Jump to content

Red v Red for real in Syria


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 153
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Cut two zeroes off that figure and you probably have the correct number of foreign volunteers, including rank amateurs. Even A'stan under the Taliban didn't host more than about 12,000 foreign jijadis.

If you look at the Russian news clips you find them clearly repeating the regime's line.

No surprise; Assad is Russia's last "client state" in the old Cold War sense, and the naval facility at Tartus is clearly of value to them. Plus there is the old "Third Rome" idea, where (Orthodox) Russia views itself as the heir to Byzantium and protector of other Eastern Christian peoples, whether beleaguered by bloodthirsty Mohammedan heathen or Catholic pope-worshipping schismatics (Croats).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No surprise; Assad is Russia's last "client state" in the old Cold War sense, and the naval facility at Tartus is clearly of valie to them.

Put that down as one more reason NATO is hesitant to intervene. With Putin inolved in an election and beating the nationalist drum, do we really want to push showing their inability to back one of their allies? Iran may be of more concern to the US over it's nuclear arms push, but Syria is by far the bigger threat of a flashpoint for regional war. You have an autonomous Kurdish area in Iraq, a large Kurdish population in Syria and of course the Kurdish population in Turkey, a Sunni/Shiite schism, The only remaining Soviet ally in the midlle east, the supply route for Hezbollah etc etc

Unfortunately the only real card the Syrian people hold is the sectarian split in the army.

LLF have you seen or heard of any news reports of any Syrian army units being disarmed by the regime?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, but I suspect Sunnis who aren't proven Baathists (i.e. Career solders) have been largely confined to base camps, with little access to heavy weapons and perhaps their rifles too. Very likely a reliable mechanized unit has also been posted to each facility, working closely with military intel "commissars" to detect and quash the first sign of rebellion.

Under these conditions organized revolt is likely impossible. The most common act would be simple and spontaneous desertion when the opportunity presents itself. There are several documented cases of conscripts being hunted down and massacred while attempting to desert or flee across the borders.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well away from the CM PC for the next 3 weeks, but the airline did have the new copy of Time. It features an article by the journalists who were in Bab Amr. Considering it is about the photographer William Daniels there are unfortunately few pictures, however they do give some detail on the horrendous conditions there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

US satellite pictures capture the brutal bombardment of Baba Amr, Feb 25. This area is densely built up, so I'm adding even more 3-4 story apartments to my map when I have time. The regime will need to assault this area with forces that depend heavily on their BMPs and tanks for firepower.

BabaAmr_Sat.jpg

BabaAmr_Sat2.jpg

Based on the diagonal road nearby, I think this is the Al Qabaa mosque, at the north end of Baba Amr.

Also, at the end of this short clip, the FSA hits a moving T72 with what looks like an IED - result indeterminate:

Very good piece on the FSA in Baba Amr by Le Monde (Feb)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bLAdRnIIbZU

Interesting "zombie formation" used by the FSA to secure an overrun government checkpoint (2 BMPs, 2 BRDM). I'd guess pretty much all the shots fired in this clip are pure celebration, until the end when they actually seem to take some enemy fire. Hardly a professional looking outfit here.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GCeCoLrO2wY

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Erwin, you may not need to wait much longer since I have you in mind to playtest H2H for "Operation Adiyat" (Warhorse - a sura of the Holy Qur'an), with me as the brave, street-savvy but underequipped FSA rebels and you as the villainous Borf.

You'll be leading a reinforced mech company of the regime's 4th Armoured Division (Republican Guard) into these mean streets. T72s and BMP mounted infantry, plus a special forces commando platoon (actually all your infantry will be SF troops - regime forces pretty much all wear body armour these days -- just Experience and Motivation will differ). See post #16 for a brief outline of the plan.

While this may seem like an overwhelmingly powerful force relative to the opposition (which I'm also modeling realistically -- i.e. they don't have masses of RPGs or IEDs, their C3 is weak, and they aren't all fanatical dervishes, regime propaganda notwithstanding) you have 2 significant vulnerabilities:

(a) nearly all your heavy firepower is on your AFVs, which are streetbound in a battlespace that is 3D and LOS-impaired. Your infantry is all SF HQ or Sniper units -- light infantry -- which deprives you of the RPG-29s. I suspect you're going to find your infantry spread awfully thin really fast... far too little to cover every approach you want to cover and clear everything you want to clear. I've been struck in looking at the videos how infantry poor the regime forces are, whether it's because units had to leave a bunch of Sunni troops locked down in barracks or just think that being an "elite force" means piles of formidable-looking vehicles.

