ISIS has been destroyed. Twice

If the reports of the Russian military are to be believed... the question arises: who are the Russian Aerospace Forces still destroying in Syria? ISIS? But ISIS has already been destroyed! About a week ago. And a couple more times in the last two days.
Have you watched the reports? Have you read military reports?

Several dozen sorties are carried out per day, during which about a hundred enemy targets are destroyed. The operation has been going on for over a month now. To summarize, during the operation, about 3,000 military installations were destroyed.

Three thousand destroyed objects!

And this despite the fact that Russian aviation does not strike at cities and infrastructure where there may be civilians. Again, according to the military.

It turns out that about 3,000 exclusively military facilities were destroyed.

So what could be left of ISIS in this case?

For example, the number of ISIS and related groups in Syria is 100,000 fighters. Approximately such assessments sounded before the start of the operation. But after all, not every fighter has a military facility. Especially if we are talking about warehouses, factories for the production and repair of weapons, control centers.

A unit of about 100 people (company) has a couple of objects. A dozen more objects per thousand (regiment) and another dozen or two objects per larger formation. Very roughly, of course.

It turns out that for a hundred thousandth grouping there should be several thousand more or less significant objects.

Destroying sheds and checking each sandbag for a machine gunner hiding behind it is already the task of the ground group, and not the Russian Aerospace Forces.

The task of aviation is the destruction of larger and more significant objects than sheds and sandbags. And there can't be a hundred thousand of them.

So it turns out that last week Russian aviation destroyed if not all of ISIS, then at least half. And if we talk about the largest and most important objects - then 95%, no less.

What are we destroying with the use of heavy bombers now? If you wish, it is not difficult to find the answer to the question that has arisen:

Some of the ISIS facilities were destroyed by aviation several times in a row. That is, they were simply counted five times already. Here it is necessary to take into account the peculiarities of military accounting.

Each pilot after departure reports the destruction of an object or even two. The headquarters simply adds up the numbers. Do you think headquarters has time to check each report to see if another pilot has worked on the same facility?

I doubt. There is no time or desire to check every "little thing". And then, the next day, they can work again on the same objects. And then add up all the numbers and get a new total.

Again, for a report to Moscow, the larger the number, the better.
According to the principle "let the tsar-father rejoice."

But that's not all.

It is almost impossible to destroy all enemy objects to one. It is easiest to destroy the enemy at the very beginning, when he has a lot of unprotected objects. The further - the more difficult. There are objects that are inconveniently located, well camouflaged, located either in the folds of the terrain or in residential buildings. And such objects can be ironed for a very long time.

But no one will report that "he flew, bombed, but did not get anywhere." They report a successful bombing. And the military will not report to Moscow that they have made a hundred sorties, but have destroyed only one object. Such reports at the top can be seen as a sign of inefficiency. Therefore, the military continues to report on new and new successes.

In fact, as far as one can understand the situation, the phase of the air operation is largely over. Most of what could be destroyed from the air has already been destroyed. Next, the Syrian army should advance. Which is exactly what she does.

But why then did heavy bombers fly to Syria?

If a significant part of the facilities has been destroyed, most of the aviation work has been done - why intensify the bombing?

In principle, it never hurts to consolidate success. And to finish off the enemy too. True, it would still have been more logical to carry out a massive bombardment from the very beginning, it would have turned out more efficiently. Usually they start with this - first, powerful artillery preparation and bombardment - as powerful as possible, and then the offensive of the ground forces with the support of attack aircraft.
Russia did the opposite - first, attack aircraft worked on individual targets, and then they began to "iron".

My opinion is that the operation has moved from a military phase to a phase of PR and a show of force.

PR is for internal consumption, so that the electorate incredibly admired the "retaliation" that the "world's most influential president" arranged in response to an unforgivable terrorist attack.

A demonstration of force is for an external consumer - cruise missiles were shown, heavy bombers were shown, only nuclear weapons remained to be shown.

By the way, remember the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki?

From a military point of view, they also did not make sense. Japan at that time was already on the verge of defeat and it was possible to put the squeeze on it without the use of nuclear strikes. And the Americans understood this very well. Hiroshima and Nagasaki - it was a demonstration of strength and capabilities, a demonstration for the USSR.
And now Russia is demonstrating to the whole world what kind of long-range bombers it has and what kind of cruise missiles it has.

