Poking the Russian Bear
With increasing forensic evidence pointing to an in-air explosion as the cause of the crash of the Russian airliner over the Sinai, the taunting claim from ISIS that it is responsible for the disaster is becoming ever more convincing. Coming just weeks after the major Russian escalation of its military role in support of the Assad regime in Syria, it is not difficult to understand the motivation for the terrorist event. But it is a different matter when trying to fathom the wisdom of attacking Russian sun-seekers, vacationers returning to their northern motherland from a tropical vacation, innocent citizens far separated from their nation’s geopolitical activities. It is a bloody provocation the instigators well may come to regret.
In the few years that ISIS has been extant, there have been many occasions when its members’ behaviors have been brutally bizarre and unnecessarily provocative – symbolic pokes in the eye of Western sensibilities – but they have thus far refrained from such a terrorist attack on American citizens. Whether or not such an attack would bring any sort of meaningful response from the clueless and neutered puppy in our White House, there should be little doubt that poking the Russian bear in such brutal fashion will draw a disproportionate response that will result in the deaths of far more ISIS followers than the number of Russian civilians blown to dust over the Sinai. And it is quite easy to predict that the Russian response will not be limited in any way as a bow to humane Western sensibilities.
It is glaringly obvious to the world, except perhaps to the wildly unpredictable ISIS leadership, that Vladimir Putin is no Barack Obama. It is not a matter of whether but rather when the Russian leader will take his revenge upon ISIS for those innocent vacationers. It is not difficult to assume that the Russian response will be sufficiently disproportionate so as to provide a memorable lesson, not just to ISIS, but to the myriad terrorist organizations that might consider testing Russian mettle.
If I may be so bold as to offer a suggestion to Colonel Putin, why not bring in Russian strategic bombers and carpet-bomb the entire ISIS operational area until nothing remains except smoking sand, a strategy I have long been urging our own ineptly commanded military to pursue? Such a response might make future terrorist planners consider options other than killing innocent Russian civilians. Let them learn the wisdom of neither poking the Bear nor killing her cubs.
Crossposted at American Thinker
Category: Politics
Russia’s response? Well, PT, for me two words come to mind: Alpha Group.
Yeah, Hondo, you’re right I’m sure, but I just couldn’t help but suggest it one more time. As you recall from our previous give and take, I’ve been a fan of the tactic of a truly intensive and massive bombing campaign for some time now.
Oh, you could well be right this time, PT. The situation is different now (overt entity trying to establish a regional government vice a covert terrorist band), and this was a larger provocation. Russia is also sited better to conduct a major bombing campaign than we would be – much closer, and no need to secure a number of new foreign bases to support such a campaign.
Economically it would be a strain, though. We’ll see what happens – I suspect fairly soon.
ARC LIGHT!!!!!
Soviet style.
In Soviet Russia, Bear bombs you!
In Soviet Russia, president assassinates YOU!
In Soviet Russia, the fool pities Mr. T.
Yakov Smirnoff says you each owe him royalties . . . . (smile)
Next time I’m in Branson, MO I’ll drop off my payment to him. 😀
In Soviet Russia, MAILMAN bite DOG!
In Soviet Russia, TV watches YOU!
Tactical nukes…
Russia can and would use them. I would not be surprised that should Russia use them, and/or bomb Syria into the stone age, if the shit starts hitting the fan up into the Caucasus Mountains which would give Russia the pretext to start clearing out the Islamist bullshit there.
Bottom line is that they are not fucking around, and they want to send a message to prove their point. Putin is desperate to return Russia to superpower status, and this is his opportunity. Hang on to your asses, folks, it’s fixin’ to get ugly. A can of whoop-ass of epic proportions is about to be opened.
Just ask the Iranians what happens when you poke the Russian bear. People forget that the Russian embassy was also targeted, by the “students” back when they overran ours. The difference is in what happened next. Carter sat on his hands and the Soviets laid out an ultimatum that probably went something like this; “you have 24 hours to release our embassy or we will turn Tehran into a parking lot”.
