conflict zones, latest, Russia, Syria, United States
Comments 23

NATO illegaly deploys AWACS in Syria

from, translation by
Pete Kimberley


At the end of a meeting of the Ministers for Defence of the European Union, the General Secretary of NATO, Jens Stoltenberg, who had been “invited”, gave a Press briefing.

He declared that he had been shocked by the battle of Aleppo, which he equated with the attack on a humanitarian convoy. He went on to qualify both events as «violations of international law».

However, the attack on the humanitarian convoy was perpetrated on the ground by the «Local Council of Aleppo» against the Syrian Red Crescent, while the battle of Aleppo is being fought by Syria and Russia in application of UNO resolutions calling for the struggle against terrorism. During the Aïd cease-fire, the “Local Council of Aleppo” considered themselves to be linked with organisations listed as terrorist by the UNO, and refused to stipulate the distinction.

Responding to a question from Reuters, Mr. Stoltenberg indicated that NATO would deploy AWACS to improve the Coalition’s view of the sky.

However, Syrian air-space is legally used only by Syria and Russia, and illegally by the Coalition and Israël. The rebel or terrorist armies have no air force. It seems that NATO intends to test the methods of aerial surveillance which still function despite the deployment of the Russian system for disconnecting the Alliance’s command and control.


  1. To think, if the crazies in the Pentagon make their wet dream a reality and trigger WW3,the overwhelming majority of the people targeted,will be even more clueless as to why it came about than our ancestors had in 1914 or 1939,yet it will make Verdun,the Somme,Stalingrad,Dresden and Hiroshima combined, seem like a
    minor car crash in comparison .
    Not a bloody peep on the MSM about seriousness of the situation.
    Where are the CND rallies ?
    Who will survive to write the history,make the sequel ‘Dr Strangelove,how we leared to ignore the warnings’,or to simply add the date to Raymond Biggs ‘When the Bomb dropped’.
    Utter,utter madness,blind lunacy and for what ?

    • BigB says

      Putin holds the cards at the moment – I suspect that barring an ‘October Surprise’ (which won’t be forthcoming from Assange or so it now seems) – Obama will keep swinging his d*ck for the next month before swanning off in January. The problem could be if that ‘deranged nurse in the mental asylum’ Killary succeeds him. She has already painted Assads face on the warhead of a cruise missile and signed it “To Bashar, love Hillary” – to be part of the firework display that crowns her inauguration!

  2. This article states that the aid convoy was attacked by the “Local Council of Aleppo” but cites no source. Can anyone confirm this?

    • Hi Doug,

      I tried to reply to you below (twice), but WordPress won’t post my replies. So I’ll try it here:

      You wrote:

      Hi, Norman,
      I wouldn’t be too sure that the US could overwhelm the Russian air defences. I think there is an s-400 and two s-300 in operation (one marine, one land). One version of the s-300 can track 300 targets. I’m not saying nothing would get through, but for the US the possibility of being humiliated might be daunting.

      I agree: the S-300 (or S-400) is capable of shooting down anything the U.S. can throw at it. But if you only have ‘x’ missiles on hand to counter ‘y’ missiles, and ‘y’ exceeds ‘x’ by an order of magnitude, then many ‘y’ are going to hit their intended targets.

      I guess the question is how much ordinance the Russians have on hand to feed their S-400 and S-300 systems in Syria versus how much ordinance the Americans are willing to lob and can keep lobbing at these systems.

      Interestingly, The Saker writes:

      . . .in the Syrian context Russia is hopelessly outgunned by the US/NATO, at least in quantitative terms.

      [. . .]

      It appears that the Russians are trying hard to compensate for their numerical inferiority by deploying high-end systems for which the US has no real equivalent or good counter-measures. The logical solutions for the Russians is to use their qualitative advantage or to seek “horizontal targets” as possible retaliatory options.

      [. . .]

      . . . the Russians will have to make an absolutely crucial call: how important is Syria in the context of their goal to re-sovereignize Russia and to bring down the AngloZionist Empire? Another way of formulating the same question is “would Russia prefer a confrontation with the Empire in Syria or in the Ukraine?”.

      I will defer to The Saker’s analysis: it is by no means certain that Russia can at this moment prevail over the U.S. in Syria should the U.S. decide to pull out the stops, and then tactically speaking, it may make more sense for Russia to pull back, regardless.

      The Saker’s article, by the way, is to my mind worth the read.

      Whatever happens, things are escalating . . . although Alexander Marouris believes that the U.S. will stand down if it hasn’t already . . .

      • Norman, I understand and agree overall, but someone (I don’t recall where) made the point that if Russian hardware appears effective then US allies/vassals will be very uncomfortable and their response is something the US would want to avoid. Mind you, Washington seems so filled with hubris they might not even consider it.

  3. MFitz says

    Does the author understand that E-3 AWACS does not have to enter Syrian airspace in order to monitor it?

  4. Putin is in the unenviable position of giving an inch to the US coalition and having them take a mile. He may still be hoping that diplomacy will work, but sooner rather than later he will have to acknowledge that the egos of the coalition parties will rule over common sense – of which there is a great paucity of – and they will, because of blind arrogance, force his hand.
    I don’t wish to be alarmist, but does anybody know of a good place to hide on this planet, to escape the consequences of arrogant egotists?

    • BigB says

      Iceland? New Zealand? Two of only ten countries in the world that can be called peaceful according to the Global Peace Index.
      UN Charter: Article 1 – To maintain international peace and security, and to that end: to take effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace, and for the suppression of acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace, and to bring about by peaceful means, and in conformity with the principles of justice and international law, adjustment or settlement of international disputes or situations which might lead to a breach of the peace;
      Letting the worlds top five arms dealers (the Permanent Members) legislate for world peace has worked out well for the last 70 years – for the arms dealers!

