Military columnist.<url> Mikhail Khodarenok second publishes extensive material on the military situation in Syria. Quick quotes:
“…During the battle for Aleppo the territory of the military school, Syrian troops surrendered, when the University broke only one BMP militants with troops not 8, not 11.
Assad’s soldiers retreated in panic, leaving to the enemy the enormous reserves of food, equipment, weapons and ammunition are concentrated in the school. Then this object had to destroy the Russian air group.
Most often occurs as follows: the Russian VKS strikes, and Assad’s soldiers in battle is not going. Sixty feet will occur. Then recede. Say: “it’s going to kill us”. Firing at the enemy without aiming, holding hands with weapons from the corner…
…At times only one bearded gunman who entered a combat zone on autotechnica with a heavy machine gun capable of accelerating a whole Syrian division…”
Khodarenok says what it says and more: the situation in Syria army is that there is not the slightest reason to suspect her ability to win the ongoing war. As an ally, Syria for us today – a suitcase without a handle and heavy weight.
The problem is that the decision on military operation in Syria was taken, as you can tell, generally without regard to realities. Neither our politicians nor our diplomats nor military did not possess and did not have information about the situation and only take the salute, implementing the decisions from above. Top live in some illusions, it is unclear on what based. In total, this creates a cumulative effect of incompetence and mediocrity. Some bursts reasonable solutions and approaches are drowning in a swamp total total idiocy.
The result of such an egregious policy will be only defeat. And if Assad is not able to create an effective and manageable structure that can defeat or at least to stabilize the situation, what is the reason of Russia to share his inevitable defeat – is unclear.
Endless reports about the assault of another shed and a Grand victory in the next a meaningless settlement, which even on the most detailed map can be hard to find, irrelevant to the deepening disaster.
This is not to assume from the Russian side, even kako cynicism. From the point of view of the cynical and rational policy intervention in a foreign conflict is possible – but only at its end and always on the winning side. What is the reason for Russia to get involved in events when they are irreversible, and even on the side of the obvious loser is unknown. If it was decided not to intervene in the war in 11 and 12 year to get into it 15 – this is pure clinic.
In the end we can say that in front of us in its pure form is a brilliant example of modern Russian policy – complete incompetence, mediocrity and cowardice, when subordinates do not even try to convey d leadership the idea that leadership makes stupid decisions. What is the result of such a policy? A question from the category rhetorical.
