Michael Peck and The National Interest, God bless you health and long life! And then there's not only Michael Peck, Russian army specialist, but also Michael Kofman, Officer of the Center for Naval Analysis.
And here together two very, as I understand, not stupid person, for some reason began to seriously discuss the topic “And if an elephant gets up on a whale, who will win"?
Will win, of course, global stupidity. Yes, we have a lot of things going on in Russia, which cannot be called smart. But constitutional changes, pension reforms and other turbulences of today are one thing, and the outbreak of the third world war is another.
Nothing else, as a prelude to the third world, I will not name a hypothetical conflict between Russia and Turkey. But someone really wants to consider it under a magnifying glass from all sides..
Okay, let's and we'll see, where Americans look and what they see.
"The balance of forces is resolutely against Russia in Syria".
“But if Turkish and Russian troops really entered the battle in Syria, Turkey would have an advantage ".
Both Meehan's voice. And Coffman, and Peck.
And then they ask themselves a question, why. After all, on paper, Russia still looks very ominous.. The biggest one is especially frightening (not fact, by the way) arsenal of nuclear warheads. That is, Michael is very serious..
Hard to tell, why did they need to touch our nuclear arsenal, as it appears, on the old principle: if in the theater on stage there is a gun hanging in the first act, means, until the end of the last, they will definitely shoot someone.
What, there is a certain logic in this. If you press very hard ... No, even if you press hard, not the independence of our supreme today, to demolish the globe. Will not be able to.
so, by the will of American experts (I write quite respectfully without quotes), Turkey and Russia may clash on Syrian soil.
Russia, nuclear power, and Turkey. Non-nuclear. Unclear, by the way, is it good or not. As for me, only Erdogan, who dreams of a new Ottoman Empire, lacks nuclear bombs..
However, the Turkish army is a very confident army.. Although not so long ago, there was a wave of purges among the highest command personnel, Nevertheless, an army. And the fleet is quite decent, capable of fighting on an equal footing with our Black Sea.
But what's the point? What's in these comparisons, if about any confrontation, apart from political, Russia and Turkey are simply out of the question?
Till, at least.
the, what is at the base of Khmeimim, - it's just laughter in comparison with the Turkish army. It's just a very limited contingent, not even the Russian army., and VKS.
"Estimated" by Americans, the grouping of Russian troops consists of several thousand servicemen and several dozen aircraft. And plus support ships.
Good, let one and a half to two thousand flight personnel, auxiliary structures and guards with the military police - these are several.
Turkey also has several thousand troops in its ground forces.. 260, to be precise. 260 thousand against two.
Michan, what are you talking about?
maybe, About, which is several dozen (two, well three) the Turkish Air Force also has several dozen Russian planes (more precisely, 26) only F-16C, who are also worth something.
And if you also take into account, that all the supply of the group of Russian troops goes through the Bosphorus and Dardanelles, which are controlled by Turkey ... And if Turkey closes the straits, and they also have their own airspace for Russian aircraft, sorry, will only have to wait, until they take out across the Mediterranean. Slightly hungry.
American journalist told, Erdogan throws Syrian gunmen in Tripoli
It's so simple for Michael to talk about the vulnerability of the Russian contingent.. Kofman thinks, what
“... In the script, where Russia has one airbase, presence, which does not increase, presence, which requires access to the Bosphorus for logistical support, Russian troops are in fact in a very vulnerable position ".
logically. but forgive, why should we increase our presence in Syria? Sorry, gentlemen potential, but this is YOUR, not OUR script.
Even if we compare participation in the life of one country (understandably, Afghanistan), we also had a limited contingent there. We left with our heads held high, leaving behind cities, school, hospital, airfields.
Used by Americans today. Here's a paradox. But what the Americans will leave behind is a very difficult question.. But clearly not hospitals and schools. They, Americans, build democracy. And schools and so on do not apply to democracy.
Oh well, distracted a little.
Further, Kofman and Peck reasoned rather sensibly about ... Russia's retaliatory strike against Turkey!
well yes, think well, but how sane is hard to say. We look hypothetically, is not it?
Good. Let's, Erdogan went so far, to strike at Khmeimim. I just don't see any other scenario, because he simply has nothing to get to the territory of Russia. Frigates and corvettes, on which it is theoretically possible to place missiles, will meet "Balls".
Airplanes ... Airplanes will also have something to correct the trajectory, and the worst weapon, which can be carried by Turkish F-16Cs are Mark bombs 84, ancient, like ... and with combat weight 900 kg.
So, in fact, Turkey will not be able to deliver such a blow to Russia., to have a decent answer. And it's indecent ...
This is where a blow to Khmeimim suggests itself.. To which Russia can answer "from the heart", I agree.
But, At first, Turkey simply has no reason to seek such an adventure to all points. Of course, no one (thank God) does not talk about nuclear strike, but cruise missiles will be more than enough for Turkey. Moreover, there will be virtually nothing to neutralize them..
