Russia Warns US Any Strikes On Syrian Army Would Lead To War: "Our S-300, S-400 Defenses Are Up And Running"

Tyler Durden's picture

Yesterday morning we reported that in immediate retaliation for the US threat that the Pentagon may launch air strikes against the Assad regime in the latest and most dramatic escalation in the Syrian proxy war in years, Russia's Defense Ministry said that a battery of Russian S-300 air defense missile launchers has been transported to Syria. As Russian Defense Ministry spokesman Igor Konashenkov said, “the Syrian Arab Republic received an S-300 anti-aircraft missile system. This system is designed to ensure the safety of the naval base in [Syrian city of] Tartus and ships located in the coastal area [in Syria]…” 

Then, in an amusing twist, Konashenkov said it is unclear why the deployment of the missile system has created such a fuss in the West. "The S-300 is a purely defensive system and poses no threat,” he said.

To which we said that "of course, a defense system is precisely what the Pentagon would prefer to avoid in case an offensive attack was launched."

Today, Russia confirmed that the deployment of the Surface-to-Air missile battery was clearly aimed at containing US offensive ambitions, when the Defense Ministry cautioned the US-led coalition of carrying out airstrikes on Syrian army positions, adding in Syria there are "numerous S-300 and S-400 air defense systems up and running", as cited by RT.

Taking the mic for the second day in a row, Igor Konashenkov said that Russia currently has S-400 and S-300 air-defense systems deployed to protect its troops stationed at the Tartus naval supply base and the Khmeimim airbase. He added that "the radius of the weapons reach may be “a surprise” to all unidentified flying objects."

Uttering the loudest warning yet that any US-coalition airstrikes would be met with a Russian response, the Russian Defense Ministry said that any airstrike or missile hitting targets in territory controlled by the Syrian government would put Russian personnel in danger, clarifying that "members of the Russian Reconciliation Center in Syria are working on the ground delivering aid and communicating with a large number of communities in Syria."

“Therefore, any missile or air strikes on the territory controlled by the Syrian government will create a clear threat to Russian servicemen.”

Konashenkov warnedthat the Russian military won't have time to use the hotline if it sees missiles on their way to targets in Syria.  

 “Russian air defense system crews are unlikely to have time to determine in a ‘straight line’ the exact flight paths of missiles and then who the warheads belong to. And all the illusions of amateurs about the existence of ‘invisible’ jets will face a disappointing reality,”  Konashenkov added. 

In an apparent hint at the U.S. stealth aircraft, he added that any "dilettante illusions about stealth planes could collide with disappointing realities."

Adding to the warning, the spokesman also noted that Syria itself has S-200 as well as BUK systems, and their technical capabilities have been updated over the past year.

The Russian Defense Ministry’s statement came in response to the previously flagged “leaks” in the Western media alleging that Washington is considering launching airstrikes against Syrian government forces.

Of particular concern is information that the initiators of such provocations are representatives of the CIA and the Pentagon, who in September reported to the [US] President on the alleged controllability of ‘opposition’ fighters, but today are lobbying for ‘kinetic’ scenarios in Syria,” he said.

He cautioned Washington to conduct a “thorough calculation of the possible consequences of such plans.”

He is not the only one: as we reported earlier in the week, launching bombing raids over Syria would necessarily require the creation of a "no fly zone" for Syrian and, more importantly, Russian warplanes.  To that point, during testimony before the Senate Committee on Armed Services last week General Joseph Dunford rang the alarm over such a strategy, saying that it could result in a major international war which he was not prepared to advocate on behalf of.

The key exchange took place after Senator Roger Wicker of Mississippi asked about Hillary Clinton’s proposal for a no fly zone in Syria in response to allegations that Russia and Syria have intensified their aerial bombardment of rebel-held East Aleppo since the collapse of the ceasefire.