(B) while this unit is of proven loyalty and willing to kill the regime's enemies, your men and officers are notably unwilling to die, tending to lean on their AFVs (send bullets not men). Their training in combat drills, especially CCB, is also very poor by Western standards, on the standard pattern of Arab armies where officers disdain their noncoms and ordinary jundi, although they've certainly had some OJT over the past year.

As in JOKER THREE, friendly casualty avoidance will be heavily reflected in your VC, regardless of what the people who ordered this attack might prefer. On the other hand, you will get points for killing the irahibin (terrorists) and rafida (renegades).

More later....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Getting really into detailing the shattered buildings. Post WWII construction, where the building is based on cement pillars and floor slabs, disintegrates differently under shellfire than do traditional structures where the exterior walls are the primary load bearing elements. The walls tend to blow out, leaving the floors and skeleton standing, unless the pillars themselves are collapsed. In contrast, once you blow out a large chunk of wall in a masonry building, especially a corner, a fair amount of the adjacent floors and roof will collapse too.

Note also the rubble spewing into the already narrow street. Narrowing the street to half a square doesn't make it impassable to AFVs, but it does slow them down a lot and they will often seek a different route if not carefully micro'd.

BabaAmr_ruins2.jpg

I've also uploaded the simple damaged building mod I built several years ago to the Repository and GaJ's site.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The map looks amazing. Am very flattered that you think of me for playtesting. I loved playing your JOKER 3 I think it was 3 times. But, that's cos it was vs the AI and cold zip through it fast. For some reason I really didn't enjoy the one (small) H2H game I tried. Just too slow and complex to be much fun. Also, in CM1 you can easily recover from a few errors. But, in CM2, you can be screwed with one error. And the thought of having to play on for weeks with all the hard work that CM2 entails in a PBEM game is like a horror film. :(

But, if you do a version vs the AI... plz think of me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I got ya re H2H; no problem. I just started playing PBEMs myself after 10 years of CMing, and have actually found it a lot more fun than expected. But yes, a 90 minute scenario does take weeks, even against a conscientious opponent.

AI is going to be tricky for this scenario. My sense is that it'll actually be easier having the regime forces as the AI side, since they're roadbound and advance very systematically.

On the other hand, if the FSA try the same crude "block then flank" tactics that made JOKER THREE challenging for the 3:1 outnumbered and ammo-limited Marine infantry, they're likely to get mowed down en masse by AFVs as they rush through the streets to their next set of buildings. Also, in Baba Amr, they'd likely be at about 1:1 with the regime force, so they can't afford those kinds of mistakes.

The only way the rebels "win" is by inflicting casualties and demonstrating that their vaunted armour isn't invulnerable. They can't -- and shouldn't try to -- stop the regime forces from going where they want, but they can sure make it highly hazardous for them to hold whatever they've seized, especially once night falls.

The AI just isn't much good at patiently skulking in alleys or balconies seeking close-range RPG flank shots or ambushing small elements that have wandered off on their own. I just don't see any way of modeling those rebel tactics without a reactive AI, short of having a human being play them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Plz don't misunderstand... I would enjoy playing rebels vs AI.

It's just that while I play CM1 pretty much exclusively H2H/PBEM, I find the workload of CM2 to be too great and therefore the game too slow for H2H - and that was for a small scenario, not the large-huge ones that could take 2 hours or so that I most enjoy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Getting pretty close to done with the Baba Amr map here. It would take me months more to replace all the Mulaab 2 storey housing compounds with 3+ storey flats, so I've just created enough of them to give a tactically authentic feel to the map. This pano is north from the army's target, the Zubair ibn al Awam mosque to the army start zone on the main boulevard marked by the Al Jouri Mosque. The zoom does compress the view a lot -- this is about 600m deep, more than the width shown.

BabaAmr_pano_67.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cool thread, I wish I had been reading it earlier.

Here's my two kopecks (er, cents) on the Russians:

This doesn't come up very often in the western media, but the Kremlin is being about as emphatic as it knows how that it will not repeat will not we'll say that again for emphasis will not under any circumstances known or unknown support an international intervention in Syria. They have promised about a billion times to veto UN sanctions against Assad, and actually done it twice. They even got the Chinese to sign on.

