri.

[ORAC]

I can pick out two emerging threads of Russian cyber/diplomatic efforts over Syria at the moment.

The first is to bluster and threaten retribution against the UK if an attack takes place at all. This is perhaps because they think the UK can be peeled away from cooperating with France and the USA. Note that Russian cruise missiles could just as easily hit French bases in Jordan and the Gulf - and indeed France itself, as well as numerous US land and sea assets.

The second is a growing set of anonymous reports of US/Russian negotiations on any attack being against an agreed list of vacated bases and headquarters - Potemkin villages if you will - which would allow Russia to claim a victory after an attack by claiming it was merely a sham.

[ImageGear]

Having come through the original cold war and witnessed Russia's attempt at expanding it's influence to within 80 miles of Florida, what does the panel think is the Russian end game in this new domino strategy.

For sure, we know that the successful annexation of Crimea and the current incursion will not end the drive to influence further West. So where are the next targets for destabilisation or "liberation"?

What does the "final solution" look like?

IG

[Thomas coupling]

I read an article in the Sunday Times about a senior government aid (UK) who had spent 20 years in office in Russia in the embassy.
He recalls a fairly recent (couple of years old) altercation with his opposite number during a dinner where the conversation got heated somewhat and the russian lost his temper with him. The russion said to the brit: "You think we're all Barbarians here in Russia don't you?". Before the brit could answer, the russian said: !Well we **king well are, we always have been...if we can't earn respect in the world diplomatically then we will turn to the next best thing - fear!"

Think carefully what the world is looking at here....Putin is cold, calm and extremely ruthless. He is a trained assassin from his previous life. He thinks things through carefully, he spends time planning devious indirect methods of antagonising the west. He would have absolutely no compunction to cross the red line if he was directly attacked. Make no bones about this. He is the real McCoy.
Trump is a complete psycho. The man is unhinged. He is unfit for running a business never mind the most poewrfull country on earth.
Mankind will continue to teeter between stability and extinction as long as these two forces occupy the same space.
Be afraid, guys, be very afraid.

[Evalu8ter]

TC,
I tend to agree with your analysis. Everything Putin has done has been measured and calibrated to see what the reaction is from NATO and the EU. The Annexation of Crimea and the interference in Ukraine have provoked opprobrium, but little concrete reaction. Likewise, he strolled right over Obama's "red lines" in Syria, doubtless encouraging Assad to use WMD to see if the West had the "Minerals" to push back. Obama didn't - and his weak, disastrous Foreign Policy is now unwinding dramatically with a nuclearised NK, an emboldened Iran, a Russia basking in external successes (conveniently hiding economic and social deprivation at home....) and a number of allies now nervously worrying if they're next....yes, I'm looking at you Baltic States. Putin is assiduously trying to destabilise NATO; he's courting Turkey and, effectively, buying large parts of Greece. Trump was installed as he preached isolationism - doubtless Putin considered he'd not risk trading New York for Vilnius. However, Trump has not exactly followed the script - his retaliation for the last Chemical attack gave Putin pause to think, as has his sabre rattling with NK and China. What Trump and NATO do next has to be carefully thought through, and backed up. The time to contain Putin has passed by, how we deal with him now is very finely balanced as there is much "face" in the game......My opinion? A co-ordinated missile strike to "punish" Assad and warn Putin - who'll likely be in the Baltic States this time next year anyway......NATO/EU should not have become so greedy and pushed so far East - it enabled Putin to mobilise Russia's greatest fears, encirclement and invasion, to shore up his own position and that of his sponsors and supporters.

[Heathrow Harry]

Originally Posted by andrewn

HH - Cyprus has a patchy history recently of being both pro-Western and pro-Russia, but since the financial crash they've been noticeably less pro-Russia and a lot less vocal on foreign affairs in general. There might be a little posturing for a domestic audience, but I wouldnt expect any significant flak from them, for example over the use of Akrotiri.

depends what Russia threatens them with - a potential air strike would bring the people on to the streets in minutes................

[Heathrow Harry]

"Russia's attempt at expanding it's influence to within 80 miles of Florida,"

And NATO stretched to within 67 miles of St Petersburg..................

[ShotOne]

“...the RAF serving as the air arm of jihadi extremist fighters in Syria “... And I thought I’d never agree with anything said by Diane Abbot!

[A_Van]

Originally Posted by ImageGear

....

What does the "final solution" look like?

IG

Trying to remain within the aviation topics and not in "general politics", would only like to say that the best solution would be stop provocations against Russia. Try to solve internal problems without inventing an external enemy who is to be blamed in anything and everything that goes wrong (or seems to go wrong). Trump/Reps vs Clinton/Dem in US, Brexit in UK, migration problems in Europe, etc. Yes, it is always the easiest way to consolidate population or alliance members (by diverting their attention from real problems), but it is too primitive. And it case with Russia (well armed) it is also quite dangerous.

This is of course valid for idiots in the Russian establishment, too.

Coming back to the aviation topic: again, strange to hear speculations about Cyprus. I am sure that even in a bad case Russia will not send cruise missiles to the British base near Limassol. What for? All those Tornados would be downed above the sea if they shoot at the Russian forces in Syria. Why to involve Cyprus?

[ORAC]

“...the RAF serving as the air arm of jihadi extremist fighters in Syria “... And I thought I’d never agree with anything said by Diane Abbot!

Except they’re not, are they?

In fact the RAF is operating over northern Syria and Iraq - within the Russian S-400 envelope and unengaged - in action against ISIL. The target identified in the original UN Resolution and exactly the same target as supposedly being engaged by the Turkish and Russian aircraft performing coordinated operations in the same airspace.

