Russia Sells Syria Warplanes, Air Defence Systems: Official

[Purveyor]

Source: http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5hKYoEcT7HFtKUQx5tTZ_M0AJzaqQ

MOSCOW — Russia is supplying Syria with warplanes, armoured vehicles and air defence systems under existing contracts, ITAR-Tass news agency quoted the head of the country's state military agency as saying.

Mikhail Dmitriyev, head of the Federal Service for Military-Technical Cooperation, said Russia was selling Syria MiG-29 fighter jets, Pantsir short-range air defence systems and armoured vehicles.

No further details were provided.

President Dmitry Medvedev this week paid the first-ever visit by a head of state from Moscow to Damascus, where he said the use of nuclear energy "may get a second wind" in Syria -- a remark that prompted concern from Washington.

Russia's arms sales and possible nuclear cooperation with Syria, which has close ties to Iran, is unnerving for Israel and the United States, which earlier this month renewed sanctions on Syria for another year, accusing it of supporting "terrorist" groups.

Russia is also in talks to supply NATO member Turkey, which Medvedev also visited this week, with air defence systems and helicopters, Dmitriyev said.

Read more: Agence France-Presse

[Plucketeer]

1. Maybe our new F-22s will get a chance to prove themselves one day!

If they perform as promised, these F-22s would make the Mig-29s tumble from the skies like kites when the wind dies.

[Chef Eric]

2. Hopefully they won't. nt

[Prometheus Bound]

8. I think you can buy 10 Mig-29s for one F-22, though, can't you?

[Plucketeer]

10. That's probably true, however

if you believe what Lockheed says, an F22 could defeat multiple aggressors simultaneously, while staying invisible.

[quakerboy]

11. Last I heard

it was my understanding that Israel could put up something like 30% more air sorties in a 24 hour period than the US could.

I coulda misunderstood, but if there is even a kernel of truth to that, I'm not too threatened by the idea of Syria getting a few Migs.

[Old Troop]

13. That would be impossible considering the relative sizes of both

nation's air and naval air forces.

[quakerboy]

17. My understandign was that they had less planes

But more qualified pilots immediately available for duty, and were set up to run a new pilot into a bird as soon as it landed from a previous mission. I also remember this being specifically in regards to usefulness in Iraq, which is much closer to them than it was to us.

With that context, it seems more believable, and I recall it coming from a fairly credible source. Though, I don't expect you to take a several year old unknown to you source to be gospel.

[Selatius]

3. Likely, they are stripped down versions of the MiG-29. Russia sells a lot of hand-me-downs.

Whenever Russia did sell things like airframes and tanks to other countries, it often sold them stripped-down or export versions of its home equipment. You don't give client states your best technology. A MiG-29 with modern radar/targeting system and a modern ECM package in the hands of a veteran pilot is akin to an American F-16, but if it is using old or outdated equipment, it's whatever.

[Adsos Letter]

6. Yup. I would be interested to know what type of armored vehicles are being offered

MBT'S? What variant, I wonder. T-80's? India uses, and Lebanon and Libya have both been in recent negotiations for, T-90 variants. I wonder how much firepower Russia is willing to give Syria to combat Israels' Merkava MBT?

[Crowman1979]

4. I can't wait for the script that the Military Industrial Complex has written for the DoD.

We must fund and continue the (insert big waste of money here) in order to protect against (insert made-up threat here).

[New Dawn]

5. Sovereign countries can do that.

[Regret My New Name]

9. The problem with that attitude is that you also need to have the same attitude

when the US announces its procurement of new weapon systems, or when countries (like Taiwan, Colombia, Iraq(now), South Korea, or wherever) buy weapons from the US. I guess either way, just so long as it's consistent. Unless it's different?

[The abyss]

7. President Dmitry Medvedev…..Said the use of nuclear energy "may get a second wind" in Syria

You can’t state a clearer message.

[quakerboy]

12. Yup.

Reading the responses, I cant believe anyone focused on the jets. They are near Israel, the jets are small potatoes unless they are shipping them something on the order of every single one they have, with trained pilots.

But the nuclear comment... that looks kinda ugly in its potentials. I wonder what the background is on all this, what is being postured by who for what reason.

[The abyss]

16. For background try nuclear power plant.

The same project the Russians are building in Iran.

Russian engineering. Russian personnel.

I think the “question” Medvedev proposes has to do with another power plant being built in Syria.

A power plant built with Russian technology

Russian support.

Russian investment.

Russian personnel on the ground.

[quakerboy]

18. and thats the story we will stick to.

The fact is, a nuclear presence provides a country that a sense of security. I think there is no doubt we would have skipped the Iraq invasion if Saddam had been armed with nukes. If I were a world country without Nukes, even with Obama now at the helm, I would be strongly considering how best to get them.

[Old Troop]

14. The nuclear piece concerns me too. The armored vehicles and

jets are probably small potatoes to the Israelis, but nukes of any kind change the equation.

[Lagomorph]

15. $$$ Ka-Ching $$$

How come nobody buys humanitarian relief ships and helicopters?

Oh yeah, they let the military do that stuff.

I liked Obama's idea of a civilian force, in principle, but it would be a duplication of assets already in place.