The formal reason, our friends the Russians say, is that both sides are responsible for violence in Syria, therefore both sides need to stop shooting, sit down and talk etc. etc. The real reason, which people like Putin and Lavrov had stated repeatedly, but does not somehow get mentioned much in Western media, is that Russia is not going to allow a UN-sanctioned intervention for humanitarian purposes, because they did allow it in Libya and it turned into NATO-sponsored regime change.

The Russians are really mad about Libya. Not that it's a hellhole now, but that their buddy Gadaffi got kicked out against their wishes and now Lukoil and Rosneft' have lots more competition drilling in Libya. Few things angers Russians in power more than handing them a fait accompli they don't like and can't do anything about. They remember forever.

So now, they are unwilling to yield on Syria. Heck, more than that, they are willing to go way out of their way to make Syria as big and irritating a problem for the NATO nations, just to get even for Libya. They have made that position crystal clear, but somehow that cause-and-effect link - as far as the Russians are concerned - isn't making it into the western rhetoric.

You read the reports and the statements, and it's like the Russians are in love with Assad. Not true, the Kremlin has stated up and down they are fine with Assad stepping down, as long as it happens peacefully. But forced regime change for them is a matter of principle, they aren't going to allow it in Syria, no matter how many people Assad kills.

Now, this doesn't mean NATO etc. can't intervene in Syria. The Russians aren't going to start WW3 over Syria. But it does mean the West can't do it with UN sanction.

People like to blow off the UN, but a sanction of international use of force against a regime is pretty important. Without it, intervening is a whole lot harder for the western democracies as they get their national legislatures and populations behind the sending troops and weapons, and try and sell that idea in western Europe these days.

Assad knows all this, and I think that's a big reason why he's blowing the bejeezus out of Homs. Because he can.

The Russians, moreover, are continuing arms deliveries to Syria, and unless NATO wants to pick a fight with the Russians those deliveries are going to continue. Assad knows this too. So the Syrian army doesn't have to worry about limited ammo, see Homs for what that means.

For the record the Russians have rented I think two piers and some shore facilities in Tartus since the mid 1970s BUT (and this is really just as much a part of Russian military build-up for domestic reasons as it is international power politics) the Russians started repairing and modernizing everything there in the late 2000s. Last I heard (Monday) they had some kind of naval reconnaissance ship and naval tanker tied up in the port and the Kremlin confirmed there was some form of Marine Infantry/Anti-terror specialists/Russian soldiers trained for ground combat aboard the tanker. The biggest unit size mentioned was a battalion, but who knows?

Anyway, the next day (Tuesday) the Kremlin says, well ok, we have these infantry in Tartus, but really they're anti-piracy troops. Sure if there's an emergency those infantry might help evacuate Russian civilians, but in general we Russians are peaceful and we'd never think of intervening on the ground in Syria.

But the bottom line is pretty clear to the NATO boys, to wit, if there ever is a decision to intervene in Syria, that decision has to consider uniformed Russian troops as a factor in how the intervention would play out. Which makes things a whole lot more complicated for the NATO camp, which of course is the main Russian goal.

So I would bet Assad is going to keep killing his people for quite a while yet, and whatever assistance to the rebels the West might manage, the Russians are going to match.

Cut two zeroes off that figure and you probably have the correct number of foreign volunteers, including rank amateurs. Even A'stan under the Taliban didn't host more than about 12,000 foreign jijadis.

If you look at the Russian news clips you find them clearly repeating the regime's line.

No surprise; Assad is Russia's last "client state" in the old Cold War sense, and the naval facility at Tartus is clearly of value to them. Plus there is the old "Third Rome" idea, where (Orthodox) Russia views itself as the heir to Byzantium and protector of other Eastern Christian peoples, whether beleaguered by bloodthirsty Mohammedan heathen or Catholic pope-worshipping schismatics (Croats).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, the Russians could be modded up easily enough using one of the NATO forces... They'd have body armour and their rifles could be texture swapped.

But realistically there isn't much spetsnaz, much less larger Russian combat formations, have to offer the Syrian army that would fit into a CM context. Grozny (re)taught them that urban combat's an awful bloodbath and Putin would be in no hurry to be sending hundreds of body bags home doing the regime's dirty work for it. The regime forces have got the sniper thing down pretty well, and it's not like spetsnaz are going to be better (or less conspicuous) than locals at assassinating rebel leaders if that's what Asssad wants to do. So bluntly I just don't see a role for them.

