Syria: So, where will you cower in the fetal position?

If (and when) the bombs fall on Syria, what would you assume would happen? Let's not turn this into a crazed /pol/-esque thread, just give an honest opinion about the effect of such a strike, and what the future will be for the world after it.

Personally, I believe that if the US strikes Syria, Russia, Iran, and the other Wibbly-Wobblies will threaten attack. Then we all hole up, have a cup of tea and wait for this whole thing to blow over

Biz tehditleri savurmayı da çok iyi biliriz.

The bomb will hit Syria and thats it.......

Skrivet av Roncho, 04.09.2013 at 03:04

Biz tehditleri savurmayı da çok iyi biliriz.

Assuming Bluster == Blunder, Agreeable.

Assuming Bluster == Warfare, could turn sour, no?

Assuming Bluster == , re-phrase?

Skrivet av Guest, 04.09.2013 at 13:00

Skrivet av Roncho, 04.09.2013 at 03:04

Biz tehditleri savurmayı da çok iyi biliriz.

Assuming Bluster == Blunder, Agreeable.

Assuming Bluster == Warfare, could turn sour, no?

Assuming Bluster == , re-phrase?

If my idea was correct , Syria will hold it s ground , and this will give syrian army a rise of spirit , hazb allah will bomb israel , and iran will bomb israel with chemical weps, and this is a bad news for me for sure -_- and USSR will join the war vs america , then china and korea , turkey UK france , and other will join war too and we will have ww3 :3

You play too much at war guys.

The Syrian conflict is terrifying for most political analysts. The US is attempting to protect the petrodollar by eliminating threats. Iran being its main threat and Syria being its ally aswell as the energy pipelines going through these territories.

The area is quagmired in ethnic conflict between multiple religous groups and governments with tangling alliances. Syria has the potential to explode into a full on war between Sunnis and Sh'ites that will cross borders and topple governments creating complete chaos in the Middle East.

Americna intervention will force different groups to pick sides. Hebollah will atack Israel, Israel will retaliate, Syria will be bombed to the stone age along with Lebanon and the fighting will push into Iraq.

There are differetn scenarios of what could occur. Are Syria air defenses as good as they think? Are they the card up their sleeve using Russian high tech AA which ould possibly dela massive damage to US Air? Will Itan intervene due to their defense pact?

Iran has the power to annhilate the entire Gulf oil and would be willing. If it did this, the Petrodollar would fall overnight and Iran with it. This would cause mass rises in oil and eventually economic failure and depression.

The civil war iN egypt is part of this. It's a very, very tense situation. It is a powder keg that cna set the world on fire and as much as I know about the siutation, I cant predict its outcome. It can fizzle out or it create a domino effect and set of multiple trigger events leading to global wars.

All of this is a mixture of events that led to both WWI and WWII. Economic depression and growing nations desperate to dominate. Syria and Iran are our Serbia with Russian backing. US is poking and prodding for weaknesses becuase if it succeeds, it can continue dominated the Middle East and eventually Iran and will retain its power of the Petrodollar.

Its a powder keg, dont underestimate it. But I doubt the Russians will intervene otuside of economic and armed support. Unless Iran is touched, then Russia will be forced to join.

Skrivet av Tik-Tok, 05.09.2013 at 17:10

The Syrian conflict is terrifying for most political analysts. The US is attempting to protect the petrodollar by eliminating threats. Iran being its main threat and Syria being its ally aswell as the energy pipelines going through these territories.

The area is quagmired in ethnic conflict between multiple religous groups and governments with tangling alliances. Syria has the potential to explode into a full on war between Sunnis and Sh'ites that will cross borders and topple governments creating complete chaos in the Middle East.

Americna intervention will force different groups to pick sides. Hebollah will atack Israel, Israel will retaliate, Syria will be bombed to the stone age along with Lebanon and the fighting will push into Iraq.

There are differetn scenarios of what could occur. Are Syria air defenses as good as they think? Are they the card up their sleeve using Russian high tech AA which ould possibly dela massive damage to US Air? Will Itan intervene due to their defense pact?

Iran has the power to annhilate the entire Gulf oil and would be willing. If it did this, the Petrodollar would fall overnight and Iran with it. This would cause mass rises in oil and eventually economic failure and depression.

The civil war iN egypt is part of this. It's a very, very tense situation. It is a powder keg that cna set the world on fire and as much as I know about the siutation, I cant predict its outcome. It can fizzle out or it create a domino effect and set of multiple trigger events leading to global wars.

