Western Officials: Russia’s Syria Gamble Faces Increasing Odds
Jeff Seldin, Voice of America
The battle between Syrian forces - backed by Russian air power - and rebel fighters played itself out on social media over the course of several hours.
“Reports that Jaysh Al-Fatah has began its long-awaited offensive on Morek,this is going to be decisive,” tweeted Abdel Rahman, a self-described history major with more than 3,300 followers, who goes by the Twitter handle @VivaRevolt.
Several hours later, @NorthernStork tweeted “Strategic Morek is free!”
In the interim, groups like the London-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, confirmed reports of fierce fighting in the area, part of a larger rebel counter offensive against the Syrian regime.
Few Decisive Gains
Whether the rebel forces took or can hold Morek, a town north of Hama along the strategic M-5 highway, Western officials say the fight illustrates the difficulties Russia is facing as it tries to carve out a larger stronghold for Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. Moscow has shown an inability to make decisive gains, despite a clear advantage with air power.
“There has been an increase in Russian air activity this week,” said Operation Inherent Resolve spokesman Col. Steve Warren, adding the Russian-backed forces are meeting with “mixed success.”
“The regime forces in some areas have managed to gain a little bit of ground,” he told reporters from Baghdad Wednesday. “In other areas, they gained ground. They were counter attacked, and lost the ground that they gained.”
The assessment was backed by a U.S. intelligence official, who said the Russian-supported offensive is making “only marginal gains on the ground,” despite the help of Iranian forces and fighters from the Iranian-backed terror group Hezbollah.
'Operational Challenges'
The official also suggested that Russia’s efforts to support Assad may be faltering because of unfamiliar conditions on the ground.
“The Russian military is accustomed to operating in an environment with a clear and unified chain of command,” the official said, adding that the lack of such structure is “likely to pose planning and operational challenges.”
Still, pro-Assad forces have been claiming their share of success. Syrian state television said Wednesday the regime’s forces captured a key road to Aleppo from the Islamic State terror group, breaking what had been a two-week-long siege.
Russian officials also said Wednesday their jets had struck more than 200 terrorist targets over the previous 48 hours, taking out a training camp near Aleppo, and underground shelters and other terrorist fortifications in Homs province.
Intelligence officials from within the Middle East are cautioning against any rush to judgment.
“It’s early on in the game to say how effective they [the Russians] have been,” Lahur Talabani, the director of the Kurdistan Regional Government’s intelligence agency, told VOA. “But I think it’s a game changer, with the Russians arriving.”
Talabani, in Washington for meetings with U.S. officials, said the Russians do not necessarily need to strike decisive blows to reach their goals.
“Their support role of Assad is very clear,” Talabani added. “They want to keep him alive and they want to go on strong for the negotiations.”
Growing Ground Force
Officials also acknowledge that facts on the ground in Syria are prone to change quickly. A U.S. intelligence official noted that while the Russian-backed offensive is “progressing slowly,” Assad’s allies have been steadily applying more pressure since the start of last month.
“The major offensive is only in its infancy,” the official said. “Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps troops, as well as Lebanese Hezbollah and other Shia militia fighters, probably did not arrive on the battlefield in greater numbers until mid-October.”
And the growing ground force is sizeable, with intelligence officials estimating there now are likely 10,000 or more pro-Assad troops in Syria. Recent reports suggest the size of the Russian force alone in Syria may have doubled in recent weeks to 4,000 troops.
Some current and former officials warn, however, that Russia’s Syria policy faces a similar shortcoming that has plagued U.S. and Western efforts in the Middle East and elsewhere: Air power alone cannot win a war.
“[Russian President Vladimir] Putin will find in three months, six months, 12 months that the battle tide has turned against Assad, despite his military presence,” said former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine John Herbst, now with the Atlantic Council’s Eurasia Center.
“Then he’s in the difficult position of having to seriously escalate Russian intervention, putting in tens of thousands of Russian troops, or watching his ally go down in defeat despite Russian planes," he said.
Comments
The U.S. is developing new arms to deter Russia. Tough speech by Aston Carter at the Ronald Reagan library. https://twitter.com/McFaul/status/663221177091932161 …
Carter: US must prepare for challenges from Russia and China
http://www.stripes.com/news/us/carte...china-1.377771 …
BREAKING: US adapting 'operational posture' to deter Russian aggression: Pentagon chief - AFP
AND the "existential threat" is again who exactly..............??