The Russians have shown how they deal with terrorist threats and it’s not pretty, but is effective.
I seem to recall one of the Russian encounters with Somali pirates went something like this:
Pirates? We don’t know what happened to them. They disappeared.
Chief, Russians are experts at ‘making things go away’. I’m certain that they won’t have an issue here, haha.
Also good to check out the Russian KGB response to terrorists in Beirut during the 80’s…. there was no repeat to any of that nonsense afterwards.
Their response methods are brutal, but very effective.
And let’s not forget that prior to becoming Czar, er, President of the Soviet, er, Russian Republic, Putin was head of the KGB.
Man knows where all the bodies are buried. He’s not afraid to add more to the pile.
Hate to break up the hagiography, but Putin was never head of the KGB. In fact
In 1985 he was sent to Dresden, East Germany, and remained there for five years. While there
He resigned as a Lieutenant Colonel in the KGB August 1991, during the putsch against Gorbachev.
So, no, he’s no superman. 🙂 On the other hand, he’s no fool either, which puts him one up on the SCOAMF in the White House.
Back in the 80s when Lebanon had issue with hostage taking one group tried there luck with the Russians it didint work out very well for the hostage takers or there family or there friends…
Yep. Follow the link in the first comment.
That’s it Lol….
What? Russians in Lebanon? You must be mistaken.
I don’t think that the Russians have that RoE thingy hanging over their armed forces like we do – which is a bad thing for ISIS
Their RoE are probably a lot more simple: Find them, kill them and anyone that is related to them.
Russian ROE: See enemy, kill same.
Turn out not enemy? Oh, well. Better luck next time, comrade!
I wish our troops had the same simple ROEs from our mom-jeans-in-chief.
The Rooskies presumably learned a thing or two from their prior military experience in Afghanistan. So, yeah, high altitude bombing and long-range arty sound good.
The problem is really what to do in the aftermath. Russians are like nail fungus, once they get embedded its a pain in the ass to get rid of them.
I don’t think there will be a solution as simple as the ‘Stinger’ to get them gone this time.
Sadly, DH, I’m afraid you’re right.
A POTUS who wasn’t terminally naive would know that, and would act accordingly.
And my response to that would be…So what?
I mean, it’s pretty clear that America, from the President on down, does not want to get stuck with the middle eastern tar baby any more than we already are.
So the Russians would own Syria?
That would be a bad thing?
More to the point, would it be any WORSE than the collection of tyrants, religious fanatics and other assholes there NOW?
It wouldn’t be a bad thing if the ROEs were simple: Go in, bomb, shoot and destroy everything and everyone in our path, get out. End. No ME tar-baby to get stuck in.
The problem is, it would hardly be limited to Syria. Are you OK with a resurgent Russian Empire and/or it’s client states potentially extending from the Arctic to the southern coast of the Arabian Peninsula, and from the Sinai to the Indus?
Historically, dominating all or part of the ME has been a Russian objective for centuries. That didn’t change under the Soviet Union; it damn near became reality after World War II. The objective didn’t go away when the USSR ended, either.
I don’t think Russia can pull that off any time soon. But given the current disorganized state of the ME, I’m not positive they can’t, either – particularly if they work hand-in-glove with Iran and we stand by and do nothing. And I’d prefer never to find out whether I’m right or wrong.
Hondo, it’s not about what I’m “OK” with or not. It’s about the reality of the situation.
There is currently a power vacuum in Syria, caused by Assad’s near-collapse. That vacuum WILL be filled.
Will it be filled by the US? Nope. There’s not even a whiff of enthusiasm anywhere in this country for us to get further mired into that part of the world. And nobody, from the president on down, is advocating that. So that’s a non-starter from the beginning.
Will it be filled by the weak and feckless Euros? HELL no, they can’t even control their own borders, are they going to get their almost non-existent military forces embroiled in a vicious conflict? Of course not.
So who does that leave? Basically it leaves either ISIS (or whatever the hell the radical islamists are calling themselves these days) or the Russians.