"What about the option of controlling the airspace so that barrel bombs cannot be dropped? What do you think of that option?" asked Wicker. "Right now, Senator, for us to control all of the airspace in Syria would require us to go to war against Syria and Russia. That is a pretty fundamental decision that certainly I’m not going to make," said the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff suggesting the policy was too hawkish even for military leaders.

It remains to be seen if the US president, either the current or next one, will be willing to make a decision which as Russia has now confirmed, would lead to direct, lethal conflict between the US and Russia.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Bay of Pigs's picture

Hey look! A wedge of Black Swans on the horizon.

Looney's picture


I suspect that at least the Eastern half of the country will be wiped off of the ISIS scourge by January 20.   ;-)


MillionDollarBonus_'s picture

Bring it!! No price is too high to pay to bring peace and stability to the Middle East! This is a MORAL quest, and morality trumps everything.

Why Democracy in the Middle East is Worth Fighting For

SomethingSomethingDarkSide's picture

Level the 3rd world with Peace!  So much fucking peace, my skin is melting off.

Haus-Targaryen's picture

I assure you, I'll be burning my draft card if I am expected to die on the new Eastern front so the banker overlords can get wealthy off my passing.  

Million Dollar Bonehead's picture

Obama is weak. Dear Leader Hillary would have Putin crying like a baby by now as his beloved kremlin lay in a giant radioactive heap of rubble. We can't afford a weak leader like The Donald Trump. We need a strong feminine presence that will not hesitate turn deliver a hot fission-falafel to Assad's doorstep and turn Damascus into the world's largest radioactive sandbox. Hail Dear Leader Hillary! The hour of Dagon's victory is at hand!

back to basics's picture

This sounds like the first step to the Russian's enforning a NFZ over Syria.

About fucking time.


pods's picture

I have been hoping that the Russians would scare ISIS's air force from helping undermine the government.

I have come to the conclusion that they will do no such thing.

Where were these systems when the base around Aleppo was being bombed?

All I see is huffing and puffing. Russia is in the right when you look at it legally.
But they know the 4th branch of government will skewer them if they ever took down one of our jets.

And all the war supporting mouthbreathers would be calling for an all out demolition of anything inside Syria.

It would take less than a week of plastering the baby photos of air force pilot XXXXXXX XXXXXXX, survived by his lovely wife who has to take care of their two kids alone............



BorisTheBlade's picture

Russia is underdog in this one. Have to calculate every move and do no missteps. Collective West is huge, but throwing punches left and right and expends resources with every move unproportionately. No reason to up the stakes even more, not for Assad anyway.

lance-a-lot's picture
lance-a-lot (not verified) neutrino3 Oct 6, 2016 12:27 PM

The truth about the conflict with Russia NO ONE dares to reveal.

exi1ed0ne's picture

The truth about obfuscated links that only the mentally challenged would ever click, and the scammers that love them!  Film at 11!

jefferson32's picture

Tyler, I believe you missed an important piece of information lately, i.e. the apparent Russian missile strike on a foreign intelligence "operations center" in Syria, killing 30 Israeli, American, Qatari and Saudi intelligence officers. It explains why the American neocons are furious, and the change of tone of Trump and his VP on Russia (apparently Trump has been briefed on an imminent strike against Assad, and doesn't want to appear unamerican when it happens).

The Russian attack took place in the immediate aftermath of the Americans bombing the Syria army "by mistake" 2 weeks ago. And because the intelligence officers (especially Israeli) aren't supposed to be in Syria, and perhaps because they know it was a just retaliation against their own bombardement, the western governments/MSM are not acknowledging/reporting the strike.

Sources: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5

Here is the Washington Post saying Obama is considering strike on Assad (i.e. WW3)

Here is the Russian general warning US planes will be shot down if they target the Syrian army. My favourite quote from the statement: "The radius of the weapons reach [S-300/S-400] may be a surprise to all unidentified flying objects".


BigJim's picture

All "five" sources point to one source.