Whether this demonstration is necessary or not is a difficult question. In my opinion, it is not bombers that should be demonstrated, but something else. Economic growth, for example. Because the presence and capabilities of the bombers do not cause any particular doubts, but the growth of the economy would be a surprise.

But the Kremlin decided that they would deal with the economy later, and now the main thing is to shock everyone with bombs.

So it turns out that they have already destroyed all or almost all of the ISIS facilities, twice in a row, and they are going to destroy them again and again.
At the same time, the destruction of ISIS facilities is not the end of ISIS itself. But this is the business of the Syrian army, not the Russian Aerospace Forces. And then the question of carrying out an operation on the territory of Iraq will also arise.

But that would be a completely different conversation...

One of the most shocking achievements of the Middle East is the rampant development of terrorism in states such as Iraq and Syria, and this is mass executions, torture and the growth of the number of terrorist groups that threaten not only neighboring states, but the whole world, writes ostrnum.com.

The rise in terrorism began in 2003 as a result of the anti-American movement following the Iraq War. The basis of terrorists are ethnic groups. Today, the most famous groups operate around the world and control large areas in Islamic states. One of the leaders of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIS) group is Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, whose photographs can occasionally be seen in the media. His group is known for its brutality and extremism.

9. ISIS recruits soldiers around the world

The ISIS organization is active on the Internet, thanks to which it can recruit new members. In 2015, ISIS has 20,000 members from all over the world, including women and men from the US and Europe. About 3,400 people from the West come to the Middle East to fight the "infidels". In France and Russia there are up to 1,200 members of ISIS, in Germany and the UK - up to 600 each, in the USA - 180, in Canada - 130. These people join the ranks of ISIS. One of the active participants is Jihad John from the UK, who is known as an executioner who captures his executions on video.

8. ISIS is destroying human history

Dozens of historical monuments have been seized and destroyed by ISIS, as they believe that people should not worship idols, their religion forbids it. These ancient monuments have been recognized as idols by ISIS leaders and each member feels it is their duty to destroy everything. Among the sites destroyed by the Islamists are museums and archaeological sites, such as Hatra, a UNESCO site, the second largest museum in Iraq, the Mosul Museum, many of which are well over 3,000 years old. The terrorists leveled these objects with bulldozers to the ground. But at the same time, their beliefs do not prevent terrorists from robbing historical sites and selling valuables on the black market in order to have money for their dirty deeds.

7 ISIS Is Too Extreme For Al-Qaeda

A year ago, President Barack Obama said that ISIS was not inherently al-Qaeda, arguing that wearing a Lakers uniform to a college sports junior would not make him Kobe Bryant. The analogy is strange, but the bottom line is that the US did not view ISIS as an equal threat to al-Qaeda. At the same time, the US President noted that al-Qaeda and ISIS are in conflict, as the former considers ISIS too extreme. In other words, the brutality with which ISIS operates is too bloody.

6. Beheading as an ISIS brand

ISIS is notorious for posting videos of innocent people being decapitated online, including the execution of ten Christians from Egypt. Known as "Jahadi John", this propaganda video distinguishes ISIS from other terrorist organizations. Its potential members perceive such a video as a manifestation of the strength of the organization and seek to join its ranks. Also, these videos spread fear among people.

5. Media in the service of terrorists

The ISIS organization is actively engaged in propaganda in social networks and in the media, strengthening its position on the world stage. To this end, she uses the Islamist channel Al-Khayat, professional media, making statements, uploading videos. If Al-Qaeda is engaged in sermons on television, then ISIS not only uploads cruel videos, but also broadcasts propaganda songs, demonstrative executions - they conduct an active aggressive policy, luring new recruits into their ranks. ISIS operates on Instagram, Facebook and Twitter, wherever new members can be recruited.

