Russia Is Attacking US Forces With Electronic Weapons In Syria, General Says (yahoo.com) 249
john of sparta shares a report from Yahoo: American forces in Syria are increasingly facing attacks from Russian and Syrian electronic warfare weapons, as Moscow uses the conflict to test its future arsenal. General Raymond Thomas, head of the U.S. Special Operations Command, said that Syria has become "the most aggressive electronic warfare environment on the planet," Breakingdefense.com reported. Speaking at a geospatial intelligence conference in Florida, Gen. Thomas said that Russian and Syrian regime forces "are testing us everyday, knocking our communications down, disabling our [EC-130 aircraft]."
The Lockheed Martin EC-130 Compass Call is one of America's most advanced electronic warfare weapons. Based on the C-130 Hercules, the plane was developed to disrupt enemy communications, radar and command operations. The craft's presence in Syrian skies gives Russia the chance to test its weapons against the best the U.S. has to offer, whether directly or through its Syrian allies. Earlier this month, four anonymous officials told NBC News that Russia has also been regularly targeting smaller U.S. surveillance drones. One of those quoted said Russian operations were having a significant impact on U.S. capabilities. The sophisticated attacks were even successful against encrypted signals and anti-jamming devices, the official said. Slashdot reader john of sparta adds, "Well, it's war; not a surprise..."
The Lockheed Martin EC-130 Compass Call is one of America's most advanced electronic warfare weapons. Based on the C-130 Hercules, the plane was developed to disrupt enemy communications, radar and command operations. The craft's presence in Syrian skies gives Russia the chance to test its weapons against the best the U.S. has to offer, whether directly or through its Syrian allies. Earlier this month, four anonymous officials told NBC News that Russia has also been regularly targeting smaller U.S. surveillance drones. One of those quoted said Russian operations were having a significant impact on U.S. capabilities. The sophisticated attacks were even successful against encrypted signals and anti-jamming devices, the official said. Slashdot reader john of sparta adds, "Well, it's war; not a surprise..."
Re: (Score:1)
The British and US military and governments are a bunch of bloody hypocrites. :-(
BTW, I'm British.
ALL governments are a bunch of bloody hypocrites, goes with the territory.
Re: Bloody hypocrites (Score:2, Funny)
I could tell by your use of bloody, Ivan.
Re: (Score:2)
If you know anything at all about Britain then you'll know that disparaging the PM is a national pastime. Doesn't matter who the PM is either.
The current incumbent seems to be pretty fair and reasonable towards muslims. She doesn't seem to hold biases towards or against any particular group, she wants authoritarian control over everybody.
Not only there (Score:2, Insightful)
""are testing us everyday, knocking our communications down,"
They also knocked a moron as president down your throats.
Re: Not only there (Score:3, Insightful)
That was in 2008. Get with the times. Those years are over.
Re: (Score:1)
He's referring to Hillary being knocked out of the election she tried to steal.
Re: Not only there (Score:1)
She didn't try to steal it, she bought it fair and square!
Re: (Score:1)
It sucks when you pay for something and then due to unforeseen circumstances you cannot take delivery.
Re: (Score:2)
""are testing us everyday, knocking our communications down,"
They also knocked a moron as president down your throats.
Ah, if only we had more "moron" presidents. Reagan, Trump ...
I've been around long enough to recognize domestic propaganda too.
Re: Not only there (Score:2, Funny)
The whole Trump Russia connection a tired democrat narrative. Only a moron would believe this shit at this point.
Re: Not only there (Score:2)
Just curious - in your worldview how do you reconcile the âoeTrump is a Russian stoogeâ fantasy narrative with the âoeRussia is fighting us in proxy warsâ reality?
Re: (Score:2)
Russia tries to control both sides of any situation they are involved in. That way, even if it doesn't make any sense, they are still in control.
How conviniently unfalsifiable a statement.
"conviniently" Is that the Russian spellink, Komrad?
Unfalsifiable is not the same as false.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Your map says it all: Look at all that red! It's commies, commies I tell you. They've taken over all those counties, and are on the way to impurify our precious bodily fluids!
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
Re: (Score:2)
"This narrative that Russia got him elected.. take a look at this map of voting by county i"
Thanks for the link, I got confirmation that the morons in this country live exactly where I thought they would.
This cuts two ways... (Score:5, Interesting)
The craft's presence in Syrian skies gives Russia the chance to test its weapons against the best the U.S. has to offer...
At the same time it also gives the US a sample of the best Russia can throw at them and the effect that has on US tactics which have relied on battlefield networking, large numbers of remote controlled drones and the apparent assumption that these communications will never be significantly disrupted or even completely disabled. Let's just hope that this lesson will be better heeded than those learned by the Americans who fought the Japanese in the run-up to WWII. Their reports were filed away or ignored by the Pentagon which ignored the threat because the reports contradicted their preconceptions about the Japanese.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
At the same time it also gives the US a sample of the best Russia can throw at them..
