Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

And next, Syria?

It's starting to look like that Assad may attempt to use the line that he didn't order any attack and it was a rogue commander. Intel suggests a a panicky phone call was intercepted on the day of the attacks by central command to field over what was going on. A sign the regime is spinning out of control?
 
Kid_Eternity said:
It's starting to look like that Assad may attempt to use the line that he didn't order any attack and it was a rogue commander. Intel suggests a a panicky phone call was intercepted on the day of the attacks by central command to field over what was going on. A sign the regime is spinning out of control?
Click to expand...


Well there are certainly stories today based on US leaks that the Israelis intercepted such a call. But is there any evidence or suggestion that Assad would admit to this even if it is true?
 
Kid_Eternity said:
...A sign the regime is spinning out of control?
Click to expand...

could be - it could also be a sign of how fragmented things are that the SG didn't feel able to say 'one of our missiles is missing..' for fear that it would show to their own forces that they weren't really in control. and nothing panics like panic...

Assad's problem is that this is just going to look too convenient to believe - in a similar way that the CW attacks happen at the same time as Assad appeares to be winning and there's a UN CW inspection team in Damascas. i don't disbelieve it, i really don't get the feeling that Assad is the big hard man with his hands on the levers of power in his regime - and after two years of civil war, nothing works as it should - however i'd feel an awful lot less sceptical of this version of events if it hadn't come out a week after the event and on the same day as the UNSC debate.
 
Regarding the stuff quoted in post #1885 about various Islamist rebels being a target for US attacks, this interview posted by the Guardian earlier may help to explain why this theory is popular with some of those rebels:

http://www.theguardian.com/world/20...ry-action-live#block-521f84e8e4b09749b486da2b

In a nutshell, they think that because Syria has not actually attempted to inflict serious harm on Israel for a long time, that the US really backs the Assad regime and wants it to stay in place. This is a gross oversimplification of US feelings towards the Syrian regime, which have long been a good deal more mixed than that.
 
Well that argument is total shit isn't it. The worse case scenario for the US is that Assad wins the war, strengthening Iran and Hezbollah in the process.
 
Divisive Cotton said:
Well that argument is total shit isn't it. The worse case scenario for the US is that Assad wins the war, strengthening Iran and Hezbollah in the process.
Click to expand...

not really - Assad as the head of a state with infrastructure is someone who can be kept in his box if he gets too objectionable, and lets remember that his No. 1 objective is being alive - he has not real interest in perpetual war with the hated Israel or the Great Statan, its just crap he spouts when inflation gets a bit high. the US can live with Assad, it might take advantage of an opportunity to bump him off his perch, but if that doesn't work the US isn't going to lose any sleep.

some collection of AQ affiliated groups who use Syrian territory as a base for their genuinely ideological driven war against the US and Israel however are a much more difficult threat to keep in their box, and if they inherit the assets and resources of a nation state they become an even less desirable outcome.

Assad winning is, in purely selfish terms, the least objectionable outcome - they are no 'moderates' left, so Syria either either stays under Assad or becomes the first AQ state that exists to a greater degree than just a place between other countries.
 
likesfish said:
The US military can crush anybody if it fully committs long occcupations while attemping vauge goals not so much.
Click to expand...

bollocks. it can crush anyone as long as the enemy is fool enough to play to the us strengths. but in a war which needs light infantry the americans will lose. they lost vietnam, they lost afghanistan, they lost iraq. their (relatively) recent successes like grenada and panama could have been done by the pope's swiss guard.
 
kebabking said:
not really - Assad as the head of a state with infrastructure is someone who can be kept in his box if he gets too objectionable, and lets remember that his No. 1 objective is being alive - he has not real interest in perpetual war with the hated Israel or the Great Statan, its just crap he spouts when inflation gets a bit high. the US can live with Assad, it might take advantage of an opportunity to bump him off his perch, but if that doesn't work the US isn't going to lose any sleep.

some collection of AQ affiliated groups who use Syrian territory as a base for their genuinely ideological driven war against the US and Israel however are a much more difficult threat to keep in their box, and if they inherit the assets and resources of a nation state they become an even less desirable outcome.

Assad winning is, in purely selfish terms, the least objectionable outcome - they are no 'moderates' left, so Syria either either stays under Assad or becomes the first AQ state that exists to a greater degree than just a place between other countries.
Click to expand...
Your assumption, that the US gives more of a shit about AQ/global terrorism than it does about its geopolitical interests, is flawed.
 