It’s just that the Turks have been, instead, concentrating their efforts against any and all Kurdish forces whilst the Russians concentrate their efforts on those opposing Assad and ignore the rest - including ISIL.

[roving]

Originally Posted by Heathrow Harry

"Russia's attempt at expanding it's influence to within 80 miles of Florida,"

And NATO stretched to within 67 miles of St Petersburg..................

When countries join the EU they are entitled to become members of NATO.

Estonia is the closest NATO member to St Petersburg.

Estonia has a population of just 1.3 million.

The City of St Petersburg has a population of 5.2 million.

Does St Petersburg feel threatened by Estonia?

Of course not.

Has NATO any interest at all in repeating the errors of Napoleon and Hitler and invading Russia?

Of course not.

Russia is just peeved because it cannot do to the Baltic States what it recently did to the Ukraine, without a response from NATO.

That does not mean it is not playing mind games in the Baltic States. But with NATO providing defensive air cover, no-one living there is intimidated.

[SARF]

No need for fighting. Break Russia financially ..
Massive trade and finance embargo’s .. target the got rich quick gangsters, freeze assets ..
Tell Germany to cancel it’s pipeline etc or face tarrifs selling into,the US.
Trump had many more options than a few missiles

Putins popular at the moment. But popularity is fleeting when your populance is feeling poorer and hungrier

[Easy Street]

Originally Posted by ORAC

Except they’re not, are they?

I think the point was that they would be, if striking the Assad regime. Which is a fair one.

Originally Posted by A Van

All those Tornados would be downed above the sea if they shoot at the Russian forces in Syria.

If the Tornados were launching cruise missiles I should imagine it would be from beneath the radar horizon of land-based SAM, which would mean fighters needing to be sent after them if Putin’s threat was to be fulfilled. Even if it was assumed that western escort fighters were kept away by the SAM, the Russian fighters would still have to run the gauntlet of naval SAM (and perhaps F22!?) while chasing the Tornados, at the same time as the air defence network would presumably be dealing with dozens of incoming missiles. It’s nowhere near as cut-and-dried as you make out...

...but what a mess!

[FantomZorbin]

#2182

You think we're all Barbarians here in Russia don't you ... Well we *** well are, we always have been...if we can't earn respect in the world diplomatically then we will turn to the next best thing - fear!

This is complete confirmation of part of the contents of a briefing I attended almost 30yrs ago, so no change there with or without Putin.

[A_Van]

Originally Posted by Easy Street

....

If the Tornados were launching Storm Shadow they would probably do so from beneath the radar horizon of land-based SAM, ....

Correct, but do not forget about the Russian ships that would be moved forward (in fact, already moved "for training exercises"). They would detect the launch pretty soon. And they have means against such missiles.

Also, have you heard of OTHR (over-the-horizon radars)? Russia does have some and East Med is transparent for them (and "stealth" does not work here). Of course they can't guide anti-missiles, but early warning is quite important in such a scenario to give land-based SAMs enough time to get ready.

Third, considering the recent episode with the Israeli attack, even "grand-dad's" C-125 and "dad's" Buks operated by the Syrians were able to intercept 5 of 8 relatively new and smart A2S missiles.

[Heathrow Harry]

"Has NATO any interest at all in repeating the errors of Napoleon and Hitler and invading Russia? Of course not"

That's not how the Russians see it ...... and they're the only one's who count

You're argument about the relative size of Estonia and Russia is also not on - Cuba only had a population of 7.45 mm in 1962 but the US went crazy when the Russians turned up.......

[A_Van]

Originally Posted by Thomas coupling

I read an article in the Sunday Times about a senior government aid (UK) who had spent 20 years in office in Russia in the embassy.
He recalls a fairly recent (couple of years old) altercation with his opposite number during a dinner where the conversation got heated somewhat and the russian lost his temper with him. The russion said to the brit: "You think we're all Barbarians here in Russia don't you?". Before the brit could answer, the russian said: !Well we **king well are, we always have been...if we can't earn respect in the world diplomatically then we will turn to the next best thing - fear!"

.....

Russian "diplomatic corps" is full of poorly educated dumbs and alcoholics. I assume such words could leave one's mouth over vodka.
However, having spent myself over 25 years in close contacts with US and European high-tech folks, I have never heard of such "exchange of views".
Unfortunately, many idiots recently appeared on the scene (incl. TV) on both sides using much "stronger expressions". Pity.

[Easy Street]

Originally Posted by A_Van

Russian ships ... have means against such missiles.

OTHR (over-the-horizon radars) ... can't guide anti-missiles, but early warning ... give[s] land-based SAMs enough time to get ready.

even "grand-dad's" C-125 and "dad's" Buks operated by the Syrians were able to intercept 5 of 8 relatively new and smart A2S missiles.

Back-pedalling already then? All your points are correct but they only speak to downing cruise missiles, not the aircraft launching them, which was what you originally said would happen. The ships’ locations would be known to the aircraft and easily avoided; there’s no way enough ships can be deployed to provide overlapping SAM coverage down to sea level all the way to Cyprus.

[ORAC]

A_Van.

With the best will in the world, OTH radar is only effective used over large areas of sea. There are surface wave coastal radars effective out to a couple of hundred miles, but only against surface targets, they wouldn’t pick up a cruise missile. Even if they could, detection range and identification in a crowded, and doubtless highly jammed EW environment like the eastern Med would be a nightmare.