Grain of salt, meet pinch.

conscious being's picture

Sputnik News is claiming it happened. That means the Russians are claiming it happened.

A rumor going around says Western SFs are trapped with their Jihadi partners in E. Aleppo.

Shemp 4 Victory's picture


A rumor going around says Western SFs are trapped with their Jihadi partners in E. Aleppo.

Then they are traitors to their country and traitors to humanity. They deserve extermination.

OverTheHedge's picture

More a case that, as always, they were dumped into a situation without all the facts, having been lied to by their superiors. The people that put them there are culpable, the grunts are just pawns to be used and abused. Nothing new, and nothing to get upset about.

More interesting will be a general strike / refusal to serve, as happened in Vietnam. I wonder if the US forces are getting even close to that point? It is hardly the same level of risk as in Vietnam, but it has been a long, hard slog with no end in sight for the lowly cannon-fodder, and if they keep getting thrown away in secret by mad, war-hungry planners, they may lose heart for the fight.

It has struck me that the term "special forces" may be over-used: if all your forces are special, that would just make them "forces". Elite fighting forces tend to have more enthusiasm for difficult situations than Joe Grunt. Please note this is idle speculation - I have no special inside track on US military morale.

We shall see.

Nexus789's picture

I'd be more inclined to believe the Mid East news sources than anything from the MSM. The fact that the MSM and the degenerates in Washington are silent and some of the military bumpkins have their panties in a knot tends to suggest there might be a grain of truth in it. Would not suprise me as the Russians appear to be quite good at intel gathering and dispution.

Road Hazard's picture

I so hope this is true but it just seems sources 2 through 5 are just repeating what source 1 said. If it is true, and I was in charge of Russian forces or the Syrian Army, I would go through the charred bodies and post up pictures of their corpses and any passports/ID cards I could find.




Ordinary average guy's picture

Wow! Never heard it. Really interesting .Thank you. Except that little thing that we are all nearer on the brink of WAR. Not just that in Siria. I do not wanna die. I think yuo too. -But look we can do nothing. For me even fllein is impossible becouse my family doesent believe. How do you think , will them stop before killin each other and thus starting bigge rkillings of nukes which will kill you and me? Ah , you clever guy, what do you think?

Ordinary average guy's picture

Wow! Never heard it. Really interesting .Thank you. Except that little thing that we are all nearer on the brink of WAR. Not just that in Siria. I do not wanna die. I think yuo too. -But look we can do nothing. For me even fllein is impossible becouse my family doesent believe. How do you think , will them stop before killin each other and thus starting bigge rkillings of nukes which will kill you and me? Ah , you clever guy, what do you think?

NiggaPleeze's picture

The neo-cons will be jumping on this, claiming the US has been "humiliated" and "challenged" (as another country enforcing a clear international law is an outrageous "aggression" in the Evil Empire's Full Spectrum Dictatorship paradigm).

The neo-cons will want to do a bombing run against Assad's forces just to force Russia to down the criminal warplanes.  This will give these Zionist traitors the excuse they need to draw the US into a war with Russia, believing that when the (radioactive) dust finally settles, Jerusalem will be the new capital of the world.

If only it were possible to send all of the neo-cons into East Aleppo to fight alongside their al Qaeda "freedom fighter" bros .... Where is a teleportation machine when you need one?

BigJim's picture

I wonder if it's finally dawning on the Russian leadership that all this shit ultimately stems from the Likudniks' (and their US vassals') adoption of Oded Yinon's policy recommendations?

If so, Israel could be in for a lot of trouble if things heat up.

If Russia are obliged to shoot down some US warplanes, I should think the first thing they'd do would be to sink as many US carriers round the globe as quickly as possible.

sister tika's picture

Tel Aviv is very likely at the bottom of this warmongering woodpile. Yep.

OverTheHedge's picture

How about sinking the French carrier as an initial hint? Would that work? Sorry to pick on the French but, when the going gets tough.........

Volkodav's picture

looks you know nothing about Russia dogs...