From May this year..

Testimony from victims of the conflict in Syria suggests rebels have used the nerve agent, sarin, a leading member of a UN commission of inquiry has said.
Carla Del Ponte told Swiss TV that there were "strong, concrete suspicions but not yet incontrovertible proof".
Ms Del Ponte did not rule out the possibility that government forces might also have used chemical weapons.
Later, the commission stressed that it had "not reached conclusive findings" as to their use by any parties.
"As a result, the commission is not in a position to further comment on the allegations at this time," a statement added.
The BBC's Imogen Foulkes in Geneva says the statement was terse and shows that the UN was taken by surprise at Ms Del Ponte's remarks.
The Independent International Commission of Inquiry on Syria was established in August 2011 to examine alleged violations of human rights in the Syrian uprising. It is due to issue its latest report next month.
'Unsupported'
In an interview with Swiss-Italian TV on Sunday, Ms Del Ponte, who serves as a commissioner on the panel, said: "Our investigators have been in neighbouring countries interviewing victims, doctors and field hospitals.
​
"According to their report of last week, which I have seen, there are strong, concrete suspicions but not yet incontrovertible proof of the use of sarin gas, from the way the victims were treated."
Sarin, a colourless, odourless liquid or gas which can cause respiratory arrest and death, is classed as a weapon of mass destruction and is banned under international law.
Ms Del Ponte, a former Swiss attorney-general and prosecutor with the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY), did not rule out the possibility that troops loyal to President Bashar al-Assad might also have used chemical weapons, but said further investigation was needed.
"I was a little bit stupefied by the first indications we got... they were about the use of nerve gas by the opposition," she said.
Ms Del Ponte gave no details of when or where sarin may have been used.
Click to expand...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-22424188
 
Pickman's model said:
bollocks. it can crush anyone as long as the enemy is fool enough to play to the us strengths. but in a war which needs light infantry the americans will lose. they lost vietnam, they lost afghanistan, they lost iraq. their (relatively) recent successes like grenada and panama could have been done by the pope's swiss guard.
Click to expand...

That is more because of the way that their overwhelming military power has been misused by politicians, rather than the nature of that power.
 
Lo Siento. said:
Your assumption, that the US gives more of a shit about AQ/global terrorism than it does about its geopolitical interests, is flawed.
Click to expand...

and yet the US has devoted almost bugger all to this great over-riding geopolitical plan for the last 2 and a half years - it has repeatedly gone out of its way to not get involved.

if the US attacks the SG it will spend more in one night than it has spent in the last two and half years of 'desperately trying to get rid' of the current Syrian government. given the resources of the US government, how do you explain that?
 
kebabking said:
and yet the US has devoted almost bugger all to this great over-riding geopolitical plan for the last 2 and a half years - it has repeatedly gone out of its way to not get involved.

if the US attacks the SG it will spend more in one night than it has spent in the last two and half years of 'desperately trying to get rid' of the current Syrian government. given the resources of the US government, how do you explain that?
Click to expand...
An opportunity presented itself.
 
So does this mean the US will be going ahead at the weekend to bomb the shit out of some civilians? No need to wait for us Limeys to make our mind up now.
 
It'll be vaguely interesting to see if the US press stirs up any kind of public pressure on Obama in the face of this result, and in the face of the bunch of bullshit "evidence" the administration is about to drop.
 
Civil war in Syria isnt going away, and what with the US going to get explicitly involved in its not impossible that the UK will still get involved down the line...
 
cynicaleconomy said:
So does this mean the US will be going ahead at the weekend to bomb the shit out of some civilians? No need to wait for us Limeys to make our mind up now.
Click to expand...
No. Civilians are moving away from potential targets so there's little threat to them. But this puts Obama in a tight spot. Polls show only 9% of Americans approve of strikes on Syria & Obama & the public don't like going it alone.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

teqniq
Huge earthquake in Turkey and Northern Syria 05-06/02/23
2 3
Replies
83
Views
3K
JimW
JimW
P
The next American Civil War
7 8 9 10 11
Replies
321
Views
15K
pbsmooth
P
MrCurry
After Ukraine, what’s next?
2 3
Replies
76
Views
5K
Dogsauce
Dogsauce
T
Hong Kong: what next?
65 66 67 68 69
Replies
2K
Views
83K
Yossarian
Yossarian
H
Syria, attack on Conoco gas plant in Feburary 2018
Replies
1
Views
349
yield
Y
Back
Top Bottom