4. ISIS Makes Millions of Dollars Daily

Media participation and military campaigns require a lot of money, soldiers want to eat, weapons and uniforms are required. The organization has developed several ways to make money and has established entire streams. For example, $425 million was stolen from a bank in Mosul, other money comes from criminals and the black market. If ISIS succeeds in taking over all of Iraq and all of Syria, then the organization will have great energy capabilities. Today it is the richest terrorist organization in the world.

3. ISIS allies

Before ISIS took over large areas and began to use the proceeds from the sale of oil, artifacts and crime, the organization was looking for rich patrons and investors. US allies financially supported the opponents of the dictator Bashar al-Assad, who turned away from the ruling circles of Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Qatar. At the beginning of the uprising against the Syrian dictator, the rebels were interested in seeing the president abdicate. However, after the members of ISIS joined the movement, the rebels had radical calls directed towards fundamentalism, and the money of Western states settled on the accounts of ISIS.

2. Caliphate controls the world

The ideology of ISIS is based on the extreme postulates of the Koran. All Muslims must live in a caliphate, in a single Islamic state, and strictly follow Islamic laws, including stoning and quartering as punishments. While al-Qaeda is busy building a caliphate, but has never controlled large areas, ISIS already controls large areas and seeks to create a caliphate for itself, exterminating infidels and opponents of ISIS.

1. Harbingers of the Apocalypse

Supporters of ISIS believe that they are the "scourge of Allah" and want to destroy the world in order to create a universal caliphate with the leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi and Islamic laws of the Middle Ages. They believe that 12 caliphs will rule the world, Jerusalem will be a Muslim city, and Jesus will lead the Islamic army and lead it to victory.

Today, only the lazy one does not talk about ISIS, Arab countries, Muslims and other relevant public "tags". Conductors in buses and trams, subway grandmas, every second in any queue - everyone is talking about ISIS. But, as is often the case, more than 90% of "experts" will not show this formation on the map (maximum - somewhere in northern Africa, because there are "bigger squares").

So, ISIS: how it all began

Here, oddly enough, all the blame lies with the United States. No, no, we are not talking about the "damned Americans" every now and then trying to annoy or even destroy Mother Russia. And not even in Obama, whom all the honest Russian people call "schmuck". Here the US is really to blame, or rather, the administration of President Bush. And the whole history of ISIS began precisely with the invasion of American troops into Iraq.

On the territory of Iraq under Hussein, 3 large communities coexisted more or less peacefully:

• Shiites (the bulk of the population);


• Sunnis (Saddam himself and the majority of the ruling elite);


• Kurds ("graters" were with them only at the beginning of Hussein's reign).

In Iraq, before the arrival of the Americans, all this brethren coexisted more or less peacefully through all sorts of "checks and balances." Many will say that all this rested on the snot "say, there will be no Saddam - everything will collapse to hell." And this is a delusion. When the US and allied forces took control of Iraq, most American experts on the region, as well as the Israeli authorities (which is quite revealing) unanimously shouted that this system should not be touched. Everything is clear with Saddam - to hell with him. But it is better not to touch the administration, special services, the state apparatus at all - it will be worse.

What is the result:

It turns out that the Shiites - everything, the Sunnis - nothing, the Kurds quietly stand on the sidelines, because their American administration did not touch any - in fact, Kurdistan existed as an independent state with its own self-government.

The result of the "sensible" policy of the Bush administration:

• civil war rages in Iraq;


• Sunnis march together in al-Qaeda;


• they are beginning to be supported by Sunnis from eastern Syria.

By the way, the Americans managed to enlist the support of the Western Iranian Sunnis, but this did not save them from the creation of ISIS. The Sunni clans, which were generously supplied with weapons and money by Saudi Arabia (brothers!), by the way, were well sponsored by Al-Qaeda (and there is a strong suspicion that the American presidential administration was aware of this). Finally, after 2 years "sponsorship" of the Islamists have become the main force behind the insurgency in Syria.

Here's something interesting to notice: when the Obama administration suddenly realized that helping the Syrian rebels was tantamount to helping al-Qaeda, Putin came to its aid with his proposal about "chemical weapons" (Assad destroys them - there is no American ground operation in the country).

By the way, about the very concept of "states of Syria and the Levant." "Syria" for the Arabs is not a specific state (as it was for Ancient Rome, for example), but a vast region that occupies the space from the east of Iraq to Israel ("Levant" is the countries of the eastern Mediterranean, partially including Egypt, etc.). to.).

