/sg/ Syria General - Wellcome to the /sg/ edition

>Kosovo

This is why that place should be gassed

Russia gave these reconnaissance vehicles to Serbia.

Attached: 1564419629943.jpg (640x400, 64K)

The future of the whole world after ISIS is being led by Iraq

Attached: Long live Iraq.jpg (2841x1500, 424K)

Good, Russia getting rid of old BRDM 2's.

b-but he enriched germany with his culture

Attached: 929px-Ivana_Kobilca_-_Poletje.jpg (929x1197, 411K)

youtube.com/watch?v=vtqvEl-snf0

Attached: 158192857.jpg (354x286, 25K)

How many of those do you lot even have floating around?

>Good, Russia getting rid of old BRDM 2's.
They are modified and still one of the best. This car can drive more than 100 km / h while it has two times better armor than the Hummer plus can swim and has a good machine gun.

bla bla bla.
At least Russia is getting rid of them to replace with more modern counterparts.

>barrel worn smooth
got a kek out of me, I wonder how many smoothbore AKs are out there in the region

>bla bla bla.
We don’t feel sorry for our allies, while you gave Ukraine some really dumb shit.
Send them at least one Abrams, Jews!

>while you.

>>while you.
Ukrainians are still waiting for their American tank to scare the Russians. Do not hurt them, because you are responsible for those who have tamed.

Attached: 1559073753739.jpg (700x960, 63K)

eXpOrT vErSiOn

Attached: MaybeWhenOlder.jpg (1500x696, 87K)

>it was an export version
>muh shitty drivers!

Attached: amerimutt.png (741x630, 27K)

Turkish military convoy consisting of 12 military vehicles, accompanied by armed opposition departed from the Turkish observation post located east of the city of Morek north of Hama towards the Syrian north.

Attached: 14244681468430.jpg (1200x1200, 150K)

>Turkish military convoy consisting of 12 military vehicles, accompanied by armed opposition departed from the Turkish observation post located east of the city of Morek north of Hama towards the Syrian north.

Attached: 15564453302350.jpg (1920x1386, 631K)

>you.
I'm not even an American citizen.

Describe then, realistically, what it would look like. Ayatollah Pence?

> No such thing as gay marriage
> Degeneracy wouldn't be pushed as hard as it is.
> Whores wouldn't be glorified
And so on..

Now, kike.
You have yet to deal with the contradiction.
You can't pilpul your way out of it either.

> How many of those do you lot even have floating around?
More than 1000 BRDM2A and 1000 BRDM2.

>page 3

Attached: moscowriot.png (768x1024, 1.12M)

You're literally describing the American Republican Party. The Christian Dominonists you don't think exist are the activist media wing of the American Republican Party that want to make that a political reality.

I know I am talking to a Copt so I can't really give a nuanced answer of why that would be bad, so let's just agree that Shia are better than both.

I am not debating wether Christians exist in the US or not, they clearly do.
They are however incapable or unwilling to implement religious policies in the West.
As for Shias, I don't really mind them, they struck me an autistic form of Islam.

Tanks don't really matter that much any more in modern warfare.
It's all about who can gain aerial supremacy.
If your opponent has aerial supremacy, you are not defending or offending shit.

> unwilling to implement religious policies in the West
The thing about this is, Zionist militarism is the first religious policy of Christian Dominionism. They accomplish their religious objectives every time a bomb falls in Gaza.

Also just pointing out your perfect Christian society is sounding a lot like South Korea

>Tanks don't really matter that much any more in modern warfare.
It's all about who can gain aerial supremacy.
If your opponent has aerial supremacy, you are not defending or offending shit.

how about no

You are not presenting an argument.

But why aren't they applying any other aspect of Christianty?
This doesn't make any sense.

>Gothic
Based and Patriciantastepilled.
It's more than enough to deal with the zerg infestation in our southern region.
Once your country falls to racial/ethnic tensions that result in civil war and you pull out of the Balkans.

Attached: 1505155635777.jpg (1111x1481, 1.07M)

Not at all.
SK is extremely degenerate.

The problem is that i do not feel like spelling the basics of mechanized warfare just for you. Also to use airforce to maximum effect you have to have ground forces.

And the Russians will step right in.
So either come to some sort of agreement with them or have a force capable of repelling a Russian invasion.

This is unfortunately undeniably true.
>tfw you'll never be a part of a Kursk-esque battle

Attached: kursk 1 sized.jpg (960x700, 61K)

>So either come to some sort of agreement with them or have a force capable of repelling a Russian invasion.
>Egypt user doesn't know we're hedging our bets with the chinks.
Serbia's destined to be the next Switzerland.

