Worldly Talk

Civil discussion and debate on real world events and issues.


That's All She Wrote for Syria?

   
Quote:
Originally Posted by silveroak View Post
Makes me wonder- was it the government who launched the attack or was it the rebels hoping to draw Turkey into the conflict...
That's what I was thnking as soon as I heard it. Just seems to convenient for the embattled regime to suddenly take an overt military action against a NATO member. False Flag conspiracy theorist bells started going off. And I wouldn't be surprised, given who the rebels have gotten in bed with. what with all the talk of al Qaeda being intrinsically connected to the FSA.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wippit Guud View Post
Syria is no Afghanistan or Iraq, and the majority of the population would be against the current rulership. It would be a quick war. Wouldn't even need to put troop on the ground, I don't think.
That is exactly what was said about Iraq. And it was a huge quagmire.

The situation isn't anywhere as clear cut in Syria as people want it to be. 'The majority are against the current rullership'. If that was actually true, it would be over by now given all the munitions that have been funneled to the FSA by outside powers/arms dealers/western agitators.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Savayan View Post
The last thing that the US needs is another war. The last two have almost crippled you as it is.
Not remotely. No, seriously, these two long-term brushfires aren't even close to a full-scale war such as Korea, Viet Nam, or the World Wars. Our economy may be bad, but it's not nearly crippled (and domestic problems did more damage than the wars). Our military capability - and this is with an all-volunteer service, mind - is still such that we can fight two theaters the size of Iraq and Afghanistan and open up a third.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Savayan View Post
Isn't that exactly what was said before going into Afghanistan or Iraq?
Only by morons - y'know, journalists, politicians, and those dim enough to take what they say as gospel truth. In military circles and among those who had actually paid attention in history class, it was understood that while the war itself was going to be very brief, the occupation would be very long.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wippit Guud View Post
NATO (well, the US) is very good at obliterating large armies. It's not equipped or trained for guerrilla warfare.
This is formerly true. Now the US military and allied nations are very, very good at counter-insurgent and guerilla warfare and we are rather well-equipped for it.
Our expertise in conventional warfare has suffered somewhat for this.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kyz View Post
The situation isn't anywhere as clear cut in Syria as people want it to be. 'The majority are against the current rullership'. If that was actually true, it would be over by now given all the munitions that have been funneled to the FSA by outside powers/arms dealers/western agitators.
Bull. The majority of Iraqis were in favor of the US forces, hated Saddam, and hated the insurgents. The first one changed a bit over the years, fluctuating back and forth depending on circumstances and the region. Something like less than one percent of the Iraqi population was ever engaged in the war or the occupation. That didn't stop it from lasting for years.

The way I look at it, if NATO gets pulled into Syria, it will be another Libya. Over in a week, and then pulled out with a "Ok, now it's your turn" to the rebels. Hell, No foreign forces even landed in Libya, it was all air and sea. Syria would most likely be the same.

It seems like a lot has been boiling up recently. China is angry at Japan for buying the Senkaku islands and is really pushing to see how much they can get away with by sending fishing boats by the thousands and even putting an aircraft carrier on display.

Then you have Kissinger saying Israel may not exist in the next 10 years, unless the US decides to intervene militarily, due to hostility and friction with all its neighbors.

And now you have exchanges between Syria and Turky. Things really look scary lately.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nexus75 View Post
It seems like a lot has been boiling up recently. China is angry at Japan for buying the Senkaku islands and is really pushing to see how much they can get away with by sending fishing boats by the thousands and even putting an aircraft carrier on display.

And now you have exchanges between Syria and Turky. Things really look scary lately.
This isn't new. Things aren't much worse now (though there are signs of the Pax Americana breaking down due in no small part to our own antagonistic policies, and I'm not just talking about Bush). It's just better-televised.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nexus75 View Post
Then you have Kissinger saying Israel may not exist in the next 10 years, unless the US decides to intervene militarily, due to hostility and friction with all its neighbors.
Neither is this. People (even sometimes experts) have been predicting Israel's destruction pretty much since it was founded. In all honesty, things are quieter about Israel because the Iraq and Afghanistan theaters have been drawing jihadis away from that theater (the Great Satan being an even better target than the Jews), and the so-called Arab Spring has been drawing conservatives into fights with liberals (note that the terms in this usage are somewhat different than their meaning in American politics) rather than, say, Israelis.
That's not to say he's entirely wrong. Israel has never been safe.

From the sound of it Turkey dosen't want to get too involved. Turns out that its neo-Ottoman aspirations are limited by its inability to project force, and possibly because it's imprisoned most of its military hierarchy. I don't think the Syrian govt is stupid enough to attack its NATO neighbor, meaning that this attack is either an accident or a "false flag" as suggested by other posters.

Turkey has the potential to smash Syria. Turkey also has a long-running disagreement between the military and the civilian government, and the religious interference on the side isn't helping. But it's relatively civil, as far as things go, and Turkey seems to be dealing with it quite well internally. It does limit their ability to project force, since they will only get sufficient political and social unity to act outside its borders in a significant way if you get the civilian government, the military and the religious jobs all lined up on the same side.
Turkey also knows the hornet's nest that is Syria, and is unlikely to want to get involved there. Perhaps a quick (and effective) smack to tell them not to do it again, perhaps intel gathering to find out who did it then a selectively targeted andslightly more brutal lesson in what *not* to do to the the 10-ton gorilla next door. They get a degree of international kudos for *not* over-reacting to the Syrian action.




 

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Myth-Weavers Status       Advertise with us