This isn't an Iraq/Afghanistan situation, where the existing order has been overthrown and foreign troops have to back and fill against insurgents while they build up a quasi-competent native army. The regime army exists, intact -- it may not be fantastically competent, but it's clearly willing to fight. So any role for foreign advisers is going to be noncombat -- at higher HQs or at most behind artillery pieces. Same goes for the Iranian Revo Guards who have been rumoured to be in shadowy roles advising Assad to take the hard line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good to hear from you, BigDuke! I always learn great stuff from your posts, even if we're not totally aligned politically. Don't be a stranger.

Interesting points on the Russian attitude. As I alluded in the snip you quoted, they do seem to feel a certain "big brother" obligation regarding fellow Orthodox communities; plus they do have a longstanding position (physical and psychological) guarding the frontier (okrajina) of Western/Christian civilization that dates back to before the Mongols.

Also, I imagine if I was Russian if I looked and saw observant Muslims trying to overthrow a secular goverment all I would see is those murdered schoolkids in Beslan and say "there is just no reasoning with those maniacs. Anything is preferable."

Finally, it seems to me that it is the Turks, not Europeans, who are on the front lines of this one (yes, I know they're in NATO). As opposed to Libya, where IMHO a key driver (even more than oil, also IMHO) was Italian (and French) terror of yet another flood of African refugees pouring into Sicily when Muammar and Saif dropped the hammer on Benghazi. That might not change the Russian viewpoint -- they have no love for the Turks. But it's a different kettle of fish.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the Kremlin is is willing to play the "protector" card when it suits them, but as nearly as I can tell what drives their decisions is the intention to remake the country into a superpower. In their heart of hearts, they don't see themselves as Europeans. They see themselves as Russians, and as Russians their top priorities are build a powerful state and undermine competing states.

If you are talking about average Russians, it's not so much Muslim fear as good old racism, I'd say. You go to the country and Russian language, culture, traditions, history you name it and if it's Russian it's overwhelmingly dominant. But if you talk to the people you find plenty who are just convinced the country is about to be overrun by foreigners and that justifies pretty much whatever the police want to do. You look at the Russian media and it has no problem making fun of Tajiks or Uzbeks.

Interestingly enough the average Russian is not really aware people are dying in the Caucasus region almost every day from the insurgency, the rebels have gotten pretty good at assassinating cops and local officials that collaberate with the Russians. This is because the overwhelming majority of the Russian media simply doesn't report it.

Educated, internet-saavy Russians of course know better. But the average Russian I would say is pretty much convinced the insugency in the Caucasus is repressed, so repressing elsewhere really isn't a big deal. Heck, the spin the Russian state media on Syria is, Assad is defending the Syrian state against rebels who are being armed by NATO. Since Russians don't assume national leaders should necessarily act democratically or spare the lives of citizens undermining the state, Assad's actions aren't that unpalatable.

But the bottom line is not what average Russians think, but what Putin and his buddies think. And what they think is that Syria is a great way to get even with NATO over Libya. I'd be willing to bet that when they talk to NATO behind closed doors the Russian line is "You fools, look at the mess in Libya/Afghanistan/Iraq. Stop this building democracy crap, it just replaces a relatively stable dictatorship with the worst kind of chaos."

Sometimes I think the western democracies get trapped into these "eliminate the evil foreign government and improve the world" campaigns becuase if they don't, they have to explain to their own populations how it is representative democracy at home isn't always improving general public welfare. But if democratic nation troops are committed to building democracy elsewhere, then at home the democratic nation leadership can point to that and say "See, we support democracy, and if you think it's bad here at home look at how things are over there, get back to work pay your taxes and leave us in charge of the country."

But that is of course cynical and another thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good perspective and makes sense. If I'm Putin though I'd focus on the Chinese who are right next door to the Siberian resources that underpin any possible Russian claim to global superpower status (other than their unplayable doomsday card). Otherwise, they're just another aging white nation with limited wealth creation prospects and a brain drain taking away a good portion of their most talented people. The chekisti may feel like they can do what America does, but they can't. The social contract is weak and fraying. A lot of the raw energy and ambition that won WWII has gone, or so it seems to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...