To Cruise Or Not To Cruise

Here's an interesting take on the use of cruise missiles to take out damage the Syrian airbase.

From Navy Matters:

By now, you all know that the US launched a cruise missile attack against a Syrian airfield in retaliation for a chemical weapon attack by Syrian forces. I’m not going to address the quality of the evidence for the chemical weapon usage or the geopolitical aspects of the retaliation. What I’m going to address is the military lessons that can be gleaned from the open source information about the cruise missile attack itself.

[...]Airfield Weapon Density. The US launched 60 Tomahawks at a single, relatively small airfield. That seems like a lot of missiles especially when the runways were deliberately not targeted and other structures were deliberately avoided that would likely have been targeted in an all out attack. Still, this gives us some idea of the weapon density the US believes necessary to destroy a single, small base.

[...]Had this been an all out attack to totally destroy the airfield, presumably many more missiles would have been used. This gives us some insight into the Tomahawk weapon density needed to take out a facility. It’s higher than I would have thought. Given that our total Tomahawk inventory is somewhere around 4000 missiles, that should tell us something about our ability to wage an all out war and how long our inventory would last. This has to be worrisome given that Tomahawks cannot be quickly replaced from the manufacturer.

Apparently the writer is a retired Navy Commander. Apparently he is not impressed with the prowess of the Tomahawk cruise missile. These missiles cost about a million dollars a pop. Other estimates place our Tomahawk inventory at about 3500 missiles.

Trump: I'd Hit It Again

The Drudge Report had this to say about the recent US response to Syrian chemical warfare: TRUMP: I'D HIT ASSAD AGAIN...


Now that's pushing it a bit. I'm sure President Trump doesn't stray from Melania and I'm sure Assad wouldn't welcome it either.  Well, pretty sure... those lines in the sand Obama drew for Assad might have been directions.

All joking Assad, err , aside, Russia has vowed to assist Syria by upping it's air defense game against further American attacks and has sent a cruise missile frigate into the area of the Mediterranean where the two American destroyers are stationed. No word on how long the air defense changes will take or the proposed enhancements.

It is also reported that after the gas attacks last Tuesday, there were additional air strikes in the Syrian city of Khan Sheikhoun on Saturday. 

US Military Not Reporting Air Strikes

From the Military Times:

The American military has failed to publicly disclose potentially thousands of lethal airstrikes conducted over several years in Iraq, Syria and Afghanistan, a Military Times investigation has revealed. The enormous data gap raises serious doubts about transparency in reported progress against the Islamic State, al-Qaida and the Taliban, and calls into question the accuracy of other Defense Department disclosures documenting everything from costs to casualty counts.

In 2016 alone, U.S. combat aircraft conducted at least 456 airstrikes in Afghanistan that were not recorded as part of an open-source database maintained by the U.S. Air Force, information relied on by Congress, American allies, military analysts, academic researchers, the media and independent watchdog groups to assess each war's expense, manpower requirements and human toll.

Russian Show Of Force

Disabled Russian Warships - 1905

Anyone have an idea of the condition of Russia's navy? I'm wondering if Putin's navy is anything like the hollow shell that Russia threw against the Japanese Navy in 1905.

From the UK Daily Mail:

Cutting through the English Channel, the looming bulk of the Russian navy’s flagship passes the White Cliffs of Dover.

Belching black smoke, the ageing aircraft carrier Admiral Kuznetsov sailed menacingly close to Britain yesterday in a provocative manoeuvre.

              Russian Aircraft Carrier - Admiral Kuznetsov - commissioned 1995

The Soviet-era vessel, leading a flotilla of eight naval vessels, is on its way to the eastern Mediterranean to bolster the Syrian bombing campaign.

[...]Putin's flagship was accompanied by the nuclear-powered missile cruiser Peter the Great and six other surface vessels including the world's biggest ocean going tug, the Nicolay Chiker.

The Kuznetsov never travels far from its home port in Severomorsk, outside Murmansk without the tug in case the vessel's unreliable diesel engines pack up.