Was not the words "existential threat" first used by the former CJoS and the former ACoS and the new incoming CJoS until he was "corrected" by the WH press spokesman.
Since that "correction" there has been silence until yesterday---this lack of any WH response to Russia was the main reason the top DoD "Russian expert" resigned from DoD as she felt the WH "did not get it".
Typical MSM problem that makes one wonder if any of their employees actually read before they hit the finish button.......
Reuters corrected the headline & @nytimes foolishly recycles it: Rebels Used Mustard Gas
http://nyti.ms/1kzHpJr
Information warfare is an inherent part of what I have been commenting here a number of times--Putin is ready to use nuclear weapons quicker and faster than the old Soviet leadership days and he has cancelled out MAD.
Russia Ready To Use Nuclear Weapons: Pentagon’s Top Russia Expert
By Polina Tikhonova • on November 6, 2015 5:21 am • in Politics, Russia
With Russian President Vladimir Putin ordering his security council to develop defensive nuclear equipment, the Pentagon says Moscow is poised to use nuclear weapons to “bring a speedy peace.”
Evelyn Farkas, who quit the position of Pentagon’s top policy expert on Russia just hours ago, urged the Obama administration to consider sending lethal weapons to Ukraine, deploying permanent contingent of ground troops in Eastern Europe, making the European Reassurance Initiative permanent, and supplying more military equipment to countries neighboring with Russia.
Farkas’ comments come amid news that NATO will station some 4,000 combat troops in countries bordering Russia. Both American and Russia experts say the move has a high chance to escalate the risk of a war in Europe and a military confrontation between the world’s two largest nuclear powers: the U.S. and Russia.
A war involving NATO, the U.S. and Russia “would probably spell, if not the end of humanity, the end of any possibility of a comfortable future for humanity,” as reported by ValueWalk, citing Press TV’s interview with Don DeBar, U.S. political analyst.
Russia is much more reckless with nuclear weapons than Soviet Union
“We have to continue reassuring, but we have to do one better, we actually have to deter,” Farkas told reporters at a Defense Writers’ Group breakfast today, as reported by Breaking Defense.
Farkas dismisses claims that say we are back in the Cold War, because first of all, Russia is not the Soviet Union, the Russian economy is not strong enough and the Russians are “brittle politically,” Farkas said. However, she added that it “doesn’t mean they’re not a danger.”
Compared to the Soviet Union, modern Russia is smaller in its size but it’s much more sophisticated technologically and militarily. “They are our peers when it comes to cyber,” Farkas said. She added that today’s Russia is also much more reckless and dangerous than Leonid Brezhnev’s Politburo when it comes to “nuclear saber-rattling.”
In the Cold War era, both Russia and the U.S. had a “healthy” respect for the horrific and destructive power of nuclear weapons, and viewed them as means of the last resort. But Putin’s Russian military follows a paradoxical doctrine of “escalate to deescalate,” which means Moscow would easily use nuclear weapons to “bring a speedy peace.” A mere thought about it is “highly alarming,” according to the Pentagon’s top expert on Russia.
Russia is the only country in the world with the nuclear capability to destroy the U.S., according to Army Chief of Staff General Mark Milley, as reported by ValueWalk on Tuesday.
The General also views Russia as “aggressive” and “adversarial to the interests of the United States,” which is why Moscow’s nuclear weapons are capable of destroying the U.S.
Milley warned that Russian President Vladimir Putin’s recent behavior suggests Moscow would be willing to use nuclear weapons. The General also noted that Russia has been violating “the Westphalian order” ever since it started invading “sovereign nations” in 2008.
Putin broke NATO-Russia agreement
The reason Farkas quit the Pentagon was “personal reasons,” which is understandable for someone who has spent three intense years working in an administration that becomes weaker day by day.
Farkas recently went beyond the current party line by proposing a policy on Russia that is much more rough than what the Obama administration publicly endorses. Over the three years working with the Obama administration, Farkas has grown frustrated over a number of things.
“Here I’ll go out on a limb beyond what [the] administration would say: The NATO-Russia framework agreement is broken. The Russians broke it,” she said. The NATO-Russia agreement, signed in 1997, obliged all parties to respect the “sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity” of European states, such as Georgia and Ukraine.
Russia has broken the agreement two times over the past 7 years: first in Georgia in 2008 and then in Ukraine in 2014 by annexing Crimea and sending its troops in eastern Ukraine.