In general, something like this:

Well, now it would be worth going through specific countries and "positions".

Why was it necessary to climb into Iraq without a pocket government (as in the first Syrian company) and destroy the entire system of government in such a specific country? Here, I think, the blame is specifically on the Bush administration. I will not even argue: perhaps the Americans, invading Iraq, had really good intentions. But they succeeded as always (and, in principle, the same can be said about the USSR). With one hand to oppose the influence of Russia, with the other - to blow up the region. Guilty? Yes, to the fullest.

Russian intelligence was working with might and main in the region all the time (the fact that they exchanged some data with the Americans is a fact). Russia, too (on its own and alone) could prevent the formation of ISIS and all that is happening on its territory. To do this, it was enough to give Assad all the necessary weapons. What is interesting: Israel would not be against such a development of the situation. Assad is predictable like a tarpaulin boot, why change something? By the way, does Russia really have at least one real ally? In my opinion - no.

European Union

There is no "single Europe", no "single army", no "single policy". In the "TOP" countries, left-liberal groups rule. The policy towards Iraq and ISIS has always been coordinated with the United States, and the withdrawal of Spanish troops from Iraq after the terrorist attack in Madrid is a sentence for a united Europe. THERE IS NO STRONG ISLAM - THERE IS A WEAK EUROPE (I don't remember who said).

Everyone knows that despite the allied relationship, Obama and Netanyahu chronically do not digest each other. If you want to deal with ISIS and all Middle East problems at once: let Israel redraw the map of the region in its favor. Israel is the country that REALLY knows HOW to deal with the Islamists (Kadyrov, by the way, also knows - during the militant attack on the TV station, he acted effectively).

How to fight? Their own methods. Why go on suicide bombers? Because Arab poor families are huge by European standards. For a suicide bomber they give 20-30 thousand dollars. For a poor family from the same Palestine - a lot of money. How to "destroy" the entire benefit effect? Destroy the home of the suicide bomber's family (without the family itself, of course).

Terror attack on board a Russian aircraft

Well, why be surprised? A declaration of war against ISIS has its consequences. The reasons are simple:

• at Egyptian airports you can carry luggage without checking for 10-15 bucks - was it a secret for someone ??


• knowing the whole "feature" of the Egyptian security control - could not the Russian authorities provide it on their own ?? (negotiate with the authorities and establish additional, already "Russian" control at the main resort airports)??


• why should state propaganda lie: the terrorist attack is a direct consequence of Russia's participation in the operation against ISIS. And this explains everything, moreover, the vast majority of the population understands this very well and such information would not cause any negative.

• deportation of all illegal immigrants to Radzima;


• for all the remaining "legals" - total control;


• the abolition of ALL social benefits and benefits for families who do not have European origin.

Russian plane shot down by the Turks

And here Russia "surrendered" itself: after the appearance of a bunch of "true" information (including on federal channels) about the "irrefutable" facts that the plane did not fly into Turkey, everything became clear. If it flew, and even 10 times - what are the claims against the Turks (by the way, about the "Korean Boeing" - the Union was right). On the other hand, would the Turks shoot down a US plane in this case, for example ?? I doubt.

The Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation confirmed the death of four Russian soldiers during a night attack by ISIS * on an artillery battery in the Syrian province of Deir ez-Zor. ISIS receive support from Iraq, “finally cleared” of them, and the Russians are not the first time under attack in Deir ez-Zor. But it is not only the Islamists who are attacking them.

In Chita on Sunday, two Russian soldiers who died in Syria. The bodies of two more were sent to the regions of the Trans-Baikal Territory. Apparently, we are talking about the same military advisers, about whose death on Sunday the Ministry of Defense. Soldiers were killed while shelling an artillery brigade in the province of Deir ez-Zor.

The regional website "Chita.Ru" reports that the bodies of the dead were delivered to the capital of Transbaikalia on Sunday morning. The same publication names the names, age and ranks of those buried in Chita: 32-year-old senior lieutenant Sergei Yelin and 23-year-old sergeant Igor Mikhailov. They were buried in closed coffins.