The Russian flee is being shadowed by a British destroyer, the HMS Dragon. This Type 45 destroyer has it's own power plant problems:

The turbines are of a sound design but have an intercooler-recuperator that recovers heat from the exhaust and recycles it into the engine, making it more fuel-efficient and reducing the ship’s thermal signature. Unfortunately the intercooler unit has a major design flaw and causes the GTs to fail occasionally. When this happens, the electrical load on the diesel generators can become too great and they ‘trip out’, leaving the ship with no source of power or propulsion.

The Brits could have installed a more mature, reliable power plant produced by General Electric but chose Rolls Royce instead.

British Navy Type 45 Destroyer, HMS Dragon (D35) - commissioned 2008

This Russian warship may also be a sitting duck for the Type 45's modern  armaments and electronic counter measures.

 Russian Guided Missile Destroyer - Peter the Great - commissioned 1985

We'll Be Lucky To Live Through It

That's what actor Fred Thompson said when he portrayed Admiral Painter on "The Hunt for Red October." In this thriller, international events were spiraling out of control and a military confrontation between the USA and Russia seemed imminent.

The conflict in Syria has the potential to do the same thing. Obama's pussy footing diplomacy has worsened the situation and Russia is calling the shots now. Putin has not hesitated to put Russian boots on the ground in Eastern Ukraine, Georgia, the Crimea and in Syria.

It's not the boots so much that is of concern, it's the tanks and combat aircraft that are raising the possibility of a NATO-Rooskie showdown.

First, LL's comments about the fighting around Aleppo near the Syrian-Turkish border.

The Turks and Saudis appear desperate to try to keep Aleppo under opposition control. Aleppo’s capitulation would virtually end the organized opposition in western Syria. ISIL and militant groups affiliated with al-Qaida. At the recent pace of the offensive by the Syrian government and allied forces, the Turks, NATO and the Saudis appear to have missed the opportunity to rescue the Syrian opposition forces in western Syria.

While all this was going on, Syrian and allied forces continued their offensive to encircle Aleppo. Several news services reported that Aleppo is effectively cut off from any high volume line of communication to Turkey. A million people are trapped in Aleppo, according to one credible report.

The Kurds are fighting the ISIL terrorists in Northern Syria. No way the Turks are going to let the Kurds get a foothold in Syria without a fuss. And Putin is still stewing over the loss of a Russian SU-24 fighter that was downed by Turkish F-16s. It could be very possible that Putin is putting together a scenario wherein Turkey's goose is cooked and the US is asked to come to the aid of a NATO member. Now the question is; is Putin banking on a limp wristed American response? Might could be...

After years of weakness and vacillation, the Obama administration may find itself backed into a corner by aggressive Russian action. Particularly if coupled with intemperate Turkish reactions, that could create a nightmare of historic proportions around Aleppo. Although the White House has foresworn any military intervention in Syria’s fratricide, it’s worth noting that Mr. Obama led NATO to war in Libya exactly five years ago to prevent possible slaughter in Benghazi, a far smaller humanitarian threat than the terrifying sword of Russian artillery and airpower that’s hanging over Aleppo right now.

For their part, the Russians are upping the ante with regime media publishing claims by the Defense Ministry that air attacks on Aleppo yesterday that killed civilians, including the bombing of a hospital, were actually perpetrated by U.S. Air Force A-10s, a war crime that they say the Pentagon has tried to pin on Moscow. In fact, American intelligence knows this was the work of the Russian Air Force: “We have intercepts of the Russian pilots talking during the attack,” a Pentagon official explained. “As usual, the Russians are lying.” Yet this sort of dishonest Kremlin propaganda, what spies term disinformation, is exactly what the Obama administration has refused to counter...

Between the Bitch of Benghazi and Obama, America is facing an Islamic nightmare that has been mishandled from the get go. That wasn't just a phone call at 3:00 AM that Clinton was referring to years ago, it turned out to be a D-9 bulldozer taking out the front door. And this administration is still hiding under the bed.