Hah, keep thinking that..
This isn't (yet) a full on war between the US and Russia, both sides are *not* deploying 'the best' as they'll be needing them in the event that they do directly engage each other.
As an example, at no point (according to a ex-colleague who worked on them) have any of BMEWS systems been run at 'full capability', the point being to try 'steer' Russian tactical planning in specific directions based on observed capabilities. Now, this is not to say that the Russians don't know this, the
Re: (Score:2)
At the same time it also gives the US a sample of the best Russia can throw at them..
Hah, keep thinking that.. This isn't (yet) a full on war between the US and Russia, both sides are *not* deploying 'the best' as they'll be needing them in the event that they do directly engage each other. As an example, at no point (according to a ex-colleague who worked on them) have any of BMEWS systems been run at 'full capability', the point being to try 'steer' Russian tactical planning in specific directions based on observed capabilities. Now, this is not to say that the Russians don't know this, they do, so any overt display of their tactics in regards to this have to be taken with a large pinch of salt. Ditto re this story, the Russians deploy various EW tactics, the USians bleat 'Nasty Russians, their EW degrades our ability to function..' both countries analysts then sit and try figure out by how much the other lot are taking the piss..
Oh!, the games people play....
I'm pretty sure that to hurt the US the Russkies are not using re-conditioned 1970s vintage Soviet era EW equipment in Syria that they borrowed from a a museum. They must be using at least SOME of their best stuff to mess with one of the best equipped high tech armies on earth even if they are not be using their best stuff to its full capacity. Basically I don't really care whether they have thrown all of their best stuff at the US forces in Syria at full capacity or if they are holding back, for me this is
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
They must be using at least SOME of their best stuff to mess with one of the best equipped high tech armies on earth even if they are not be using their best stuff to its full capacity.
I'd agree neither side are likely to be going full capability, but that also means that the Russians aren't necessarily using any of their best stuff. ECW technologies dating back to WWII will compromise drone control and it'll be useful to Russia to find out how they respond to that type of attack.
The US forces need to be able to survive a complete breakdown in all of these networked systems and if there is one thing that recommends manned tanks/aircraft/choppers it's that a crew on board the vehicle driving/flying it manually can neither be jammed nor hacked.
Well, even that's not necessarily true. Given A10 pilots' tendency to shoot friendly forces even when not under electronic countermeasures I can only imagine how US forces will respond when they're receiving fals
Re: (Score:2)
I really doubt that the Russians are using their best tech here. They will just be testing how practical electronic warfare is for their soldiers to use. It has to be usable by low skill front line troops.
Re: (Score:2)
I really doubt that the Russians are using their best tech here. They will just be testing how practical electronic warfare is for their soldiers to use. It has to be usable by low skill front line troops.
Maybe you are right, maybe you are wrong, it is immaterial. Even if you are right and the Russians are already disrupting US comms, drone control and battlefield networking without even really trying or deploying their best assets it should be a wakeup-call to the Pentagon.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Same thing in Ukraine (Score:5, Informative)
From the beginning of the Russian attack against Ukraine, the Russian military has been using and testing its electronic warfare capabilities. They were even able to track an app Ukrainian artillery units were using to calculate their fire and use it to target the units.
The OSCE monitors routinely report their UAVs are being jammed while over Russian-occupied territory. Also, these monitors report on a regular basis the presence of Russian mobile electronic jamming vehicles.
Fortunately, as was stated further up, this jamming has given us a look into Russian procedures and allows us to find ways around it or at the least, to mitigate it. As a result, Ukrainian military units are able to communicate and coordinate their activities to target Russian military personnel on Ukrainian territory.
Turns out... (Score:2)
Re:Syria & allies don't attack,they defend mot (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Just wait until some one brings back the "support our troops" bumper stickers because some how you cant support the troops if you're against the war.
How dare they (Score:5, Insightful)
How dare they interrupt our electronic weapons with their own electronic weapons!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: How dare they (Score:2)
Re: How dare they (Score:2)
We're there to fight ISIL? ISIL is pretty much where we want them: out of Iraq and focused on Assad. Sunni extremists attacking our Shia allie in Iraq? Terrorists. Sunni extremists attacking Alawites in Syria? Freedom fighters.
Re: (Score:2)
nope, you need to research whom we're fighting and arming in Syria. We have no good purpose in Syria
Re: (Score:1)
Nope, Russia is fighting ISIS. The US is fighting Assad, who was trying to defend his country against ISIS.