Sometimes in foreign policy you don’t get to choose between “good” and “bad.” You have to choose between “bad” and “worse.” I don’t trust the Russians one bit but I’ll take a cynical criminal over a wild-eyed fanatic with God on his side any day of the week.
Serious question: Do you think there is ANY enthusiasm in this country to go to war for Syria? To commit tens or hundreds of thousands of US troops to another long twilight struggle?
Do you really think Mr. and Mrs. America are ready to send their sons and daughters into the abyss to prevent Syria from becoming a Russian client state? Because I don’t.
War is something you can’t half ass (not if you want to do it right.) You’re either in it, up to your elbows, or you’d best stay out.
Vietnam showed graphically what happens when you half-ass a war and your enemy doesn’t. With Obama’s empty threats to the Russians and his piddling deployment of Special Operations troops, I see us making the same mistakes again.
Actually, Vietnam showed graphically what happens when you fight a war that serves no strategic purpose, should never have been fought in the first place, and have an inappropriate and ineffective strategy for fighting the war on top of the above. On the battlefield, we excelled; strategically, we effed that up from square one. But that’s a different and irrelevant matter entirely. And initially (1965-mid 1967), the US population generally DID support the US involvement in Vietnam. It was only after they realized LBJ was lying through his teeth – and that we didn’t really have a strategy for the war – that they began to turn against the war in a major way. No, the US population at present has little desire to back further involvement in the ME. The US population also had little desire to become involved in War in Europe in 1940 or 1941. Even after Pearl Harbor, it took Germany declaring war on the US to get us involved. But we nonetheless realized that Europe – not Japan – was the decisive and existential threat, and gave that priority (roughly 2/3) for our World War II war effort – and the public did end up supporting that. For all his faults, FDR recognized that reality, then provided the leadership the American public needed to buy into and support a good war strategy that supported US long-term interests. Unfortunately, the current POTUS is as likely to provide that degree of leadership as I am to run a sub 4-minute mile tomorrow. Keeping the Russians from dominating the Middle East is indeed in the US best interest, and has been a cornerstone of our ME policy since immediately after World War II. Unfortunately, the current feckless and foolish Administration may well simply wave “bye bye” to that – and by doing so, hand the keys to that region to Russia and Iran. Enjoy today, because under the scenario you propose it may will represent what in the future you will fondly remember as “great economic times”, even though they suck. If Russia and Iran come to dominate… Read more »
We already have near if not over 20% unemployment.
We just have enough welfare programs to keep the society from consuming itself for lack of nourishment and other human needs.
I look at a lot of areas of Houston and see the real blight that has descended on our country and am appalled at the lack of forethought or action that has caused all this decay.
This will not end well no matter which way things go.
Our pResident being as feckless, cowardly and stupid as he is will have nothing to make this or any situation better.
All he can do is stand at the sidelines and shout that history will not judge Russia or Iran or wherever he is talking about at that point in time in a good light.
He states that those policies will fail of their own accord.
Well, that will come after the loss of a few thousand or perhaps a few hundred thousand deaths.
These could have been avoided had we had a policy of actually fighting a war and holding a territory instead of destroying a military and leaving nothing except a vacuum which will be filled by the nearest strongman or organization near the area in question…
Aren’t you forgetting that the USSR spent 10 years trying to take over Afghanistan and failed, because the Afghan government brought in the Taliban?
And then they turned to the US to drive the Taliban out of Afghanistan, and when we left, the Taliban moved right back in.
So how is it any different now from what it was back then? That was pre-USSR collapse, caused the dissolution of the USSR and the Politburo, and made the USSR financially bankrupt, so how is it different now?
Vlad may want to take Central Asia for his very own, but I do not see a real difference between now and 1990, unless you can specifically point to something.
First: the ME is not Central Asia – geographically, culturally, or resource-wise. Second, Russia today has allies in the ME today – Iran and Syria. In 1979, they had no allies except for the Afghan government they installed, which was largely ineffective. The situation today is not at all comparable to Afghanistan in 1979.