It is reported that Vice Admiral Sergei Alekminsky, Deputy Commander of the Eastern Military District, attended the farewell ceremony. Next to the coffin of Sergeant Mikhailov stood Major General Valery Sharagov, deputy commander of the 29th Army, which includes the 200th Artillery Brigade. The unit is based at the Drovyanaya garrison, also known as Chita-46; the garrison is located in the Uletsky district of the Trans-Baikal Territory.

During the day, unconfirmed reports began to appear on the Web that there were more deaths. In particular, in the VKontakte group "Anonymous Army" a record was published that five Russians were killed in battle, and one of them died in a hospital already in Russia.

Novaya Gazeta came up with its own version: it is alleged that there were six dead - in addition to four servicemen, two people from the private military company (PMC) Wagner, which "guards oil rigs" in the province of Deir ez-Zor, were killed.

Night fight with carts

Reports appeared on social networks that the battle in which four Russians were killed took place last Wednesday, May 23. The Ministry of Defense does not specify the date and exact location of the attack. According to the military department, the night battle with the Islamists in the province of Deir ez-Zor lasted about an hour.

The artillery battery was attacked by mobile groups of militants. According to the Ministry of Defense, the jihadists used pickup trucks equipped with heavy machine guns to "jump". Experts compare these SUVs with carts from the Civil War.

The militants opened fire from large-caliber small arms, mortars and grenade launchers. The militants were driven back by artillery fire. In total, the Syrian military and Russian advisers who were in position managed to destroy 43 terrorists and six off-road vehicles.

Two Russian military advisers who controlled the fire of the Syrian battery were killed in action. “Another five servicemen were injured and were promptly taken to a Russian military hospital. Military doctors fought to the end for the lives of two wounded servicemen, but they could not be saved, ”TASS quotes a message from the Ministry of Defense. All the dead are presented for state awards.

IG * responsible for the attack. The media resources of the terrorists circulated a statement stating that during the attack on the Russian-Syrian convoy and barracks "in the desert area" of the province of Deir ez-Zor, about 15 military men, including Russian ones, were killed.

Uncleaned Deir ez-Zor

The province of Deir ez-Zor, where the battle took place, is divided along the Euphrates between the Syrian government forces (Syrian Arab Army) and the units of the Kurdish-Arab "Syrian Democratic Forces" oriented towards the United States.

On Thursday it was reported that the US-led coalition on the positions of the Syrian army in the province. In the same areas in February, people from the PMC "" came under American attack. The version about the "Wagnerites", we note, has surfaced even now.

At the same time, the desert areas in the southwest of Deir ez-Zor and the strip on the left bank of the Euphrates from the city of Hajin downstream are still controlled by the militants of the Islamic State*.

The Masar Press Agency Internet portal reported that it was Hajin who recently recorded their skirmishes with the Syrian Arab army. Military expert Boris Rozhin, in turn, believes that the battle took place in those desert areas where the cleansing from ISIS* gangs continues.

In any case, we are talking about territories bordering Iraq, Semyon Bagdasarov, director of the Center for the Study of the Countries of the Middle East and Central Asia, stressed in a commentary to the VZGLYAD newspaper. Although ISIS has almost been defeated in Iraq, according to the reports of the Americans and the Baghdad government (the operation to clear the last enclaves has been going on since mid-April), there were reports that the militants who retreated from Mosul were based near the Syrian borders.

Fueling from Iraq allows militants to carry out raids and attacks similar to those that led to the death of our military.

The other day, IS militants also attacked the pro-American Syrian Democratic Forces on the eastern bank of the Euphrates, Bagdasarov recalled. And despite the support from the Americans, the battle in the area near Hajin was not successful. In any case, the losses among the jihadists are unknown.

According to the telegram channel Directorate 4, rumors also appeared on the eve of an attack by militants on May 22 near Palmyra in the province of Homs, during which Russian soldiers were allegedly killed. But, as the authors of the channel note, these reports have not been confirmed.

* An organization in respect of which a court has made a final decision to liquidate or ban activities on the grounds provided for by the Federal Law "On countering extremist activity"