Yes, yes, that is what Turkey declared in Brussels and I think they, out of traditional humbleness, lowered numbers of destroyed S1 Pantsir AD systems dramatically. I think there were at least 25-30 those systems destroyed together with those 3,500 SAA soldiers and, probably, couple battalions of Russian SSOs. In related news, before lunch I was Napoleon, after lunch I became Marcus Aurelius. Turkish baloney and butt-hurt from what they experienced in Idlib is such that they don't see anything wrong with simply making shit up. So much so, that Russia's Ministry of Defense was forced to flatly debunk those fairy tales. In its statement Russian MoD underscored:
Translation: Assessments of combat effectiveness of strike UAVs in Idlib Province, presented to the head of Turkish Republic, alleging the destruction of eight Syrian gun-missile complexes "Pantsir" do not correspond to reality and are more than just exaggeration".
Truth is, only four S1s have been deployed around Idlib, two were damaged and repaired. Most of SAA's S1s remained deployed around Damascus and didn't take part in operations in Idlib. But never mind, as long as it is stated that it happened, it DID happen in accordance to NATO's combat doctrine which is rigged towards media and brainwashing, not fighting the actual war against competent adversary. The butt-hurt in Turkey is understandable, but it wouldn't be completed without this S-400 soap opera.
ANKARA (Reuters) - The United States has offered to sell Turkey its Patriot missile defense system if Ankara promises not to operate a rival Russian system, Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan said, in what he called a significant softening in Washington's position. Two Turkish officials told Reuters that Turkey was evaluating the U.S. offer but that Ankara had not changed its plans for the Russian S-400 systems, which it has said it will start to activate next month. In Washington, the Pentagon said that U.S. Defense Secretary Mark Esper had not changed his position on the issue, which was: "Turkey is not going to receive a Patriot battery unless it returns the S-400."
Erdogan was in Brussels to "report" on Turkey's great victory in Idlib. Meanwhile lunatic "Ambassador" Jeffrey was thinking on:
Jeffrey also said they had considered possible responses should Russia and the Syrian government break a ceasefire in Idlib, officials said. He suggested other NATO states could individually or as an alliance provide military support to help Turkey. But he ruled out sending ground troops and said there still needed to be a resolution to the S-400 issue for the security relationship to move forward. "You can forget ground troops. Turkey has demonstrated that it and its opposition forces are more than capable of holding ground on their own," Jeffrey said. "The issue is the situation in the air and it's what we are looking at," he said. Washington did not believe that Russia and Syrian had any interest in a permanent ceasefire in Idlib, he said. "They are out to get a military victory in Syria and our goal is to make it difficult for them to do that," Jeffrey said. "Our goal is...to make them think twice. If they ignore our warnings and preparations and move forward, then we will react as rapidly as possible in consultation with our NATO and European allies on what the package of sanctions and other reactions will be."
Jeffrey is delusional and is very butt-hurt, possibly because of his utter professional and human inadequacy, which is expected from a man with background in management and a member of "National Security" team of W (we all know how "well" that played out) and a burden of "victory" in Vietnam War with which utter irrational hatred of Russians comes naturally and, in fact, is a requirement; enough to recall another American Vietnam War "hero", late John McCain. Obviously Jeffrey's deal with Syria is not to fight terrorism but to support Al Qaeda (and its many iterations) operations there. In general--anything to not allow Syria (and Russia) to defeat Islamic terrorism there. He even speaks openly about it. Jeffery, an infantry officer in Vietnam, then some CIA "spook", in addition to his "diplomatic" background, is a 74 year old and, obviously, cranky man who does not understand modern warfare and, as is expected from US "experts" in Russia, has no knowledge of real Russia. Nor, obviously, he knows his own country, the United States that is, since he still thinks that the United States is this unstoppable military juggernaut which....lost most of its wars. That is why this senior citizen is so eager to start the war with Russia. There are many like him in all kinds of D.C. institutions.
Highlighted in yellow is a very good indicator of a depth of a delusion this whole cabal of US "strategists" resides in: sanctions are good for Russia. But as was demonstrated in the last 72 hours, Russia can also "sanction" back and that shakes the bejesus out of not only the US, but global economy. But here is the larger issue: how many still rational and competent people are left out there in the US governing institutions? How many of them have real strategic awareness and I am not talking about Mnuchin suddenly having an urge to talk to Russians on "investments" and "sanctions". Mnuchin is a bankster who understands only debit and credit, black and red, and when he sees red he (and his ilk) react, in pain. I am talking about people who have any strategic vision based on reality. Whole American geopolitical thought in the last 30 years is a permanent record of one failure after another. US "diplomacy" is a laughing stock of the world, US military, ask Iran. Economically? You all know what is going on. How this all could have gone so wrong, so fast? I have a metaphysical answer for that--exceeding established limit on a number of ass-holes populating governing institutions. It all comes down, in the end, to how many decent, honorable, honest that is, people are still out there and I'd say not many. In final analysis these are always human choices we make, which count most towards the final outcome. Or, as beloved by me Barnett stated:
… swift decline in British vigor at home and the failure to exploit the empire were not owing to some inevitable senescent process of history....That cause was a political doctrine.... The doctrine was liberalism, which criticized and finally demolished the traditional conception of the nation-state as a collective organism, a community, and asserted instead the primacy of individual. According to liberal thinking a nation was no more than so many human atoms who happened to live under the same set of laws.... It was Adam Smith who formulated the doctrine of Free Trade, the keystone of liberalism, which was to exercise a long-live and baneful effect on British power.... Adam Smith attacked the traditional “mercantilist” belief that a nation should be generally self-supporting.
We all will pay one way or another for an expected and predicted and ongoing as I type it collapse of liberalism, it is just that one cannot escape a desire to see some of the most ardent enablers of liberalism, who have their hands soaked in blood, be seen behind bars or in a front of a firing squad. Some of them know today that this is not anymore beyond the realm of possible and will try to light the world on fire, thinking that under the cover of ensuing chaos they can make an escape. But I know for sure now that there are those who keep the score. Just listen about "We can repeat":
Post a Comment