RUSSIA TAKES WAR TO THE MIDDLE EAST

I am watching my daughter lose the tennis finals but I saw this come across my news ticker and I had to post it via blackberry. Russia has re-emerged from its secondary status and seized its previous standing as treacherous superpower. Anyone watching the bloody aggression in Georgia could see a new era of Soviet aggression. Israel is America's proxy in the Middle East and if recent events are any indication, friends of the US do not fare well when our balls are to the wall.

The Russians put Arafat and the PLO on the map so we know where the Ruskies stand. Terrible, all of it
.
The balance of power is shifting rapidly (for the worse) will all but eliminate an Israeli raid on Iran..

Note the words "the West awaits". Yeah, that seems to be the norm,
now, to just WAIT around while the rest of the world makes their move.
We must be taking a page from the EU playbook

Big Russian flotilla led by Admiral Kuznetsov carrier heads for Syrian port
DEBKA  Exclusive Report

(hat tip VanAugust 21, 2008, 9:17 AM (GMT+02:00)

As the West awaits Moscow's threatened reprisal for the treaty
installing American missile interceptors at Redzikowo, on Poland's
Baltic coast – signed in Warsaw Wednesday - the Kremlin is striking
back in the Middle East – hence Russian president Dimitry Medvedev's
honeyed words of reassurance to Israeli prime minister Ehud Olmert in
a call he made to Jerusalem Wednesday, Aug. 20.
DEBKAfile's military sources disclose that a powerful Russian naval
contingent, led by the aircraft carrier Admiral Kuznetsov , left
Murmansk on the Barents Sea Aug. 18 to dock at the Syrian
Mediterranean port of Tartus Saturday, Aug. 23. It includes the
Russian Navy's biggest missile cruiser Moskva and at least four
nuclear missile submarines.
[...]
Assad signaled he would also be representing Tehran's interests in his
talks with Russian leaders. Jordan's King Abdullah is on his way to
join them later in the day.
Before the Russian flotilla departed Murmansk, Assad is reported by
our sources as having given the nod for Tartus port's conversion into
a permanent Middle East base for Russia's nuclear-armed warships.
CONTD...

I will post more as soon as I can get to a machine.

UPDATE: Fear of New Mideast "Cold War" as Syria Strengthens Military Alliance with Russia - Kevin O'Flynn and James Hider
As Syrian President Assad arrived in Moscow to clinch a series of military agreements, many in Israel fear that the Middle East could once again become a theater for the two great powers to exert their spheres of influence, militarily and politically. Russia has wooed Syria in recent years, as it has tried to increase its influence in the Middle East and increase arms sales. (Times-UK)
    See also Russian Aircraft Carrier Heads for Syria
Russia's only aircraft carrier, the "Admiral Kuznetsov," will sail from Murmansk to the Syrian port of Tartus. The mission comes after Syrian President Assad said he is open for a Russian base in the area. The mission will also include the missile cruiser "Moskva" and several submarines. (MINA-Macedonia)
    See also Assad's Shopping List - Jonathan Spyer
The leading item on Assad's shopping list in Moscow is thought to be the sophisticated S-300 long-range anti-aircraft missile system. This state-of-the-art system has already been purchased by Iran, which is expected to deploy it by March 2009. (Jerusalem Post)

UPDATE: Russians halt Nato co-operation BBC

Comments

[Thomas Carney]

Ion Mihai Pacepa, head of Romanian intelligence under Nicolai Ceaucesu, was Arafat's KGB handler. Mr. Pacepa defected to the USA in the early 1990s.

Romanian Intel was under KGB control so Arafat was under KGB control. Anyone who believes that Yasser Arafat was looking out for the "Palestinian people" is a fool. Arafat squandered $40 billion of foreign aid (much of it US taxpayer $$$$$) into Swiss bank accounts and didn't even give the numbers to those accounts to his "loving" wife!

Now that the KGB is running Russia instead of the Communist Party, it makes me wonder who REALLY won the Cold War:

1. Communism officially fell in the 1990s, but the KGB is alive and well. Prime Minister Putin has put his old KGB buddies in charge of Russian provinces as governors of those provinces.

2. All the funding the Communists gave to the Left in the USA has borne much fruit:

a. Our mainstream media is nothing more than a mouthpiece for the Left.
b. Our universities and colleges, with very few exceptions, are full of Lefties... Ward Churchill was the very tip of the iceberg.
c. Our State Department and mid-level of our Defense Department is full of Lefties and as they've gone up the civil service ladder, getting rid of them takes an Act of G-d.

The Cold War's still on. Russia knows full well how overextended our military is with the "Total Forces Policy" (thank you, General Abrams for putting that in place), no draft, and a shrunk active duty force that's 1/4 the size it was during the Cold War itself.

Putin just flipped us the bird and he knows he can get away with it. Condi Rice is the moron of morons. W. has totally lost it.

[jj]

friends:

the best perspective is one based upon facts. so let us look at the facts as they relate to the admiral kuznetsov.

she was initially named the tbilisi, something of an irony given recent events, and to be built with a sister ship, the varyag, as part of a class of ships. the varyag was later sold by the ukraine to china, upon condition that she not be retrofited as a military ship, another irony.

she was launched in 1985.

she was not fully operational until 1995, and did not start taking aircraft aboard until 1993.

in that time she has undergone major repairs twice, once for over a year, and spent another two year period in port.

she did not go to sea for her sea trials and inspection until early 2004.

in 2006 she returned to port yeat again for repairs.

she is steam powered, with a range of 3,850 nautical miles, and an endurance of 45 days. she can make 32 knots. this means she could only steam at full speed for about 5 days before needing refueling, and she can only be at sea for a total of 45 days before she has to go to port for stores and chandlering, e.g., get groceries, water and laundry soap.

she has a compliment of 17 aircraft, 12 sukhoi su-33 fighters, and 5 sukhoi su-25utg/ubp aircraft, put about 24 or 25 helicopters.

the aircraft carrier does not use steam catapult launch systems, instead launching from a ramp, which limits the weight of arms or fuel or both upon launch. moreover, the planes are fixed wing, which limits the number of planes which may be taken aboard.

the soviets have one aircraft carrier.

they do not have another on the ways, e.g., if the kuznetzov is to have a sister ship, it will be many years before it ever sees sea trials and operational status, perhaps as many as 10 to 15 years.

this aircraft carrier, and her compliment of 17 airplanes, does not make russia a superpower again, and it does not allow her to project power into the mediterranean, no matter how much putin and assad bluster.

given the vagaries of the russian winter on her seaports, given the not so good service life of the vessel, and given problems with some of her planes which has also faced repair before being put back into service, is it doubtful that the kuznetzov could spend 6 months of the year at sea, and most of that would be sailing back and forth to station and port.

this is not a vessel that projects power. it was designed to protect other fleet assets, adn can do very little else.

she is not a blue water navy all by herself.

she is hopelessly and ludicrously outclassed by any aircraft carrier task group in the united states navy.

john jay

p.s. wikipedia has a pretty good article on her.

[jj]

p.s. correction:

"... have also faced repairs ..."

john jay

[RISE_UP]

John J what you said. Russia is in fantasy if she believes that war machine she has can outclass the United States. The only difference is and it makes a difference, Russia don't mind killing civilians. Thus our reluctance to finally shut them down looks like weakness to them.

[jj]

rise_up:

yes, i think they most definitely view our reluctance to use our power as weakness, and as foolhardy. i believe they view it as a squandering of our power and historical opportunity. and, they are quite willing to exploit it as they can, and when they can.

john jay