Posted on 11/22/2015 6:17:19 PM PST by rickmichaels
Russia has launched a merciless blanket air campaign, backed by Kalibr cruise missiles fired from the Caspian and Mediterranean Seas, for the object of wiping the Islamic State's Syrian center of Raqqa off the map, DEBKAfile's military sources report.
Western and Middle East sources tracking the campaign since Friday, Nov. 20, report that at least 75 air sorties have been conducted and are systematically razing the town of 200,000 inhabitants 160km east of Aleppo, district by district, irrespective of civilian town dwellers.
Moscow wants the entire Middle East and Muslim world to see the price exacted for launching a terrorist attack on Russia after the downing of the Metrojet airliner that killed 224 people over Egyptian Sinai on Oct. 31.
Russian bombers and cruise missiles rained death and destruction on the ISIS administration center after the jihadists claimed responsibility for that disaster and published photos of a soft drink can claimed to have been rigged as a bomb for blowing the plane up.
When the Russians are done, the town will be a pile of rubble, an intelligence source told DEBKAfile.
The Russian defense ministry ran photos Friday of Russian technicians loading bombs on the Tupolev 95 bombers (dubbed "Bears" in the West). Ground crews marked the bombs "For ours," and "For Paris."
Last Tuesday, our military sources first revealed that the Tupolev's were taking off from Morozovsk air base in the Rostov district of southern Russia instead of from the Russian military enclave outside the Syrian town of Latakia.
Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu reported Friday that 15 Syrian oil facilities seized by ISIS had been destroyed this week and 525 of their trucks, costing the jihadists $1.5 million a day in revenue.
As for casualties, the published figure of 600 jihadists killed in one day is probably far below the real figure. Our sources report that the Islamist terrorists' death toll most probably runs into thousands with many more injured.
To sustain the hectic tempo of its aerial war, Moscow has doubled the number of bombers assigned to Syria from 34 two weeks ago to 69 by Saturday, Nov. 21.
Our military sources add that this augmented air power allows the Russians to expand their targets to other parts of Syria. On Friday, they renewed sorties against Syrian rebel forces holding the southern town of Deraa near the Jordanian border.
Russia gave us Isaac Asimov, also.
You’re going too far for me. Russia does have an authoritarian drive toward domination outside its borders. Something of its own caliphatic-type sense of destiny for global domination, and that is a risk that should be recognized. It is, for example, an implicit ally of Iran’s, and Iran has a stated goal of destroying the US militarily.
Squashing ISIS may be a good outcome, but naivete and romanticism re: Russia is not a good thing.
Monday the French Carrier will be on station and ready to go. I expect they will enter the fight with a vengence—maybe tonight! It will be awsome! Raqqa will be no more!
Oh, and the short answer to Obama’s support of the Sunni ISIS over the Shia Iran’s puppet Assad in Syria, is that not only are “our friends the Saudis (and Jordanians and...) Sunni, but so are Indonesia and Pakistan from Obama’s youth.
Why doesn’t the muslim moon god rock stop the bombs from falling??
“Interesting that American press isn’t showing the carnage. “
I’ve been wondering that myself. Where are the nightly videos??
One hydrogen bomb should do it.
carpet is thicker, and stapled down. So yeah, carpet.
Ja, this
And also Tokyo with the Fire bombing
Too bad for the civilians who probably are being used as shields by ISIS
Next stop Mosul
I am not convinced. They have said over and over that the spread of NATO toward their borders was viewed as a threat. We negotiated one thing but did another. They claim their actions are a response to that, and to the fact that they see us as violating our negotiated agreement with them regarding those issues. So which is it? An aggression or a response? I’ll be honest, I see their point. If the tables were turned, what would we do? It does not look like moves to conquer. It looks like moves to secure.
But I respect your view and fully recognize I could be wrong. I cannot deny how it looks to me. I don’t think it is naivete and romanticism at all. I take no sides and stay cautious. But what I see on our side is a bunch of dug in attitudes that are not based on reality. I’m still stuck on “Trust but verify.” Many have moved to just plain distrust, vilify and squash and betray. We then get a reaction from them and say AHA!!!! Look! I told you they were aggressive. But which came first? We are a long way from the things Reagan said back when they were much more of a threat as the USSR. He worked to build trust saying, “we do not distrust because we are armed, we are armed because we distrust.” He discovered that they REALLY BELIEVED we would one day instigate a first strike. To us that sounds crazy. To them it was a solid belief. Do we really want to return to that?
Too many of the wise minds in our Country have died out and we have seen a rise in either hot heads or fruitcakes holding power, sometimes both at the same time.
Thanks for your reply, especially the “Tetris” part ;)
“Interesting that American press isn’t showing the carnage. Maybe it’s because they’re not willing to die to get this story.”
As soon as there’s a few dead children to photograph it will be the leading news story.
I had a professor who predicted we would become more like Russia, and Russia would become more like us. I don’t have a visionary bone in my body, naturally, I scoffed at the notion.
My dad told me that back in the ‘70s. I thought he was nuts.
He also hoped things would plateau out but I don’t see that yet. If we get Hillary or an empty Republican suit again, we will continue our descent.
I agree with you 100%
” I don’t have a visionary bone in my body, naturally, I scoffed at the notion.”
Slightly off topic but I had a friend who was quite serious with a guy back in the early 50s.
She broke it off,though,because she thought he was nuts. All he talked about was man landing on the moon.
We all told her it was a wise decision.
.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.