“Russia’s broken it but somehow we are and our allies have decided that we’re going to keep up with the letter of it even, although maybe not the spirit,” she said.
Under the NATO-Russia agreement, the Alliance foreswore “additional permanent stationing of substantial combat forces.” Farkas said US European Command has to consider the possibility of U.S. forces stationed permanently in eastern allies like Poland and the Baltic states of Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia.
U.S. has to encircle Russia to reassure Europe
But Farkas noted that it’s not only European allies Washington has to reassure to prevent Russia’s aggression. Former nations of the Soviet empire require U.S. military assistance against Putin’s increasing pressure, too, according to the Pentagon expert.
“I was very excited to see this past week Secretary [of State] Kerry go through Central Asia,” Farkas said. “We need more high-level attention being paid to the countries that feel directly threatened by Russia…. not just Ukraine but Moldova, Georgia, Azerbaijan… The countries around the periphery of Russia, they need our political attention. They also need our economic assistance and they need our military assistance [to] deter Russia.”
The Kremlin has repeatedly warned the U.S. against encircling the country by stationing its troops all around Russia’s periphery.
Farkas also commented on the Pentagon’s investments to counter Russian capability. “I want to actually commend Deputy Secretary [Robert] Work because he really took on the challenge of how do we better deter Russia, very seriously and I would say aggressively,” she said and added that Work does his best to direct funding to deterring Russia in FY16 and FY17.
http://www.valuewalk.com/2015/11/russia-ready-to-use-nuclear-weapons-2/
http://www.isn.ethz.ch/Digital-Library/Articles/Detail?lng=en&id=194510
Well worth reading............
6 November 2015
How can Societies be Defended against Hybrid Threats?
Amela Sadagic demonstrates the virtual sand table for urban warfare operations training rehearsals during the MOVES 9th Annual Research Summit
Indeed, how might defense planners come up with better strategies to protect against today’s hybrid threats? Aapo Cederberg’s and Pasi Eronen’s answers point to the patient strengthening of national capabilities, working with one’s allies to overcome capability gaps, etc.
By Aapo Cederberg and Pasi Eronen for Geneva Centre for Security Policy (GCSP)
This policy paper was originally published by the Geneva Centre for Security Policy (GCSP) in September 2015.
PDF-----worth taking the time to read and fully understand....
http://www.osw.waw.pl/sites/default/files/pw_50_ang_the-devil-is-in_net…
The devil is in the details. Information warfare in the light of Russia's military doctrine
2015-05-19 |
Jolanta Darczewska
By highlighting informational threats and giving them a military dimension, the authors of the Russian Federation's military doctrine have outlined the concept of information warfare. It is a kind of combat conducted by both conventional and indirect methods, open and concealed, using military and civilian structures. It has two dimensions: broader ("non-nuclear containment", i.e. combat waged on various levels - political, economic, diplomatic, humanitarian, military) and narrower (as an element supporting of action).
An analysis of these issues enables us to identify several rising trends over the period 2000-2014 in Russian security policy. These boil down to a blurring of the boundaries between internal and external threats, introducing non-military methods and organisational structures to armed combat, and conferring an ideological character on this combat. This leads to a blurring of the contours of inter-state conflicts, which allows Russia to take part in armed conflicts in which it is not officially a party.
"Disinformation Review" - new EU information product
http://goo.gl/JvfQo8
The current Russian leadership is revisionist: it doesn't accept existing rules, borders - Wallander #RigaConf
pic.twitter.com/QNbe1LYb8C
Kremlin's Weapon: MT @Mariusz_Fryc: Russian Propaganda:'The Weaponization of Information':
http://www.voanews.com/content/russian-propaganda-weaponization-informa… …
pic.twitter.com/HkTXjfMeyt
The American news consumer doesn't give a sh!t.
Are you seriously thinking that the mainstream media, collectively, are engaged in a conspiracy to hide the truth in Syria? If so, why? What interest would be served by such a course? Isn't the usual media routine to exaggerate and sensationalize? Why would they suddenly do the opposite?
Goes to the heart of information warfare...or better yet just why is seems that the American consumer of news gest fully left in the dark by MSM...
UNDER the general rubric of........DUH... as social media has been relentless in reporting over the last year of more and more usage of Assad chemical weapons THAT Russia stated to the UNSC and the world THAT all weapons and raw materials had been destroyed---NOT a single MSM report during that period ---then the world organization on the control of chemical weapons comes out and verifies what social media has in fact been saying for a year----THEN FINALLY a single article by WSJ?