Third: the Taliban as an organization originated circa 1991, in Pakistani madrassas, likely with the support of Pakistan’s ISI. The USSR’s involvement in Afghanistan ended in 1989.
The Taliban were not invited into Afghanistan by the Afghan government. Rather, they began operations in Afghanistan in 1994 in response to the lawless actions of Afghan government officials and the confused, anarchic conditions found there at the time. At the time, they were welcomed by a large component of the population, which was fed up with anarchy and lawlessness after over a decade of war.
You may be thinking about the Afghan Mujahideen covertly armed and funded by a combination of Iran/Saudia Arabia/Pakistan/US efforts and trained by Pakistan in the mid/late 1980s. Those forces preceded the Taliban, and after the Russians left Afghanistan many later joined either the Taliban or al Qaeda. But that episode predates the Taliban as an organized entity.
Well, now, wait a minute there, Big Fella! That’s not what CNN said on all those news reports of theirs. (Seriously, they did say that. And I do know that the ME and CA are miles apart geographically.)
Are you telling me that CNN LIED TO US?
Okay, it’s been a while, and it followed closely on the heels of Kuwait, so it likely has been all shuffled together over time, but that was the first time I had heard of the Taliban and it did follow closely on the heels of the breakup of the USSR. That’s all.
Not at all. They might have merely exercised insufficient due diligence in fact-checking a story they reported as fact before broadcasting same. Whether that was due to laziness or incompetence, I won’t speculate.
You do have a point Mj. There was even a case made to get them involved in the fight years ago. Who knows how that might have turned out.
My guess is the Russians will not get rid of the fanatics. The will save enough of them so they can be used to reek havoc on others.
Of course they will be better trained, better armed, and far more effective. In general Arabs respect power, if its real and not imagined.
Not to worry, I speak a few words of Russian, we should all be fine. You just might want to learn what, “Touch the Red” means before you post anything in the future.
С наилучшими пожеланиями
“Touch the Red”? Is that the magic words you used to capture that smoking hot Russian Stripper? You give classes, yes?
Sleeping with the enemy is just the price I pay to protect this country. Giving that extra inch to the cause is not always easy.
We’re all grateful for your sacrifice, DH. Carry on.
Carpet bombing. Now just what have I been saying for weeks?
Well, if Vlad wants to go drop a few bunker busters on those bastards’ heads, fine by me. We should have done it long ago, but now — too late.
We are a bipolar bunch aren’t we? We demand SSG Bales head after he kills people tangently related to the bad guys, and yet we cheer at the prospect of Russia doing the same thing on a genocidial scale.
As much as I’d like them too, I don’t actually expect Russia to take a large scale action on this. If they do it’s because (as has already been noted) it’ll improve their standing on the world stage as a hard power.
Their more likely response is to blame us for arming the militants and bomb those groups we support in Syria while conducting precision strikes against those responsible (with a broad definition of responsible).
I feel sad for Bales he should have never been where he was… the system failed his and his leadership taxed…
I’m not cheering the possible Russian response. I’m merely pointing out what said response would likely be.
As an aside; back when we had real leadership in this country, the leader of Libya had a nasty habit of promoting terrorism. Our leader responded by sending a couple of 1000lb. bombs in the front door of his palace. Killed one of his kids and would have killed him if he hadn’t been out back playing boy scout in a tent. Said Libyan leader got the message loud and clear and you didn’t here shit from him after that. In fact, a few years later, that same Libyan leader would try and convince the leader of Iraq to GTFO of Kuwait before the US got all up in his grill. He basically told the leader of Iraq “they ain’t playing, homey, so it would be good for you to just get out now, before they get pissed”. We all know that the leader of Iraq didn’t heed the advice of the leader of Libya and the aftermath of us getting pissed.
Well not until December of 1988 when his agents blew up Pan Am 103 over Scotland and killed almost 300 people.
Which was followed shortly afterwards by the 2nd Gulf of Sidra incident. After that, Qadaffi rather “got the message” and quit attempting to screw with the West and concentrated primarily on countering home-grown Islamist opposition to his rule.