A ground force still does matter to a degree just not as much as gaining and holding aerial supremacy.
Not only will you be able to provide air support to your ground forces but you will be able to gather precious intel via surveillance drones.

>Egypt user doesn't know we're hedging our bets with the chinks
Don't trust the Chinks.
They will try to fuck you over somehow.
If you are going with someone, go with the Russians.

Now you are just throwing an abstract point, what does air supremacy mean? Air supremacy on the scale that U.S has against military without any will nor capability even perform most basic anti air tasks? Because for that kind of air supremacy you need most incompetent actor against U.S. If you have an army that has even some kind of training they should be able to use decoys and to achieve air superiority atleast for the time they are operating mechanized offensive. In the fantasy situation where you have 24/7 aerial surveillance and can pinpoint decoys from real targets is just fantasy. It could manifest against insurgents but any proper army it would be not so easy to achieve on such scale. Ofcourse it is better to have air superiority than not but it does not make tanks in no ways useless.

And even without mechanised ground units, you can still pin down a sizable force just by bombing the shit out of their supply lines.
So yeah..
Aerial supremacy is one of the most important aspects of modern warfare.
Why do you think Russians spend so much money on their AA tech?
They dont focus NEARLY as much on their ground forces.

BRDM2 is quite suitable for the tasks for which it was created.

Attached: 1454317871223.jpg (1024x683, 82K)

>page 4

Attached: белаягвардия.jpg (383x600, 42K)

I never said tanks were useless just not as important as they used to be.
Tanks are essentially mobile cannons, they will never be useless.
And decoys are a temporary measure that will hardly save the day, just lower your casualties.
And modern day surveillance drones equipped with 3d radars and combined with infra-red sattelite imaging imaging as well as ground based recon units can give you a fairly reliable view of the battlefield.

>And modern day surveillance drones equipped with 3d radars and combined with infra-red sattelite imaging imaging as well as ground based recon units can give you a fairly reliable view of the battlefield.

Drones are pretty easy to deal with even quite poor AA equipment, movement counters most of the satellite imaging. Ofcourse in situation where enemy could use their air capabilities without harrasment it would be as you said.

so nothing less than vilayet e fiqh with christian fiqh

ayatollah pence it is

This, of course you could fit them with bit more optics if you wanted but it is cheap, mobile and easy to maintain

Mobile suits are the king of the battlefield

Attached: Zaku_II_Odessa_day.jpg (1280x800, 333K)

Superior video game taste.

>Navalny hospitalized
Someone photoshop him.

Attached: DN6l14JXUAAR6uI.jpg (1024x1024, 136K)

based

how much

Attached: Na2019.jpg (680x409, 41K)

en.mehrnews.com/news/148109/VIDEO-Moment-when-Iranian-ship-sinks-off-Azerbaijan-s-east-coast

Attached: Screenshot_2019-07-29-20-48-11-562_com.microsoft.emmx.png (1080x2246, 673K)

>Drones are pretty easy to deal with even quite poor AA equipment, movement counters most of the satellite imaging. Ofcourse in situation where enemy could use their air capabilities without harrasment it would be as you said.
They are easy to sort out, yes.
That's why they would be only deployed in a situation where Aerial supremacy has been granted

Oh and one more thing about decoys of AA units.
Those wouldn't be too simple to build.
They would be essentially radar wave emmiters disguised as regular AA units so they wouldn't be cheap.
Since most modern military use a lot of Anti-Radiation missiles.
They home in on your radar signatures, they just get a proximate location of an AA unit's position and are than deployed near them.

That kind of situation is where for example U.S can find itself against far weaker and ill equipped opponent. It is so to say quite theoretic and ideal condition. That is far from being representative situation in most of of the time, of course depending on which countries would be actors on the conflict. That said the original point was that on most situations the tanks still have their role to play on offensives and counteroffensives, only in situations as you described they would be rather useless.

Daily Reminder that Iranians are white

>Bolton: we must destroy the white supremacist neo-nazi regime of Iran.
>Omar: well my great great aunt was one fourth Spanish.

sorry bro, wrong argie

>Since most modern military use a lot of Anti-Radiation missiles.
They home in on your radar signatures, they just get a proximate location of an AA unit's position and are than deployed near them.

This is why you should use them in consideration, for short periods of time to achieve air cover for the period of time you for example make an offensive. Also you have to be constantly on the move. Also as there are signal decoys and other means of electronic warfare that can affect the capabilities of homing missiles.