By letting Mr. Putin get away with whatever he likes in Syria, Mr. Obama has created a deeply dangerous situation in the region. By abandoning his infamous Syria “redline” in September 2013, the White House in effect outsourced American policy there to Mr. Putin, as I warned at the time, and which the Obama administration, powerless to influence terrible events in Syria, is slowly realizing.

“Are we heading for our ‘Sarajevo moment’?” a senior NATO official bluntly asked. “It’s clear that there has to be some actual ‘redline’ for Mr. Obama, something that the United States cannot tolerate Russia doing—but where is it? If I don’t know, I’m sure the Kremlin doesn’t either.”

That is NATO’s top concern right now: After years of weakness and vacillation, the Obama administration may find itself backed into a corner by aggressive Russian action. Particularly if coupled with intemperate Turkish reactions, that could create a nightmare of historic proportions around Aleppo.

US Deploys F-15s To Turkey

Obama has put on his big boy pants and is upping the ante in Syria. We'll see if Putin calls him.

The Pentagon is sending F-15Cs—supposedly to fight the ISIS war. But the jets only have air-to-air weapons, and ISIS has no planes. Which means the real adversary is Russia.

The U.S. Air Force is deploying to Turkey up to a dozen jet fighters specializing in air-to-air combat—apparently to help protect other U.S. and allied jets from Russia’s own warplanes flying over Syria.

Officially, the deployment of F-15C Eagle twin-engine fighters to Incirlik, Turkey—which the Pentagon announced late last week—is meant to “ensure the safety” of America’s NATO allies, Laura Seal, a Defense Department spokesperson, told The Daily Beast.

That could mean that the single-seat F-15s and the eight air-to-air missiles they routinely carry will help the Turkish air force patrol Turkey’s border with Syria, intercepting Syrian planes and helicopters that periodically stray into Turkish territory.

But more likely, the F-15s will be escorting attack planes and bombers as they strike ISIS militants in close proximity to Syrian regime forces and the Russian warplanes that, since early October, have bombed ISIS and U.S.-backed rebels fighting the Syrian troops.

Story here.

Su-27

Russia has deployed Sukhoi Su-27 "Flanker" jets to Syria. Both the F-15 and the Su-27 are highly maneuverable, air superiority aircraft with similar capabilities and armament. The F-15 has had a much greater exposure to aerial combat than the SU-27 which has seen very limited engagement in Angola, Eritrea and Chechnya. The F-15 shot down over 30 Russian aircraft (mostly Migs) during the Gulf War. Of course American pilots did not face Russian pilots in those encounters.

F-15

This could get real interesting. The first F-15s were first deployed in 1972; there have been four upgrades. The F-15E is the latest variant (1988); F-15C's are being sent to Turkey. The Su-27 is a mid-80's Russian product.

Druze In The News

I have heard of the Druze. To be honest, I never gave much thought about them until now. The Druze are a minor ingredient in the seething stew-pot that is the Near East. Apparently a bunch of them ambushed an Israeli ambulance carrying several wounded men and beat one of them to death.

Earlier this week, on the Golan Heights, an enraged mob assaulted an ambulance and attacked two wounded men inside with rocks, clubs, and chains, killing one and seriously wounding another.

The ambulance was Israeli. The wounded men were Arab fighters from Syria. The assailants were also Arabs, though they were Druze rather than Muslims.

Rocks, clubs and chains. Sounds like a Baltimore prayer meeting.

But who in the wide, wide world of pain (I'll take primitive assault weapons for $400, Alex)  are the Druze? Wikipedia says this:

The Druze revere the father-in-law of Moses, Jethro, whom some Muslims identify with Shuʻayb. According to the biblical narrative, Jethro joined and assisted the Israelites in the desert during the Exodus, accepted monotheism, but ultimately rejoined his own people. The tomb of Jethro near Tiberias is the most important religious site for the Druze community.[

That doesn't tell us much.