Gosh, I wish the U.S. was more like Russia. If only Putin would run for US president. I bet he would beat Hilary.
Carpet bombing ISIS means carpet bombing lots of innocent civilians, most of whom are more aptly named ISIS victims than ISIS followers.
ISIS is a hybrid organization. While there is a central authority, they really only control the ideology. There are multiple semi autonomous groups that are not directly controlled by anyone.
ISIS per se does not really care about the people they ‘govern’. They will declare everyone a martyr and go on about their business
‘beat hilary’?
Oh, my cat! Don’t toy with me, Reddevil.
The only question is what form the vengeance will take (kinda like in “Ghostbusters!”). Will Comrade Vlad just carpet-bomb them, tell Spetznaz to go and have fun, or go full “Great Patriotic War” on the hajjis, complete with mass-rape and Katyn Forest reruns?
Whatever the response, life in Syria is about to get a whole lot shittier…
I agree completely.
Pretty ridiculous civilization has to rely on Russia for justice regarding the ISIS issue, but here we are western spineless nations incapable of action. Go get’em, Russia. No quarter.
While you all are discoursing on ISIS as a political entity, you should know that they are running out of ancient junk to steal and sell on the black market, banks to rob, and oil to steal.
They expanded their territory to acquire funding for their caliphate, but that financial arrangement was not and is not sustainable.
At some point you run out of other people’s stuff to steal or sell, which is what is happening now. And they are meeting more resistance than they had anticipated, because their crude PR scheme, showing atrocities whenever possible to scare people, had just the opposite effect. It pissed people off. Remember what happened to Jihadi John? He’s got a price on his head for enjoying the limelight as a murdering scumbag.
You should consider that while Vlad may retaliate heavily for the destruction of the Russian airliner, he’s too smart to do more than just smack those offspring of the piggeries their fathers rose from, as hard as he can. I’m sure that he, too, remembers the USSR’s time in Afghanistan.
I see this as a one-time shot, not a Dec of War.
“At some point you run out of other people’s stuff to steal or sell, which is what is happening now” – are you referring to ISIS or Congress?
Take your pick!
Russia should let Israel retake the Sinai, by keeping Washington out of our hair long enough to consolidate our forces.
Some random thoughts … Russian allies in the ME: Iran and Syria. Iran is ascendent, Assad is in deep doodoo. ISIS is fighting against Assad. Those people who we loosely support in Syria are fighting against Assad. It would be in Russia’s interest to defeat those people who we support first to support Assad and second to stick their thumb in our eye and point out our weakness. It would in in Russia’s interest to defeat ISIS because Iran wants them dead. It would not be in Russia’s interest to overthrow Assad – unless he is already done for and they want to support a new guy but we did that in Iran and we still hear about it. On the other hand, it would also be in Russia’s interest to keep Iraq and the Kurds unstable and the best way to do that is ISIS. I do not know what Russia’s position is on Turkey but doing large-scale Russian military operations in the country right next door will certainly get Turkey’s attention – and Saudi Arabia and Jordan. Lebanon is too messed up to care much either way. The Russian attitude toward Israel is complicated. There are a lot of Russian / Ukrainian speakers in Israel and there are still a lot of Jews in Russia and the Eastern European countries around her. Most Russian emigres have no love for Russia, the Ukrainian emigres have even less love for Russia. Russia has only acted against Israel when they are actively supporting their nominees in the area (Syria and Egypt) or when they are trying to stick their thumb in our eye and show our weakness. Seems to me that a stable middle east is not in Russia’s interest because the West is their economic enemy and ME stability helps Western stability. I think that the Russians will do one or two things, well known in Syria and by other Sunni radicals. I think that the message will be, “Don’t fuck with us again. The next time we won’t be so nice – or selective”. Like other Russian operations, I… Read more »
I took a slightly different approach in post on this at Blackfive yesterday, but closed with the following: Владимир: Добрый Охота!