>Oh and one more thing about decoys of AA units.
Those wouldn't be too simple to build.
They would be essentially radar wave emmiters disguised as regular AA units so they wouldn't be cheap.

Probably not outright cheap but still good possibility. And that is also a reason that there are radar masts on wheels.

>They home in on your radar signatures, they just get a proximate location of an AA unit's position and are than deployed near them

Also for example Russia would in that situation use Pantsir or equipment similar to that to also counter incoming missiles.

Attached: or_worse_Idlib.png (281x365, 94K)

>Also for example Russia would in that situation use Pantsir or equipment similar to that to also counter incoming missiles.
What you are talking about is point defence or close in weapon platforms.
And yes, they would deployed alongside TOR defence batteries for cruise missiles.
Anyhow all you have done so far is prove my point.
The battle will be largely build around preventing your enemy from gaining aerial supremacy for an extended period of time.
That's why the Russians stopped focusing on producing a fuck ton of tanks like they used to, they are focusing almost entirely on AA platforms.

Hahaha.
You got ripped off, Kraut.
The Turks took the gibs but not the migrants.

aljazeera.com/programmes/specialseries/2019/01/saudi-aramco-company-state-190126125553856.html
>Saudi Aramco: A story of oil, wealth and power

your bait is weak

>That's why the Russians stopped focusing on producing a fuck ton of tanks like they used to, they are focusing almost entirely on AA platforms.

Nope, that does not make tanks less usefull than they were before. They still have their essential role on advancing on enemy positions and flanking them. Also you should not forget how effective and accurate basic artillery is these days coupled with proper fire control personnel. Also Russia already has large and partly excellent armored core wich it can rely on war situation, of course there is also need to develop those capabilities but resources are allways somewhat limited. Though most significant advances by every country have been made in regards of aerial combat, but why that is completely different matter and has more to do with fighting developing countries instead of focusing on greater scale conflict.

outer/pol/ is garbage and /sg/ is dead
my life has no purpose

>Also you should not forget how effective and accurate basic artillery is these days coupled with proper fire control personnel
Fire control systems are almost entirely digital these days so skilled personals aren't that necessary.

> Also Russia already has large and partly excellent armored core wich it can rely on war situation, of course there is also need to develop those capabilities but resources are allways somewhat limited.
The T72s which form the backbone of Russia's tank forces (even modernised ones) are kinda shit.
Russia does have better tanks of course but it won't allocate the resources necessary for mass production.

Does anyone in /sg/ have info on belarusian military capabilities and strategy vis a vis NATO, the Baltic states and Poland?

Reminder that caring about whiteness is retarded

Nationalism is natural and healthy.

It's not about whos white, it's about whos not black

Attached: HatefulMap.png (800x472, 41K)

>belarusian military capabilities
Mostly Soviet era equipment that they modernise every now and than.

it's pretty bad

They got nice air defence units.

>mfw all assadpedes are all s-y boy trannies

Attached: assadpede.jpg (532x318, 51K)

gifted by Russia, but yes they are very nice

Assad will prevail in Syria!

Attached: 59448552sy.png (849x1200, 1.33M)

>Fire control systems are almost entirely digital these days so skilled personals aren't that necessary.

Yes you need fire control personnel on the front line to be in the position to request fire on coordinates. To extent can be done with aerial recon but that is subject to AA. On the skilled part i would rather disagree, better training = better results, versatility for other tasks and survivability.

>Russia does have better tanks of course but it won't allocate the resources necessary for mass production.

They instead have modernization program for the T-72. Presumably they have better bang for buck ratio since main hindrances of the equipment are optics and fire control electronics.

reminder that russians struggle to buy food

I care about my people
You're to one who's too retarded to see the games being played around you

then you might as well visit your local garlic festival

if the United states wanted, they could kill assad easily, just as they did with both gadaffi and hussein

>Yes you need fire control personnel on the front line to be in the position to request fire on coordinates. To extent can be done with aerial recon but that is subject to AA. On the skilled part i would rather disagree, better training = better results, versatility for other tasks and survivability.
I thought you were referring to the fire control system the artillery battery itself.
In that case, I do agree with you, those do need to be skilled.
>They instead have modernization program for the T-72. Presumably they have better bang for buck ratio since main hindrances of the equipment are optics and fire control electronics.
You forgot armor.

egybro > egypt user

and create a state in chaos?
What's that good for?

>What's that good for?
thats why they dont want to destroy syria completely, it doesnt help anybody

imagine legit thinking that