U.S. intelligence agencies believe Assad regime failed to destroy all of its chemical weapons stockpiles
http://on.wsj.com/1NhjDcd
Also under the same rubric of ...Duh.....ever ask the question why MSM does not even attempt reporting on this?
More than 100 detention centers, 200 K jailed. Why is Assad torture kept secret? On top of the AI released documentation 4/11 concerning Assad kidnapping for ransom of 100s of thousands of Sunni. Especially since there was a large photo display of this systematic torture even against children in the main hall of the UNGA recently--yet virtually no MSM coverage.
Torture and starvation of the Syrian civil society has been ongoing by Assad since 2011 and documented in a relentless manner by social media---still no real take up by MSM on the depth of those actions by Assad as being the basis for the current anti Assad movement.
Ever wonder why the American news consumer is kept so in the dark?
This proves just how correct Putin was in claiming he was going to attack and destroy Islamic State.......sums up nicely Russian foreign policy.....
Footage
RussianAirstrike hits school in Hubūb ar Rīḩ, occupied #Homs province.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=geTev80wC7c …
Stunned how RussianAirstrikes miss ISIS by 200 miles, but hit school basketball courts precisely ...
So explain to me again exactly why the US should do anything with a Putin that has lost his way.
Remember two things--it was the top Russian general of the General Staff that stated publicly THEY knew everything there was to know in Syria--yet they hit basketball courts?????
AND it was Putin who blatantly told the world there was no bomb on the Russian aircraft BECASUE that is what his FSB told him and he then publicly derided US/UK intel--with the comment how is it you know so much and we do not and then they agitpropped social media with accusations that it was a Us or Israeli missile that shot down the plane. THEN he ever so quietly stops all Russian aircraft going to Egypt AFTER he gets the same intel he publicly derided.
This is a world leader that is basically right now out of control driving on an imperialistic expansionist ethno religious road trying to emulate a superpower.
I said nobody that matters is buying what Putin is selling. Winning over a small fringe of troglodyte skinheads is not going to advance Russia's cause in Europe. If anything it's going to unite everybody else against him. Despite all the spending and blather, Putin has only succeeding in providing NATO with about the only stimulus that could have rallied the alliance together, and in uniting the entire Sunni world against him. Some victory.
There is no need for the US to be "in the game" because the Russian "info war" is a self-defeating effort. The claims are so clumsy and so poorly presented that they inspire more derision than belief.
Don't ask how many "agents of influence" are on board, ask who they have influenced, and to what effect. Your approach is analogous to claiming that a bombing campaign is effective on the basis of the tonnage and claimed sophistication of the ordnance deployed, rather than on the basis of what has actually been hit.
I don't see what "corporate interest" would be served or advanced by not focusing the mainstream media on Syria or the Ukraine. Tha audience just don't care that much, and today's news generally doesn't sound all that different from yesterday's or last week's or last month's. The mainstream media compete for the eyeballs of the mainstream audience, and the mainstream audience has largely lost interest.
Dayuhan---again if you had paid attention to the early stages of the Ukraine first thread you would have seen a poster chart of the "agents of influence and the money flows to those agents of influence" and you might in fact have been surprised at their names and organizations especially those in the US and if you had followed the same thread you would have seen the input by a US Congressman to the Defense Spending bill based on Russian info war input and when he was called on it--suddenly he seemed to have not fully understood "where the info came from".
What you point to is the troll side of the house.
NOW seriously go back and read several of the articles I posted on that first thread including extensive input on Russian military doctrine tied to info warfare.
Then come back with another comment----"nobody is buying what Putin is selling"--when you have fully understood the massive Russian info war/weaponized money focused on the up and coming neo right populist parties throughout all of the EU--starting with a 12M Euro loan to Le Pen.
I had pointed to this short article that goes to the heart of the matter and it inherently goes to the point I am making--we are not even in the game. The author is a greatly respected retired CI type who came out of the Cold War era and has a deep memory of the 80/90s and understands the Russian mindset as he worked there in those "Cold years" and is fluent in Russian.
Propaganda has played a key role in President Vladimir #Putin’s new aggressiveness
http://observer.com/2015/11/obama-fails-to-fight-putins-propaganda-mach…
pic.twitter.com/qFBJI962KV
Ever ask yourself just why western MSM is not really focused on Syria or the Ukraine or constantly get reporting wrong---lack of readership interest or is it not in the corporate interest????