Re: (Score:1)
Wait? An ally of the government of a country is helping to defend that country against military interference from another country, and yet the narrative is that they're the aggressor?
Fuck that. Russia is helping defend Syria against the US. Be glad they're only using electronic countermeasures and not anything more lethal.
Personally I hope Russia shoot down Turkish jets to stop those cunts genociding the Kurds. Luckily they can do this as a defensive measure against Turkish aggression and thus not draw the
Re: (Score:2)
The Peshmerga aren't a radical islamic group, and neither are the SDF or FSA.
Russia is against anyone who isn't Assad, because even though he's an asshole he's their asshole. They want a naval base in the Med and Syria has a few decent candidates.
Re: (Score:3)
Actually the FSA kind of are now that Turkey has folded the extremist Sunni's they back into the FSA and turned them on the Kurds to do Turkey's ethnic cleansing for them. We can't really view the FSA as moderate anymore.
This is partly our (the West's) fault too of course for letting them get repeatedly slaughtered by barrel bombs, chemical weapons, and indiscriminate attacks by the Russians as that led to them becoming more extreme and left them with no ally other than Turkey (and a handful of other gulf n
Free strategy (Score:5, Insightful)
If this is such a concern, I've got a strategy the US can use to combat this: Get the hell out of Syria.
It's ridiculous to be offended/upset that someone is using countermeasures against the drones being used against them or their allies.
Re: (Score:2)
Because staying in Syria kills people, and allows the big bad Rooskies to attack our expensive drones.
He's got a funny way of showing it, bombing on of their most important strategic allies.
Re: Free strategy (Score:2, Insightful)
Strange that Syrians are so stupid that after assad wipes out AL qeda in controlled cities that residents move back in. Don't they know assad will kill them?
Stop spreading propoganda bs. We killed more Iraqi civilians than saddam, so extending our war in Syria is not going to save people from big bad assad. We'll end up killing more civilians than assad ever would.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
> If you haven't noticed neither Assad nor Putin cares that much for human lives
Putin the psychopath is one thing, but the current syrian leader Basher el-Assad is actually a medical doctor specializing in opthalmology. He had studied, settled and practiced in London, that's why his wife is a white lady. He wasn't supposed to be in politics, but his elder brother, the designated successor to previous syrian dictator Hafez el-Assad, was assassinated by the Mossad in a faux car accident. Thus Basher was ca
Re: (Score:2)
According to the President, Russia is our ally, our great friend, who we should respect and celebrate.
So, why is he attacking them in Syria ?
Re: (Score:1)
I don't recall the US attacking Russia in Syria since Trump was elected. Could you perhaps highlight a key incident of which I should be aware?
Re:Free strategy (Score:5, Insightful)
Here are a few reasons I believe this should not be happening 1) congress has not approved it. 2) the refugee crisis in Europe caused by this and our previous actions in Libya. 3) What reason do we have to think that overthrowing another secular ruler will result in anything other than the crap we've seen in Iraq and Libya? A rather comprehensive list of our work to date: master list [williamblum.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Good points, but between Assad and ISIS, there would have been a refugee crisis without our help.
Re: (Score:2)
Am I allowed to find it deeply ironic that the media and many others collectively berated Trump for risking WW3 due to his comments on North Korea and now, just a few weeks later, the Korean War has finally ended.
I think the historians are going to have a fucking field day on this one.
Re: Free strategy (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
Re:How dare they fight back when attacked (Score:5, Insightful)
The US actions in Syria aren't self serving, it only tried to serve Israel/Saudi Arabia and their self fulfilling paranoia vis a vis Iran. It would have been far cheaper for the US to just stay out of it and only fight Isis in Iraq (and actually fighting them straight from the start). Arming ISIS and then subsequently "bombing" them and then finally actually bombing them when their former pet dogs became a little too rabid has done nothing but bring grief to the US. It didn't even help their Sunni allies, Saudi Arabia is off worse in some ways.
In the end only Israel is laughing as it's hold on the Golan is strengthened. The US was played.
Re: (Score:2)
Hahah I was waiting for the "Israeldidit" reply. smh...
Re: (Score:2)
I didn't say Israel did it, Israel is the only one who came out ahead.
Re: (Score:2)
Wish I could mod you 6 insightful.
I would also add that ISIS was created by the USA from the leftover Saddam Baathists after their pointless invasion of IRAQ. It's crazy to think that the 9/11 terrorists came mostly from Saudi Arabia, but bush attacks Saddam who himself was an ex CIA asset.
Saudi Arabia is a nasty country, promoting extreme Islam, but I hear they get a pass because they promised to support the petro dollar in exchange for protection.
You couldn't make this nefarious shit up.