The Druze ... are an esoteric monotheistic religious community found primarily in Syria, Lebanon, Israel, and Jordan. The religion incorporates elements of Ismailism, Gnosticism, Neoplatonism and other philosophies. The Druze call themselves Ahl al-Tawhid "People of Unitarianism or Monotheism" or al-Muwaḥḥidūn "Unitarians, Monotheists." Sheikh Amin Tarif was the preeminent religious leader of the community until his death in 1993.

That .....  really doesn't help much either. No matter, whatever they believe, the Druze are very active in the Israeli military and in politics. One of them served as the acting President of Israel in 2007 and the Druze play major roles in the IDF.

As there are about 130,000 Druze scattered throughout Israel, the Golan Heights, Lebanon and Jordan, they find themselves on different sides of the current conflict.

A Druze gotta do what a Druze gotta do.

They make political alliances with whomever is in power, this is how they survive. The Syrian Druze allied themselves with the Assad regime, the Jordan Druze with the King and the Israeli Druze with the Israeli government. So the Druze find themselves at odds even with their own brethren. This happens when you are are a very small minority in a region that is not well known for tolerating people with different beliefs ... except in Israel. The Druze have done very well in Abraham's Keep.

But why did Israeli Druze attack an Israeli ambulance?

So when an Israeli ambulance drove down the street carrying wounded fighters from the Free Syrian Army, some of the local Druze fingered those people as enemies. They are a potential threat to the continued existence of their Druze brethren on the other side of the border since a victory by the Free Syrian Army would lead to the downfall of Assad and the possible enthronement of Al Qaeda or ISIS, whom the Druze couldn’t curry favor with even if they wanted to without abandoning their religion and converted to Islam at gunpoint.

So some of them decided to attack the ambulance and take a perceived enemy or two off the board even as the Israelis were trying to save them.

In the politico-religious mess that is boiling in that region, I guess it makes as much sense as anything else. Unfortunately this happened in Israel.

Reasons Why We Shouldn't Attack Syria

 Reason #1:
Sarah Palin rather succinctly phrased it and I'll paraphrase it.
Syrians are slaughtering Syrians in a civil war.
Mexico and Canada stayed the hell out of our four year romp through a sea of blood back in the 1860's; how about we follow suite and let the Syrians sort it out like we did. Who's ever left standing we congratulate and send our ambassador back over with lots and lots of flowers.

In Rwanda, the Hutu's slaughtered 800,000 Tutsi's, or was it the other way around? .... in any event, the US did nothing. The natives either got tired of pillage or ran out of Tutsi's or machetes. Either way, our Marines stayed home.

Saddam Hussein gassed thousands of Kurds and we also sat on our Marines. We had a good steady thing going until we decided to get all righteous over someone else's mineral rights.

Reason #2:
Our intelligence assets allegedly report that Assad gassed his own people. Our intelligence assets now say that we knew about it three days before the Sarin gas was deployed. And we did nothing anyway.

Who are those intelligence assets? It was just leaked that 20% of all job applicants submitted to the CIA are terrorist sympathizers. In and of itself that is worrisome. What is even more problematic is this - how many got through? Is our intelligence now tainted by those who are feeding us wrong information in order to draw us into an armed conflict to benefit their own interests?

And now the French say they know something too. What do the Brits know? They must have had the same intel, Obugger must have sent them the same data but they turned down the party invitation and will keep their soldiers home.

Reason #3:
What is the end goal? Are we winning hearts and minds again or just jumping into another dust up? We didn't bother sending in the Marines to rescue our own Ambassador in Libya. Our Ambassador to Syria, Robert Ford,is safe and in no danger of being (in no particular order) killed and butt raped. The U.S. Embassy in Damascus was shut down on February 6, 2012, and is still not open. This is a good thing. Gee, wonder why Hilary didn't do the same thing in Libya...

So here's the plan. Make sure all US employees are out of the country and send them back in when the shooting is over. With flowers.