By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics - Russian soldier wipes out ISIS thugs by calling airstrike on HIMSELF

nanarchy said:
fatslob-:O said:
Why was this a one man mission ?

It is not uncommon for 1 or 2 man missions, they act as spotters for artillary and air strikes. They usually don't intend to directly engage with the enemy themselves, they just paint the targets for others, less people equals less chance of being caught and taking 5, 10 or 20 would actually decrease your chance of survival as more chance of being spotted.

It sounds like he was screwed anyway he went, but definitely a brave act. Russia seems to be the only country that have actually made a difference in the fight (even if many of their reasons to help are selfish).

The only thing is, Russia is not fighting ISIS but the rebels. Just this week, US wiped some high ranking ISIS officials in Syria, leaving the ground soldiers with their d*ck in their hands. Russia is fighting the rebels off Assad's back.



Around the Network
fatslob-:O said:
nanarchy said:

It is not uncommon for 1 or 2 man missions, they act as spotters for artillary and air strikes. They usually don't intend to directly engage with the enemy themselves, they just paint the targets for others, less people equals less chance of being caught and taking 5, 10 or 20 would actually decrease your chance of survival as more chance of being spotted.

Don't modern militaries usually have backup plans ? 

of course. But you can't have a backup plan that will work for every possible scenario. If you are unexpectedly surrounded nothing is going to save you as nothing but fast moving jets can get their in time.



fatslob-:O said:
nanarchy said:

It is not uncommon for 1 or 2 man missions, they act as spotters for artillary and air strikes. They usually don't intend to directly engage with the enemy themselves, they just paint the targets for others, less people equals less chance of being caught and taking 5, 10 or 20 would actually decrease your chance of survival as more chance of being spotted.

Don't modern militaries usually have backup plans ? 

It sounds like a mission gone bad.



Goatseye said:
nanarchy said:

It is not uncommon for 1 or 2 man missions, they act as spotters for artillary and air strikes. They usually don't intend to directly engage with the enemy themselves, they just paint the targets for others, less people equals less chance of being caught and taking 5, 10 or 20 would actually decrease your chance of survival as more chance of being spotted.

It sounds like he was screwed anyway he went, but definitely a brave act. Russia seems to be the only country that have actually made a difference in the fight (even if many of their reasons to help are selfish).

The only thing is, Russia is not fighting ISIS but the rebels. Just this week, US wiped some high ranking ISIS officials in Syria, leaving the ground soldiers with their d*ck in their hands. Russia is fighting the rebels off Assad's back.

ISIS and Al-Assad suck. It's all because of Al-Assad that the revolution and chaos all occurred.

 



 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

12/22/2016- Made a bet with Ganoncrotch that the first 6 months of 2017 will be worse than 2016. A poll will be made to determine the winner. Loser has to take a picture of them imitating their profile picture.

Wright said:

I wonder what were his final thoughts.

"Well, I'm dead either way. Might as well troll them by having all of us be killed"



 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

12/22/2016- Made a bet with Ganoncrotch that the first 6 months of 2017 will be worse than 2016. A poll will be made to determine the winner. Loser has to take a picture of them imitating their profile picture.

Around the Network
nanarchy said:
fatslob-:O said:

Don't modern militaries usually have backup plans ? 

of course. But you can't have a backup plan that will work for every possible scenario. If you are unexpectedly surrounded nothing is going to save you as nothing but fast moving jets can get their in time.

Or deploy drones to have eyes on the sky for the troops or platoon.



Goatseye said:
nanarchy said:

It is not uncommon for 1 or 2 man missions, they act as spotters for artillary and air strikes. They usually don't intend to directly engage with the enemy themselves, they just paint the targets for others, less people equals less chance of being caught and taking 5, 10 or 20 would actually decrease your chance of survival as more chance of being spotted.

It sounds like he was screwed anyway he went, but definitely a brave act. Russia seems to be the only country that have actually made a difference in the fight (even if many of their reasons to help are selfish).

The only thing is, Russia is not fighting ISIS but the rebels. Just this week, US wiped some high ranking ISIS officials in Syria, leaving the ground soldiers with their d*ck in their hands. Russia is fighting the rebels off Assad's back.

yeah ..NO. Not even the US with there Anti Russian agenda go as far as making such a ridiculous statement. Russia is fighting the rebels AND ISIS, mainly ISIS but they definitely are going after the rebels too many of which aren't much better than ISIS. Taking out high level officials is good for press releases and PR, it does very little in the actual war as even the US have stated ISIS work with many people trained to replace anyone so that no person is essential. Palmyra is ISIS, this is where current Russian strikes are centered it seems.



hershel_layton said:
Wright said:

I wonder what were his final thoughts.

"Well, I'm dead either way. Might as well troll them by having all of us be killed"

 

Those are possible throughts before calling the airstrike. I'm talking about when you hear that frightening final sound coming closer and closer.



nanarchy said:
Goatseye said:

The only thing is, Russia is not fighting ISIS but the rebels. Just this week, US wiped some high ranking ISIS officials in Syria, leaving the ground soldiers with their d*ck in their hands. Russia is fighting the rebels off Assad's back.

yeah ..NO. Not even the US with there Anti Russian agenda go as far as making such a ridiculous statement. Russia is fighting the rebels AND ISIS, mainly ISIS but they definitely are going after the rebels too many of which aren't much better than ISIS. Taking out high level officials is good for press releases and PR, it does very little in the actual war as even the US have stated ISIS work with many people trained to replace anyone so that no person is essential. Palmyra is ISIS, this is where current Russian strikes are centered it seems.

That's a good PR but even if it was true, wiping out commanders and financial officials deals more blows than picking off replaceable minions.



Goatseye said:
nanarchy said:

yeah ..NO. Not even the US with there Anti Russian agenda go as far as making such a ridiculous statement. Russia is fighting the rebels AND ISIS, mainly ISIS but they definitely are going after the rebels too many of which aren't much better than ISIS. Taking out high level officials is good for press releases and PR, it does very little in the actual war as even the US have stated ISIS work with many people trained to replace anyone so that no person is essential. Palmyra is ISIS, this is where current Russian strikes are centered it seems.

That's a good PR but even if it was true, wiping out commanders and financial officials deals more blows than picking off replaceable minions.

you are dealing with a group of people that have zero respect for life and many of whom will happily strap a bomb to themselves and walk into the enemy if they think it is going to even slightly benefit their cause. These aren't people you can stop by taking out their leaders, it isn't a traditional army, such attacks on their officials I applaud, but if you think they are little more than an inconvenience then I think they don't understand the type of group ISIS is. The US's tactic of these targetted strikes had been going on for years all the while ISIS made further inroads, it wasn't until the Russians stepped in that the direction of this disaster changed.

For the Record I think Assad is as much to blame as the US for the current situation their and Russia's intentions are mostly selfish, but they are currently the only ones doing what actually needs to be done. What I think will be interesting is what happens after this war. If the US gets its way it will be a disaster, like it or not you actually need someone that is a bit of a pr!#k if you want to keep most of the extremist groups in check in the area, a soft puppet government will see the area erupt into chaos again.