Russia is able in one fell swoop to disgrace the vaunted US army in Syria

5
Over the years of the Cold War, the US use of “carrier diplomacy” and the use of punitive missile attacks on rogue countries, enough information has been accumulated about the behavior of the US and the opposing side in such local armed conflicts. Therefore, it is not difficult in general terms, based on open data, to illuminate the scheme of action in the upcoming missile conflict around Syria.





Presumably, the United States will not launch a missile strike earlier than the approach of a group of ships led by the nuclear-powered aircraft carrier USS Harry S. Truman, since only in this case the Americans will have the necessary arsenal of cruise missiles, as well as DRL, REP and electronic warfare. Thus, the first “window” for such an attack will most likely open on the night of local time from April 20 to 21.

To ensure the destruction of government facilities in Syria, taking into account the possible opposition of the Russian group and the mandatory opposition of the Syrian troops to flying waves of cruise missiles, the Americans will have to launch about 250-300 Tomahawk missiles. This puts the United States in a very unpleasant position in advance, since, regardless of the results that will be achieved by the American strike, Washington will rightly be accused of destroying an entire country in favor of unsubstantiated accusations and unbalanced ambitions of North American political leaders.

If the missile strike will be "limited" in nature, that is, for example, from the destroyer USS Porter and, possibly, present at the firing positions of the American nuclear submarine, 60-120 Tomahawk missiles will be launched, then, given the possible Russian counteraction (a the Russian group will probably be faced with the task of protecting the airspace of the Syrian ally without entering into direct fire contact with the carriers of the Navy and the US Air Force), the number of missiles that have reached the target will be so small that it will give rise to Damascus and Moscow to identify the results of the raid as a shameful failure of Washington.

Note that such a “limited” strike can also be a very meaningful act if it is taken a few days before the main operation. In this case, it will be reconnaissance in battle, during which the United States will try to collect data on the organization of the defense system of Syrian airspace. However, to carry out such reconnaissance, strong political will is needed, as its seemingly discouraging results can encourage politicians in Washington to cancel the Syrian operation in general.

In the above calculations, it is assumed that the United States will not launch missile strikes in the direction of the Khmeimim air base, and against Syrian targets, the exit routes to which can be interpreted by the Russian military as a threat to its own group. Perhaps a direct conflict with Russia is still not in the interests of the United States. If the US military strikes, including at the Khmeimim base, the details of this part of the scenario, for obvious reasons, will not be disclosed.

The Americans suggest that Russia will not use the Caliber missiles of the US Navy. Of course, both the American and the Russian military know that the number of Caliber cruise missiles that can be used in the region under consideration is not enough to break through American air defense missile defense. At the same time, the Caliber is more than enough to guarantee the cleansing of pro-American militants and their infrastructure in Syria. This is a matter of political decision, and it is the competence of the Russian political and military leadership.

At the same time, Americans predict that if Russia uses the “Dagger” hypersonic systems in the conflict, then only for ground targets, for bases of pro-American groups or ISIS facilities. Americans are comfortable and pleased to think so. Incidentally, to stop the Syrian crisis, most likely, one statement by the Russian leadership would be enough that the VKS group equipped with the Dagger complex was deployed at one of the air bases in the North Caucasus and could, if necessary, be used for any purpose.

The situation can be brought to a completely different level of threat balance, for example, by a formal purchase (or lease) from the Syrian government, several units of the Dagger complex and its carriers. The Syrians will surely have much less doubt and sentiment to destroy the American nuclear carrier, or not. An analogue of such a decision is Turkey’s purchase of the German battle cruiser Goeben and the light cruiser Breslau in 1914, which played a key role in Turkey’s entry into the First World War on the side of the Central Powers. The crews of the cruisers “bought” by Turkey, by the way, then remained German.
5 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +1
    April 13 2018 14: 58
    How much we are lacking in the latest Zircon hyper-sound anti-ship missiles, the modernized Pantsir-SM air defense missile systems with improved performance characteristics and of course the long-awaited S-500 air defense systems, when finally all these latest systems will begin to arrive en masse in our troops, why is it taking so long It takes a period of development and introduction into production, it is necessary to reduce this time as much as possible and accelerate the rearmament of our army to the latest types and types of weapons.
    1. +1
      April 13 2018 15: 45
      Modern weapons in general have an extremely long development period. The life cycle of modern weapons and military hardware takes about 40-50 years.
      It must be understood that the current and planned State Armament Programs (GPA) are quite heavily placed on the Russian state budget. Alas, there is no escape from the issues of prioritization.
      For example, I am a supporter of the construction of heavy nuclear aircraft carriers in the amount of 2 copies until 2040-2045, so that, together with the medium aircraft carrier "Admiral Kuznetsov" (and the subsequent ship to replace it), Russia would maintain the number of aircraft carriers of 3 units. In the future, this should be enough to protect Russia's sovereign interests. However, the beginning of the implementation of these projects has been postponed until the final years of GPV-2027 due to limited resources, and, unfortunately, this is correct in prioritization.
      1. -1
        April 14 2018 07: 02
        Quote: Nikolay Kuzyaev
        Modern weapons in general have an extremely long development period.

        I will answer you in the light of the missile strike by the United States and its coalition against Syria. You can chew snot and puff out your cheeks for another 18 years, telling everyone that Russia is much more powerful than the DPRK. Only they are afraid not of the big, but of the strong. The cow is much larger than a pit bull terrier, but for some reason they milk it, and no one dared to milk the pit bull. A comparable example? Continue to develop country castles, laws on parliamentary and bureaucratic involvement, additional capitalization of banks, assistance to sanctioned oligarchs, and you will have "happiness."
        1. 0
          April 20 2018 04: 02
          Yura, snot it you chew, sitting on the couch.
          Russia defeated the Americans without entering into a direct exchange of blows. Everything was done by the hands of the Syrians with our technical and advisory assistance.
          And in the country's leadership, people are responsible and understand what the exchange of attacks between nuclear powers can lead to.
          Are you ready to be mobilized and exchange a soft sofa for trenches? I think no.
    2. +1
      April 13 2018 18: 56
      There is no Stalin and Beria ...