Could the U.S. remove Russia from Syria?

Well yes CD, but not related to my comment which was specifically related to Y-20 Bacon’s post above, to which I await his response.

And what has the United Kingdom got to do with the Assad regime? Yet we are bombing (some) of those trying to overthrow Assad. Or why has there been a sudden improvement in Unites States and Iranian relations? The whole nature of the Syrian conflict (and ISIS in Iraq) is a classic example of: my enemy’s enemy.

But that had nothing to do with ISIL and its fellow travellers, which is what we are discussing here. That was about national autonomy.

In a word…..Chechnya.

Where is the evidence that there is a “plethora of Russian speaking Muslims” ready to attack Russia internally?

Russia ain’t really gonna bomb ISIS because they fear ISIS. the Daesh guys will likely respond by using its plethora of Russian speaking Muslims and attack soft targets internally as revenge.

its a proxy war
if anyone is going to remove anyone it’ll be through their puppets:

if US wants to remove Russia, they will simply supply SAMs to all rebels not named ISIS or Al-Nusery school.
if Russia wants to remove US, they will keep bombing anyone not Assad.
Turkey will keep bombing Kurds

and no one is really bombing ISIS

How you are going to shot down Su-30SM/Su-34? They have more electronic warfare power than EA-18G. and each of them can routinely carry 8 to 12AAM with radar ranges nearly equal to AWACS with greater loiter time so it can chose when to engage afterburner for optimum shot…

I’m going to stick my neck out here and guess that you are Russian? :rolleyes:

The question- could? Without precipitating a major conflict, no. And since neither Putin nor Obama is stupid the question is hypothetical. Obama’s weakness and vacillation has enabled Putin to fill a vacuum and it’s now up to diplomacy in the long run, but for now Putin holds the cards.

OT Question is hardly something to be discussed.

Militarily, ie on paper confrontation? Are you kidding? Russian expedition consists of what; 4 Su-30SMs, 6 or so Su-34s, a dozen Su-24s and a dozen Su-25s, an S-300 battery 9 or so Tanks and several APCs. You don’t need any asset of US Military. Even one tenth of Turkish Armed Forces or Israeli Defense Forces, who are already in the region, can wipe such force several times over.

how you are going to shot down Su-30SM/Su-34?. They have more electronic warfare power than EA-18G. and each of them can routinely carry 8 to 12AAM with radar ranges nearly equal to AWACS with greater loiter time so it can chose when to engage afterburner for optimum shot.
there is ship in water with S300F
Russia has capability to destroy Turkish and Israel airforce on the ground and that include the factories that assemble and upgrade fighters.
Russia can recover from few missiles thrown at it but Turkey/Israel cant from war with Russia. the economic system is extremely vulnerable.

OT Question is hardly something to be discussed.

Militarily, ie on paper confrontation? Are you kidding? Russian expedition consists of what; 4 Su-30SMs, 6 or so Su-34s, a dozen Su-24s and a dozen Su-25s, an S-300 battery 9 or so Tanks and several APCs. You don’t need any asset of US Military. Even one tenth of Turkish Armed Forces or Israeli Defense Forces, who are already in the region, can wipe such force several times over.

Politically, ie real world scenario? There is nothing that can “force” Russia out of Syria. Granted, Nuclear War or WW3 is unlikely, but what could be gained by attacking Russians? One missile, one aircraft down, excused as accident and Russia can bring in one hundred aircraft next day. Any open and deliberate aggression againist Russian forces and US Risks *severe* retailation to its carrier groups, submarines, strategic bombers conducting routine patrols throughout the world. So “firepower” to defeat Russia in Syria is irrelevant.

If you are talking about converntionally fought war between US and Russia with zero outside intervention? Neither are fools to go to war because some terrorists and a dictator. If it comes to that, neither Russia or US has the military strength to wage war in the adversaries soil.

Sadly, you know, it’s would be the easiest way to temper the noise made by the Russian Air force tricked in a show of force that have only a few real strategic motives.

Easiest because of the Tech gap and the very Force structure of the Ru Army (fewer expeditionary assets in %).

Sad days indeed.

He posts a lot on that ****ty “War is Boring” site, doesn’t he?

He founded War is Boring actually. There should be some kind of ban on David Axe pieces.

Moved to general discussion…

Btw, since I would like to keep the other thread clean, and this one is…not terribly important:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nXUSBwYqcS8

Hahahaha.

He posts a lot on that ****ty “War is Boring” site, doesn’t he?

That would be him

@barnes- ain’t gonna happen. Even if there were an incident, my guess would be there would be some cashiering of theater commanders and lots of media indignation, and that would be the extent.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/09/30/did-russia-send-an-anti-u-s-force-to-syria.html

I noticed this article today that would prompt a question.

Does the United states even remotely have the fire power or assets to remove the Russians? In the event of an international shooting incident, do we even have enough F-22s? Discuss.

I think if it comes to US vs RU it isn’t going to be conventional, so it’s noughts and crosses all over, everyone loses.

Because David Axe is the “the Daily Mirror” and “the Sun” of defense journalists. Though I hate to insult them by classifying him as a journalist.

He posts a lot on that ****ty “War is Boring” site, doesn’t he?

Because David Axe is the “the Daily Mirror” and “the Sun” of defense journalists. Though I hate to insult them by classifying him as a journalist.

Why remove Russia from Syria?