Ordinary average guy's picture

I saw your comments here years ago. Look you are not the only Russian here. And your boasting is boring a bit. May be it is too much and enogh of beeing an orangutang from tropic forests. It's cold here

Ordinary average guy's picture

I saw your comments here years ago. Look you are not the only Russian here. And your boasting is boring a bit. May be it is too much and enogh of beeing an orangutang from tropic forests. It's cold here

Ordinary average guy's picture

Err sorry , why my comment appears two times? do you know? - Ahhaaa! - That is the sign of my barbarian origin )) Let's try ! once agan

Ordinary average guy's picture

Ahha! its all easy.  -I jast had to wait alittle . Couse this american ))) site is to slow. I havent benn used to such a that slow reaction. Now I know )) You need not bother. Well  ,but lookin so boring. Still you did not fucked youself?

HowdyDoody's picture

They should air lift some Pantsirs into Deir ez Zor, Why? Just for the lulz.

I was so busy firing of S-400s I lost count of how many were launched. Is there still one left in a launch tube? Well, punk, do you feel lucky?

Just a reminder of why the US wanted the ceasefire on its terms. There are 12+ US military 'advisors' (though they may pretend to be PMC) mixed in with the multi-national (Chechnya, Daghestan, Turkey, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Albania, West China, Tunisia, Libya and Egypt plus individuals from other Asian countries) takfiri force in east Aleppo city. The US is desperate to get them out, or in the worst case, pray they are totally Arkanicided. To this end it is pepared to send in cruise missiles to possibly cover the entry of a US extraction team from Turkey.



BigJim's picture

 There are 12+ US military 'advisors' (though they may pretend to be PMC) mixed in with the multi-national (Chechnya, Daghestan, Turkey, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Albania, West China, Tunisia, Libya and Egypt plus individuals from other Asian countries) takfiri force in east Aleppo city.

And how do you... "know"...  this?

JohninMK's picture

Agree with the Pantsir comment. But there are probably many more of them in Syria than we will ever know about. The problem in the town you mention, Deir, is that the system is way too big to airdrop, currently the only way into the besieged town.

As to the advisors, it must be very unlikely there are any still there, if there was any there to begin with. Were there any then they would have been pulled out in late August/early September when the siege of East Aleppo was lifted for a while. Maybe that episode was to get them out?

unrulian's picture

pods, you are correct again.

SSDD? I have to keep consulting the urban dictionary to figure out your acronyms, for a 56 year old you're down with shit the kids say these days.


Son of Loki's picture

"our invasion of Iraq and the killing of millions of muslims was only a defensive move so what's all the fuss?"



pods's picture

Same Shit, Different Day. 


toxic8's picture

I believe Russia claimed to have rolled out the S-300/400 systems in Syria right after the bombing of the SAA by, as you so elequently describe, ISIS' Air Force.

flapdoodle's picture

My thoughts exactly. The tone of the entire conversation has changed... needless to say with the Zionazis effectively running the show in Washington, this is not good news.

Obama can actually earn his Nobel Peace Prize at this point in time by rejecting the advice of the self-chosenites who are so intent of electing Hillary, even if WWIII is the result. (As a side note, they are probably all delusionally excited about how many Russian, European and American goyim will die leaving them without any opposition in running the world).

Kirk2NCC1701's picture

Good opportunity to have Syria issue an NFZ, "to maintain territorial sovereignty, and prevent an accidental escalation between Russian and US forces".

This would force the US to either work with Russia to attack ISIS, or to risk WW3 over Assad.

There comes a time in this Poker game, when you gotta decide: ante, see or fold.

OverTheHedge's picture

Haven't the Russians just done that? Admittedly, it's more of a non-bomb zone, and cunningly, the US is still free to bomb Isis if it want s to, just not Srian forces (because they might be Russian, you see). Same effect, with none of the drama. Quite a clever move, I think. "There will be consequences....": a new factor for us mission planners.