Re: (Score:2)
The weapons shipped to Isis&co are almost all Russian made, so an economic loss and economic aid to a supposed rival. Operation Inherent resolve costs 10 Million per day, slightly increased weapon sales don't really help. If your weapons are superior they will sell regardless and Saudi Arabia&co will be paranoid about Iran regardless, so they'll buy weapons regardless.
The US is a national entity, if traitors work to oppose that entity it's still not self serving for the US. Globalist institutions ad
Re: How dare they fight back when attacked (Score:1)
Banksters and Corporate Managers are globalists. They dont care about Average Americans.
Re: (Score:2)
This is excellent, do you have a whole book?
I love alternative histories, they open so many thought experiments.
And (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
yes, it's actually a good thing for the USA's ability to stay on top of ECC. Some people have no critical thinking skills....
Enemy actually hits you back in a war (Score:1)
C-130 Hercules, the plane was developed to disrupt enemy communications, radar and command operations.
So it is ok for the US to put a bigass electronic weapon in a foreign country.
Russia has also been regularly targeting smaller U.S. surveillance drones
But they are pissed that the other side do the same thing to a few drones?!
The headline should be "US General Surprised That Enemy Actually Hit Back"
EMP the hell out of the place (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Umm. Why? What would be the benefit, and how the fuck do you even think it could be achieved without committing war crimes?
Should we be outraged? (Score:1)
The author of the article makes it sounds as though some outrage is being visited on American troops in Syria. All that is happening is the the Russians and Syrians are using electronic tools to counter our own electronic surveillance. It's a little difficult for me to get upset about this.
Incoming! (Score:2)
Budget season. Public presentation by a four star screaming "Crisis! Give me more money!"
Electronic counter measures (Score:4, Insightful)
Do electronic counter measures qualify as attacks, especially when the US military are flying war planes in sovereign Syrian airspace? Oh the US military are such poor, delicate victims of these evil Syrian radio waves. Why won't the Syrian military stop?
Re: (Score:2)
Syria is still recognised as a sovereign country by the international community. As yet, no legal basis for de-legitimising the Syrian regime or any of its members has been presented in an international court of law. Declarations from poorly informed politicians and pundits are just hot air.
Under a diplomatic framework and international oversight, the Syrian regime agreed to controlled, supervised destruction of all their chemical weapons stockpiles and facilities. That doesn't sound like an illegitimate re
Israelis Monitoring? (Score:3)
I suspect the Israelis are somehow monitoring this with great interest. They have the capabilities to have good performance in this area on both sides of the EW battle. And they would not be tipping their hand to either side.
If the attacks were having no real effect... (Score:2)
Pffff (Score:2)
Syria, much like Iraq, is simply a testing ground for both sides to see how well their new toys perform outside of a controlled environment.
Neither side can show what they're really holding though lest they spoil the surprise.
As a result, these are the minor, expendable assets they're playing with atm.
Albeit, at the expense of Syrian lives.
Red scaremngering (Score:1)
Seeing that a) the US is an invader in Syria and b) Russia is there at the invitation of the invadee a correct headline should be "Russia Is Defending against Attacking US Forces With Electronic Weapons In Syria, General Says"
Keep showing us your cards (Score:1)
So, it's true? (Score:1)
But the U.S. is not at war in Syria (Score:1)
But the U.S. is not at war in Syria, right?
No boots on the ground, so it doesn't count.
Just like the first Sunday in December, 1941, at Pearl Harbor.
LOL (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Well now, they're also jamming ENCRYPTED communication!
That doesn't just piss off Trump... it also pisses off all the sex traffickers that weren't on backpage.
Seriously, sometimes the press releases the military puts out are so stupid.
"We had a really good supply caravan. With hidden stuff under blankets. And then the Russians blew it all up,
even the stuff under blankets!!!!!"
Encryption is of no value when the underlying medium is sufficiently attacked.
E
Re: (Score:2)
Is ROT13 from WW-II useful for military now?
No, now they have to use double ROT13 encryption. I read somewhere that quad-ROT13 encryption is in development.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1)
Yes, that is why the News is the enemy of the people, as we are told daily in our reports from the only trusted source in news.
Re: What, how could this be? (Score:1)
In the New Amerika, ignorance is strength!
Re: What, how could this be? (Score:3)
Let's go have the beer
All the beer are belong to us.
Re: US in Syria illegally (Score:2)
That depends on which government you recognize. The entire point of the civil war is there are large swaths of Syria that do not recognize Assad's government.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, while the US are attacking enemies of the Syrian state then it's beneficial to let them get on with it.
You'll notice that the attack on the Syrian state was made with missiles fired from outside Syrian airspace, and defended nonetheless.
Re: (Score:2)
You're embarrassing other Americans with this pathetic paranoia and stupidity.