Russian presence on at least 3 Syrian airbases visible on sat imagery as of last week. C'mon news orgs, buy from DG & publish
Dealing with Islamist information campaigns is a challenge, because we can't do it directly: anything traceable to the US is going to be automatically rejected by the target audience. The more effective approach would be to very quietly support and encourage moderate Islamic voices and organizations. That of course has to be very subtle and very indirect, because anyone visibly supported by the US will be immediately discredited among the target audience. It's hard to say what is or isn't being done on that side, because if it's being done right, it's invisible.
I agree with your point that Russia isn't winning the info war in most places, and there is no need to respond to stupid claims that don't resonate with anyone. However, I think our ability to use information as a tool falls well short of our potential. Russia is Russia, and most of the world ignores their propaganda. The Islamists on the other hand are a very different challenge in the information domain.
I have seen the usual ration of hysterical blather, most of it based on the assumption that whoever is shouting the loudest and the most is "winning the info war". That of course is a completely pointless.
Again, propaganda is advertising. Success or failure is not judged by how much or how loud you talk, or how many people hear you. It's judged on how many people buy the product... and nobody that matters is buying what Putin is selling. Yes, they are spending money and shouting a lot... but what's the return on investment? Close to nothing. That's not success.
Actually if you again fully understand the Russian use of information warfare--one must always push back--why by ignoring it you actually "lend credence" to the disinformation.
BTW--think about your comment "the truth will come out"---when it does and that is a very large WHEN... the news cycle will have moved on and your "truth" will never be in fact never be even heard and or seen AND if it "does come out" what impact will it have in the 24 hour news cycle--absolutely none. WHAT will have an impact is the "perception" that was created--ever try to "kill" a perception when it has taken firm hold??
There is an old saying you must be aware of in the game of international relations and it goes to Russian propaganda as well---if something is said and you say nothing against it--- it is interpreted and perceived that you actually agree with it.
Again for your info the Russian propaganda works on the 6Ds concept---distort, dismay, deflect, distract is used to create doubt and distrust.
So what did the Russian comment actually address from the 6Ds?
BTW--you actually missed the WH push back and it used the "truth"--by releasing a few hours later --that the US intelligence community is tipping towards a bomb and then that short announcement was supported by a UK release a few hours after the US that they had "chatter" concerning the bomb---those two statements effectively killed this Russian info war attempt and the Russian news cycle totally stopped.
Perfect example--Russia states we are meeting in Abu Dhabi with the Syrian opposition--why?-- it gives support to the image back home that Russia is seeking a parallel diplomatic solution --then immediately the FSA pushes back with a public statement from all 49 resistance groups that there is no such meeting.
Carried by the way by Reuters---Reuters has yet to correct the false press release as it was fed to them by Russia's Sputnik---the next internal Russian news cycle carried this FSA no as follows---"Russia air strikes will continue as the Syrian opposition are not "moderates" because they did not want to meet with Russia thus do not want a diplomatic solution".
BTW--hope you have read the countless recent US and European articles all basically stating the West has lost the Russian info war and or was never in the game to begin with??
Remember Russian info war is also for the home front as much as for influencing the Western civil societies and decision makers.
Kremlin says US or Israel shot down #7K9268:
https://mobile.twitter.com/RobPulseNews/status/662223816870002688 …
What is the Obama WH doing about this? ZERO
http://observer.com/2015/11/obama-fails-to-fight-putins-propaganda-mach… …
This idea of treating "social media" as if they have some sort of independent agency is quaint, but ultimately pointless. Social media may not answer to corporate sponsors, but that doesn't mean that the people using social media don't have agendas of their own, and aren't in many cases posting items that are agenda driven, based on rumor or inaccurate information, or just plain false.
If you are going to talk about Obama's failures, acknowledge also his success: he set out from the start to avoid commitment to a fight in which the US has no clear and achievable end state goal, no viable ally or partner, and no vital interests at stake. He has succeeded in avoiding commitment. It may not be a goal you sympathize with, but it is by no means an irrational goal, and achieving one's goals is better than not achieving them.
You need to get a handle on the reality that "social media" themselves do absolutely nothing. Whatever is done or not done is done by people, the users, not the tool they use. The people using social media have all manner of agendas and methods. Some may be paid to disseminate information or disinformation. Some may simply get an ego rush out of attention. Some actually report what they see. Some are just full of it. One must be exceedingly careful in choosing what to believe. There's a lot of confirmation bias involved: many social media "analysts" give undue weight to sources that confirm their expectations and tell them what they want to hear.