    • “I don’t wish to be alarmist, but does anybody know of a good place to hide on this planet, to escape the consequences of arrogant egotists?”

      I would say that the safest places to be are in areas that are pretty much self-reliant in terms of local food production and distribution. Most of the people in the advanced economies are pretty much screwed. It doesn’t take very much time to starve. Seriously disrupt transportation and distribution networks, and people begin dying in a month or so. And then winter in the Northern regions must be survived.

      Large cities are the most vulnerable because they are the most dependent on supplies from far-flung regions. People who still live in the hinterlands — and yes, they still do exist — are likely to be the least affected of all. Most, however, because they live in large cities, will be caught in the cross-fire and in fact will be deliberately targeted, as it has always been in all wars. If the gloves do come off, and you have children, you might want to take them out of the city and into the country.

      Of course, we think that to talk in this manner is to be alarmist because we want to believe that the calamity will never come to pass. Except that for many it already has come to pass and is happening even now as we exchange these comments.

      I think the situation is objectively fraught with danger. We are on the brink. I don’t think that is an exaggeration.

      There isn’t much that any of us can do except to wait to see what happens, and what happens will then dictate our actions.

      In the meantime, we try to remain alert to what is happening and to keep those who will hear us apprised.

  5. BigB says

    Just a thought – is this a coded message? Do we need to deploy AWACs because we lost our Forward Operating/ command and control redoubt in the Samaan mountains (re: the unconfirmed reports of a Russian Kalibr missile attack)? Is this a tacit admission that we have lost our ‘ears on the ground’ so to speak?
    Also, “the rebel or terrorist armies have no air force” – no, but the USAAF, RAF, Dutch, Austalian etc. air forces seem to be providing a useful stand in. Is this to further this end?
    In reply to Norman – the Russians are adding their S-300 anti-ballistic missile system to bolster the S-400s already deployed. Let us hope and pray that we never have to find out whether they can take down a Tomahawk in mid flight.
    Yet Russia can’t simply back down, neither can Hizbolah (Lebanon) or Iran (China might as they have only a limited deployment.) If they do they will have to submit to the Empire; Syria, Lebanon and Iran will be annexed and the worlds largest deposits of hydrcarbons – the black and the blue gold (gas) – will be in the hands of Wall St. Russias limited leverage over Europe (mainly gas supplies) will be cut off and they face being sanctioned into submission. Putin has been warning us for over a year that we are deep in the Cold War 2.0. I can read the signs but I pray that it is not about to go hot.

  6. International law as it pertains to war and peace has evidently disappeared, gone extinct, from the face of the Earth in October 2016. For those interested, the link below is of an outstanding, critically important, revealing interview about Syria of Dr. Henry Lowendorf (U.S. Peace Council) and Gerry Condon (Veterans for Peace), hosted by Gary Null. One of the guests stated the organized media push for war on Syria is the “…greatest propaganda, psychological military operation ever.” That makes immediately conducting the “greatest global truth and peace operation ever” a matter of ultimate urgency:

  7. My feeling is that the U.S. and NATO are gearing up for a major attack, probably by means of cruise missiles. They will hit both the Russians and the Syrians from afar, and there won’t be much that Russia will be able to do to counter the attack given that it currently has limited means on the ground in Syria with which to counter cruise missiles were they to come in their hundreds. Therefore, in my opinion, the U.S. and its toads and vassals are counting on the pause that the Russians would have to take, logistically speaking, and contemplate the full measure of the Empire’s intent on war, the insanity of it. Their hope is doubtlessly that Russia will retreat and surrender, so to speak. I don’t know how likely that is.

    As Bill Van Auken puts it:

    . . . the Putin government sees Syria as part of a broader struggle against the US drive to militarily encircle Russia. It fears that a successful US regime-change operation in Syria would serve as a stepping stone toward direct intervention in Russia, including through the unleashing of CIA-funded Islamist fighters drawn from Russia’s Caucasus region. A US-backed client regime in Damascus could help funnel such separatist forces, already trained on the Syrian battlefield, back into Russia to serve as Western proxies in a campaign to destabilize and ultimately dismember the Russian Federation.

    And as everyone is probably also aware of by now, forty million Russians are practicing emergency “Civil Defense” evacuation drills.

    It seems that the Russian’s have already seen the writing on the wall and have begun preparations in earnest.

    It doesn’t seem likely that they will truly stand down even if they have already been caught logistically flat-footed in Syria, on the assumption, that is, that Amerika is about to ratchet up the terror in the course of the next week or so.

    • At least the Russian Government has the support of the citizens who unlike Americans are kept in the dark about geopolitical matters ablaze.

    • Yonatan says

      The S-300V system shipped to Syria includes cruise missiles as designed-for targets. The tracked S-300V transporters are also capable of moving over a wider range of terrain that the wheel-based S-400 transporters.

      • No doubt you are quite correct. However, these systems can be overwhelmed by numbers. The U.S. military will have a fairly exact idea of those numbers are, and the expense will be acceptable, especially to the companies with the for-profit contracts to replenish stocks.

    • Doug Colwell says

      Hi, Norman,
      I wouldn’t be too sure that the US could overwhelm the Russian air defences. I think there is an s-400 and two s-300 in operation (one marine, one land). One version of the s-300 can track 300 targets. I’m not saying nothing would get through, but for the US the possibility of being humiliated might be daunting.

    • This was the Russian Checkmate to a potential US imposed No Fly Zone !

      Its all theatre & hot air by the US to disguise their evil intent & the plain fact that they have lost in Syria. Russia is being very careful not to humiliate the US as these clowns are very capricious & might just start WW3 by accident.

Please note the opinions expressed in the comments do not necessarily reflect those of the editors or of OffG as a whole