I have a very poor idea of the Atilgan and Zipkin complexes, made on the basis of "Stinger", intercepting "Caliber". It would be a very epic sight..
At all, before the purchase of our S-400 from Turkey with air defense it was very so-so. But even now the S-400 is not a panacea against Russian weapons..
Count on the help of block mates?
Complex issue. And the American Michaels themselves stroke him very carefully.. One side, Yes, Turkey is a member of the NATO bloc. On the other hand, block, according to the charter, is not obliged to support the participation of block members in campaigns in the territories, outside the NATO zone.
That is, the war between Turkey and the Kurds on the territory of Syria is exclusively Turkey. But if the Armenian army starts an offensive on the city of Kars, citing the fact, that Kars was the capital of the Armenian kingdom of Bagratuni and the capital of the Armenian kingdom of Kars, - then the entire force of the NATO bloc will have to fall on the hordes of Armenians.
But not before, than the first Armenian (or not Armenian) a soldier will cross the border of Turkey. And no one will forbid to have fun outside the national territory of Turkey. At one's own risk.
That is, American experts confirm, what 7 thousands of Turkish military men in northern Syria, coupled with heavy equipment and aircraft, supporters or simply beneficial people to Turkey, - all this is done outside of NATO.
Because, properly, and Michael is considering this turn of events, as a military confrontation between Russia and Turkey.
And it can really begin. It's hard to argue with the Americans here.. In the area of the same Idlib there are Russian advisers and military police. It's easy to imagine multiple scenarios, when Turkish and Russian troops engage in direct combat.
"For example, Turkish attack on Syrian troops could injure Russian advisers, which require air support from Russian aircraft. Or Turkish planes accidentally shoot down Russian planes, mistaken for Turkish, and then Russia can strike back, shooting down Turkish planes ".
Translation accurate. But again, Americans speak up to their standards.. It happened before, when a turkish plane shot down a russian. because, despite all the curtsies, "By chance" hardly anyone will mistake a Turkish plane for a Turkish, and therefore will receive the rocket who needs. But not just anyone.
US-led coalition confirmed the deaths of three military bases in the shelling of Iraq
But in general, Kofman and Peck understand very well, that Russia, and Turkey until the last moment will "sort out" in the political arena. And only then can the guns speak, and that is how it all looks ... How can the Russian aviation contingent create a real threat to the Turkish side, personally, I don't really understand. This is just the case, when the Turks take it in bulk.
Yes, the question is, do Turkey and Russia have goals, which can be satisfied, considering the interests of both countries.
Here yes, unlikely. Turkish troops occupy northeastern Syria in order to, to create a buffer zone between the Syrian Kurds, who want to live apart from Assad, and Turkish Kurds, who have long wanted independence from Turkey. Generally, arrange such a reservation, where it will be possible to place all dissenters.
Besides, Turkey does not hide its joy over the hypothetical collapse of the Assad regime with the desired death of the latter. Then the borders of the Kurdish reservation could be extended towards the oil-bearing regions., and then many of Turkey's problems were resolved as if by themselves.
And the third problem, which I talked about in one of the previous articles: million Syrian refugees in Turkey. A little bit wrong "reward", which Erdogan would like. more precisely, not at all the same. Erdogan needs gas (let Russian, okay) and oil. As cheap as possible.
From my side, Russia supports the Assad regime. Yes, Americans somewhat do not understand the difference between the legal presence of their troops on the territory of another state, because for them the opinion of another country is irrelevant. The main thing is that the Senate and Congress have decided, and then the grass does not grow, because she will be trampled anyway.
A very old and very American position.
Coffman, true, understands, that the Russian side is starting to act in the style of the Americans. And this frankly does not amuse him, not that infuriates.
"Clear, that the Russian military will intervene on behalf of the Syrian regime, if the stability and survival of the regime is in question. But she (Russia) is not going to interfere on behalf of the Syrian forces in Idlib. Russia does not need Idlib ".
Well, we'll see about that., by the way. Whether or not Idlib is needed on the map of Syria as a Syrian city - yes, it will be decided in Moscow and Damascus. offensive, what is not in Ankara and Washington?
Such is the political alignment in the region today.
Military alignment to closely examine the meaning, see how, no. Nothing to compare with the Turkish army from the Russian side. So sure, no need to worry about the escalation of hostilities and the hypothetical conflict between Turkey and Russia.
Peck and Kofman did a pretty good job.. And the conflict of interests of Russia and Turkey on the Syrian territory is very possible. And even as a prelude to the third world.
But still I think, that the third world war will be provoked by corvettes of the Swiss Navy, who will open fire on the fishing vessels of Belarus, trout fishing in the wrong place, where necessary.
A source.
Roman Skomorokhov