Poundsand's picture

A flock of black swans?  Now days, I think that a 'white' swan would be the outlier.  Seems that black swans are all we ever see anymore.

The Management's picture

Thats SO fucking racist !!! :)

Bumpo's picture

My fear is that Trump \ Pense actually believe that Russia is part of the problem in Syria. I just hope they are being practical and see the easiest path to the Whitehouse is pretending the US isn't actually complicit and directly responsible in assisting, arming and training Al-Qaeda

The Billy Blaze's picture

Doesn't matter.  The President of the USA isn't the one making policy anyway.  This "war" is nothing but a staged event which is meant to "smoke-out" the Iranian radicals.  Yes, there will be a tussle between USA and Russia; and yes, there will be sacrificial lambs.  This entire shit show is an effort to drag Iran into the conflict in a BIG way. 

It is inconceivable that anyone would lift sanctions upon Iran and allow them the freedoms that flow from the "Iran Nuclear Agreement" unless those counter-parties knew for certain that Iran would not exist (at least in its present political form) in 10 years. 

Everything that happens between now and the ultimate Iranian obliteration is theatrics.

Got The Wrong No's picture

You may be right. The plan that started with Bush was to bring down 8 nations and Iran was the last in line. 

researchfix's picture

And the 8 nations found a base to stop this salami tactic. Attacking one of them is attacking all of them.


Socratic Dog's picture

Don't agree.  This is about, primarily, the control of oil/nat gas.  Greater Israel is a convenient 2nd-tier, parallel, goal.  Control of oil means control of distribution, not ownership of the resource although that is useful.  Toppling Assad would mean eliminating the Russian chokehold on  the supply of European nat gas/oil.  Russia is the Germany of the early 20th Century, building its Berlin to Baghdad railway which directly threatened the British control of oil distribution (yes, it mattered, even before WWI). Shades of Silk Road.   Germany had to be taken down, even if it cost the lives of a few 10's of millions of serfs, and Russia has to be taken down now.  Loss of control of oil distribution means loss of Reserve Currency status, and loss of Empire.

There's a lot of parallels between the runup to WWI, and now.  For example: Britain was bankrupt as WWI started, yet they held the Reserve Currency of the day.  Sound familiar?  How about this: the three pillars of the British empire were control of the seas (military might), control of the world's finances, and control of the world's raw materials (with the primacy of coal shifting to that of oil around the turn of the century).  Yes, that sounds very familiar, I think.

This culled from my reading of William Engdahl's  "A Century of War", a (for me) truly astonishing read that pulled together all the disparate threads I have picked up over the years from places like this.

NiggaPleeze's picture

Explain to me how Syria is needed for a pipeline from the Persian Gulf to Europe.  Instead of going through Syria it can (in addition to Saudi Arabia) go through Egypt, Jordan/Israel, or (Kuwait/)Iraq/Turkey. If the desired connection point to Europe is in Turkey (the Nabucco pipelline), the two options are SA/Jordan/Syria or SA/Kuwait/Iraq.  In any case Syria is by no means a required transit country.

Indeed, even if Assad is overthrown, the country afterwards will be too unstable to host a pipeline upon which Europe will be dependent for its energy - pipelines need to go through stable territory to be effective as they are rather vulnerable to attack.  Even Saudi Arabia and Turkey are not looking all that reliable these days.

Is Qatar even reliable as a supplier or will they play games once they have a monopoly after Russia is kicked to the curb and finds other markets?  Russia has reliably supplied Europe for many decades.

Moroever, LNG offers a quite good alternative nowadays.  Pipelines are worthwhile only when transporting very large quantities of gas for long periods of time, as the "fixed cost" is extremely high.  LNG is more flexible as terminals can be relocated much more efficiently than pipelines, which cannot be moved at all.

In short, the pipeline theory is a pipe dream, and wouldn't explain the other countries on the "List of Seven":  Iraq (check), Syria (work in progress), Lebanon (work in progress), Libya (check), Somalia (work in progress), Sudan (check) and Iran.