Some people even put hashtags in SWJ posts to show everyone how quantum postmodern kewl they are... juvenile, but so it goes.
It's worth noting that reputable mainstream media will not run stories based on unconfirmed social media reports, unless the story is built around a social media angle (something generally avoided). The probability of running an inaccurate story is just too high. Of course mistakes do get made, but editors are actually pretty demanding about confirmation and verification, at least in the better outlets, and a journalist who tries to base a story on tweets is going to have a very short career, or get palmed off to the tabloids.
AND MSM cannot provide you with this......
Emirates: #HelloJetman
How crazy and awesome is this?!?!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_VPvKl6ezyc …
But and there is always a but......social media especially those tied to the Ukrainian events have expanded social media open source analysis with new tools and internet search methods that have IMHO changed the way social media now competes with MSM.
Take the Russian MoD videos and parallel pr reporting---geo tagging developed for the Ukraine is shredding the Russia narrative day in and out and yet not much has been picked up on this by the MSM.
Just as the western narrative that there is no such animal called "moderates" in Syria just Islamists and jihadi's nothing could be further from the truth.
And lately social media is self fact checking itself and when necessary immediately corrects itself--try that in MSM.
Many of those in social media that push back on the Russian info warriors and now Syrian info warriors long ago at the beginning of Crimea learned an important fact---you can effectively counter Russian info warfare simply by using the truth as the weapon--verifiable truth.
Examples just from today that will never make the MSM.....
SOHR reports this morning, "jihadis captured Morek", which is - as often - nonsense.
Multiple groups involved from islamists to moderates.
Widely ignored by the #SOHR & intl. media orgas,the Free Syrian Army plays an important role in the #Hama campaign.
Rebel gains in southern #Idlib / northern #Hama during the last 5 days. -> Crushing regime defeats.
The fall of strategic #Morek despite heavy intervention of #Russia (air) and #Iran (ground) makes clear #Syria can´t be retaken by force.
From my previous comments--maybe MSM does not want to get into the Syrian narrative as it would force them to admit to Obama failures in Syria--besides MSM has to answer to their "corporate sponsors"--something social media does not have to do.
Morek in 2012.
#BlameAssad for all jihadis and islamists, taking over the city now.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7_xo_WIrZIQ …
Especially since they largely ignored the ongoing Assad genocide and now the Assad/Russian supported genocide with their bombing of civilians, hospitals and schools. something social media has been covering intensively since 2011.
amnestypress @amnestypress
New Syria report exposes vast scale& orchestrated nature of enforced disappearances in Syria
http://amn.st/6019BPUyD
Amnesty International: #Syria'n Regime kidnapped 65.000 people -only to
extort money from the families
BTW--you do not even see this in MSM---from social media today......
Syria: according to oppo media the #Latakia military hospital has been closed for days now, storing #russia|n KIA's
http://sobsrvr.com/e0qufBxU
What is extremely interesting is that the Russian/Syria info warriors are not able to match the speed and efficiency of the current social media responses to what is ongoing inside Syria.
The social media that was "tested in countering" the Russian Ukrainian info war narrative and learned exactly how to push back on Russian propaganda is succeeding well in the Syria info war.
Russia is barely able to get out their narrative before it is totally shredded as lies.
The Russian MoD has performed so badly they are slowly stopping the release of any more combat footage.
What is equally interesting is the total lack of a valid MSM effort of any push back against the Russian Syrian narrative.
Typical social media response from the Syria side----nothing like this is being carried in MSM.
QUOTE:
It's silly to see Moarek falling like this: after all, this is the northern gateway to Hama...
Last year, the regime needed four months of pitched assaults to capture the place. NDF and Hezbollah lost about 30 MBTs and IFVs, plus over 1,000 combatants there...
After its fall - think it was April or May last year - it was completely looted by the NDF and whatever other gangs and militias are 'pro regime': they really took away everything that was not fixed.
And now, after that '87th Brigade of 11th Tank Division' (translation: '87th Brigade NDF, all Christians), were left to guard the place on their own, with only minimal IRGC support, they've lost it to one VBIED, few insurgent T-72s, and a multi-prong attack in a matter of hours...
Various regime-fans are still so shocked by this loss, they simply can't believe it...
UNQUOTE: