Russia Begins Drone Flights Over Syria: U.S. Officials

[Purveyor]

Source: NBC News

by Jim Miklaszewski

Russia has started flying drones over Syria in what appears to be its first aerial surveillance operations over the war-ravaged country, U.S. defense officials told NBC News.

Although the officials said there was no indication Russia had yet conducted combat missions using fighter jets and attack helicopters, they said they expected such operations to start soon.

Moscow has already sent in four SUKHOI attack fighter jets, four HIND attack assault helicopters, four HIP transport helicopters, along with tanks and artillery, the officials said.
Image: A MI-8 Helicopter flies during Russias large-scale Center-2015 military exercises
A MI-8 Helicopter flies during Russias large-scale Center-2015 military exercises at Donguzsky Range on Sept. 19, 2015 in Orenburg, Russia. The exercises aim to contain the outbreak of an armed conflict in Central Asia. Sasha Mordovets / Getty Images

In addition, it has now flown in large quantities of air-to-ground missiles, high-caliber ammunition for attack-jet machine guns and aircraft fuel, the officials added.

Read more: http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/russia-begins-first-drone-flights-over-syria-u-s-officals-n431001

---

Russia urges 'action' after shell hits Damascus embassy compound

Moscow (AFP) - Russia's foreign ministry on Monday called for "concrete action" after a shell landed on its embassy compound in the Syrian capital, blaming forces battling Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

"A shell fell on the territory of the Russian embassy in Damascus on September 20 around 9:00am, going deep into the ground without causing damage," the ministry said in a statement.

"We ... condemn the criminal shelling of the Russian diplomatic presence in Damascus. We await a clear standpoint on this terrorist act from all members of the international community, including regional actors."

"What is needed is not just words but concrete action," the statement said, adding that "the shelling of the Russian embassy was done from the direction of Jobar, where the anti-government militants are based."

The militants have "outside sponsors" who are responsible for influencing their actions, the foreign ministry said.

more...

http://news.yahoo.com/russia-calls-action-shell-hits-damascus-embassy-compound-154747119.html

[Demeter]

1. I can hear the teeth-gnashing in DC from here

Quick!! Order up the Bite Guards!

[Oneironaut]

2. The U.S. And Russia have something in common: neither is fighting ISIS.

The U.S. is propping up the usual losers to oppose a leader they don't like, and Russia is there to fight a proxy war against those forces. Meanwhile, ISIS laughs.

[jamzrockz]

4. I don't quite understand this line of thinking

For the Russians to effectively prop up the legitimate Syrian govt, they would have to face up with ISIS and the other Al Qaeda groups fighting to remove Assad. But for the US, leaving ISIS to dmg up the Syrian govt would actually put them that much closer to achieving their goal of regime change.

And once the Assad govt is down and there is nobody left for the Russians or Iranians to support, then the US can come in and really finish off ISIS. But right now as we speak, the Russians are the only ones who have a real incentive to defeat ISIS. We all know that unless the 50-75 ish so called Syrian moderate rebels are some form of video game soldiers with unlimited ammo and regenerating health bars, they aren't going to make any difference in the war.

[Oneironaut]

6. The U.S. Govt seems up have a delusional fantasy of those moderate Rebels winning somehow.

Destroying ISIS seems to be a secondary goal to fighting against Russian influence. Basically, it's the "We need to destroy the city to save it" mentality, where taking down Assad and the ensuing chaos would be worth it because Russia would lose influence in the region.

That mentality makes no sense logically. The logical thing to do would actually be to support Assad. We're putting our money on a group that has no chance of success. If Assad lost, ISIS would absolutely take over the country. How would this benefit us?

[jamzrockz]

7. But you said neither side is fighting ISIS

Russia if they ever fully enter the Syria war they would have no choice but to fight ISIS. Essentially, the only people left worth fighting are ISIS and Al Qaeda. So Russia has to fight ISIS to make any difference now.

US on the other hand can just play around until ISIS defeats Assad then they can come in and mop up, they can get their allies to seal the bothers, start serious sanctions on anyone buying ISIS oil and in no time, they power and influence would be degraded. For our goal to be achieved in Syria, we actually need a fighting force to keep the Syrian govt busy and right now it seems like the US are in no hurry to really confront ISIS because they are in fact that fighting force.

Since the US coalition started bombing, ISIS has actually grown in size and area conquered. You have to wonder how they keep growing when all these countries plus Syria, Iraq, Hezbollah are fighting it.

[Oneironaut]

8. Sorry - that was terrible wording. Both sides are fighting ISIS, but that's not the main idea.

The US is fighting Russia through puppets (and vice versa). What I really meant was, Russia wants to prop up Assad regardless of who the enemy is because it doesn't want the US to put their own puppet in Syria. The US is supporting useless "secular" rebels because they don't want Russian influence in Syria. ISIS benefits from both sides.

[BumRushDaShow]

3. Meanwhile, over in Ukraine

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/09/21/us-ukraine-crisis-nato-idUSKCN0RK14M20150921

[Adsos Letter]

5. "...a shell landed on its embassy compound in the Syrian capital..."

Just a formal "welcome to the party."

[ReactFlux]

9. We set the precedent

Took longer than I thought