Socratic Dog's picture

Then explain to me what Syria is about.  Why is the US so desperate to overthrow/destabilize Asad?  I know the MSM says it's all about freedum 'n shit, presumably you don't buy into that if you're hanging out here. 

It's not just about Greater Israel, that is a proxy for the control of oil, that's why Israel was established in the middle of the places with the oil.  Greater Turkey?  Doubt it.  Kurdistan?  Ditto.  Control of Russia?  Sure, Syria hosts a Russian warm-water naval facility,right in the middle of the place with all the oil, very inconvenient that.  Russia is clearly only a threat to one thing, the continued US dominance of the oil trade.  Which means, of course, the petrodollar, and thus the US control of international finance.  Which means, Goodnight Charlie so far as the Empire is concerned.  And there's a lot of pigs slurping at the trough of empire in this country.  Have been for a long, long time.  The MIC is only one of them.

For a far better explanation of how crucial Syria is to pipelines than I can give, refer to other commentators here.  Paveway IV comes to mind.

NiggaPleeze's picture

"It's not just about Greater Israel, that is a proxy for the control of oil, that's why Israel was established in the middle of the places with the oil."  I agree, it is about two things:  Greater Israel and One World Government (of which Jerusalem will be the capital, or so the neo-cons envision it).

If you look at who nominally holds the power in Washington (i.e., the strategic implementation, rather than strategic direction, level of US policy - strategic direction is done outside the public government), it is the neo-cons, who are ardent Zionists, the vast majority of them Jews.  It is not oil or pipeline men.  That should tell you something.  And who works in the influential think tanks and lobby groups?  Again, neo-cons, not oil or pipeline men.  Who owns and controls the mass media?  I see lots of Zionist Jews, in fact every mass media outlet has a Jew at the top and spread liberally throughout, very few oil or pipeline men.  Do you get the picture?  It's not about oil.  Oil could disappear as a global resource tomorrow (say in favor of nuclear fusion) and the power structure and wars would not change.

I know there are people that push the pipeline pipe dream.  I don't buy it.  I do think that the Zionist/Globalist propagandists offer many alternative explanations for their agenda since most people could not be counted on to be supportive if they indicated their true goal was to install a global dictatorship under Jewish Messianic rule from Jerusalem, would they?  I'm not claiming that everyone that supports US imperialism in the Middle East supports that goal - in fact, that's my point, they throw out a number of other options ("freedom and democracy" for the sheeple, "oil and pipelines" for the level 1 free thinkers, "military industrial complex" for the level 2 free thinkers, "preservation of the dollar hegemony" for the level 3 free thinkers, etc.).

For the Messianic vision of Jews, it is a prerequisite for the Jewish Messiah's dominion over Earth that the temple be rebuilt in Jerusalem.  Now, I posit that this is the current agenda.  The neo-cons are attempting to weaken any regional power who would credibly object to the destruction of the Al Aqsa Mosque to make room for the Third Temple (even though I think the mosque will be destroyed in a false flag "terror" attack, the issue is what will be re-built there after its destruction, the Muslim mosque or the Jewish temple).  They might even have to neuter Saudi Arabia to do accomplish this (is the 9/11 Bill the harbinger of that struggle?), though my guess is Saudi Arabia is fully on board and will not object aside from some pointless condemnations.

Some say that the Messiah (for Christians, the anti-Christ) will only come at the time of Yahweh's choosing.  But the Zionists settled that debate when they established Israel.  The Jewish anti-Zionists back then claimed (and they still claim) that only Yahweh could gather the Jews in and re-create Israel, not man; but the Zionists won the day.  The same attitude now prevails regarding the Third Temple and the related coming of the Messiah.  Because, after all, as the Talmud makes clear, the Jewish elite (at that time, the rabbis) are Yahweh.  So Yahweh has decided.