All of this is a mixture of events that led to both WWI and WWII. Economic depression and growing nations desperate to dominate. Syria and Iran are our Serbia with Russian backing. US is poking and prodding for weaknesses becuase if it succeeds, it can continue dominated the Middle East and eventually Iran and will retain its power of the Petrodollar.

Its a powder keg, dont underestimate it. But I doubt the Russians will intervene otuside of economic and armed support. Unless Iran is touched, then Russia will be forced to join.

Biz biliriz.

Skrivet av Tik-Tok, 05.09.2013 at 17:10

The Syrian conflict is terrifying for most political analysts. The US is attempting to protect the petrodollar by eliminating threats. Iran being its main threat and Syria being its ally aswell as the energy pipelines going through these territories.

The area is quagmired in ethnic conflict between multiple religous groups and governments with tangling alliances. Syria has the potential to explode into a full on war between Sunnis and Sh'ites that will cross borders and topple governments creating complete chaos in the Middle East.

Americna intervention will force different groups to pick sides. Hebollah will atack Israel, Israel will retaliate, Syria will be bombed to the stone age along with Lebanon and the fighting will push into Iraq.

There are differetn scenarios of what could occur. Are Syria air defenses as good as they think? Are they the card up their sleeve using Russian high tech AA which ould possibly dela massive damage to US Air? Will Itan intervene due to their defense pact?

Iran has the power to annhilate the entire Gulf oil and would be willing. If it did this, the Petrodollar would fall overnight and Iran with it. This would cause mass rises in oil and eventually economic failure and depression.

The civil war iN egypt is part of this. It's a very, very tense situation. It is a powder keg that cna set the world on fire and as much as I know about the siutation, I cant predict its outcome. It can fizzle out or it create a domino effect and set of multiple trigger events leading to global wars.

All of this is a mixture of events that led to both WWI and WWII. Economic depression and growing nations desperate to dominate. Syria and Iran are our Serbia with Russian backing. US is poking and prodding for weaknesses becuase if it succeeds, it can continue dominated the Middle East and eventually Iran and will retain its power of the Petrodollar.

Its a powder keg, dont underestimate it. But I doubt the Russians will intervene otuside of economic and armed support. Unless Iran is touched, then Russia will be forced to join.

Thanks for the Red Pilling, honestly thought it was deeper than that.

Skrivet av Unleashed, 09.09.2013 at 06:40

If it weren't for Russia, USA would've bombed the shit out of Syria without a second thought.

There will be no attacks on Syria. And if there are, I hope Russia interferes, and fights against the expansion of this fascist, criminal, american government always posing as the Hero.

I have to agree with you on that.

Skrivet av Unleashed, 09.09.2013 at 06:40

If it weren't for Russia, USA would've bombed the shit out of Syria without a second thought.

There will be no attacks on Syria. And if there are, I hope Russia interferes, and fights against the expansion of this fascist, criminal, american government always posing as the Hero.

There will be attacks on Syria. It's going to happen and Russia wont intervene. America is NOT Fascist. Russia is far more Fascist in view than America is. I like Russia but its playing its own agenda, there are no good guys. Just interests.

Yes if you break them down they are both fascists.A difference might be that Usa is a bit more subtle.While 100 times more imperialistic than todays Russia,Usa actually dont enforce war.Nobody is forcing the americans join the army and fight wars that dont concern them.But they do anyway.The government just feed them some bs and the people are just too damn dumb to see right through it.
Also to the subject itself i see no way for Russia interfering militarily without starting ww3.and i doubt anyone wants ww3.

-> Except the weapon manufacturers and the banks..Hm hm

Skrivet av Tik-Tok, 10.09.2013 at 11:38

Skrivet av Unleashed, 09.09.2013 at 06:40

If it weren't for Russia, USA would've bombed the shit out of Syria without a second thought.

There will be no attacks on Syria. And if there are, I hope Russia interferes, and fights against the expansion of this fascist, criminal, american government always posing as the Hero.

There will be attacks on Syria. It's going to happen and Russia wont intervene. America is NOT Fascist. Russia is far more Fascist in view than America is. I like Russia but its playing its own agenda, there are no good guys. Just interests.

/thread

Im not a fan of the conspiracy theory but I'm convinced USA is doing the chemical weapons hoaks for Obama to get inside exactly like he did to iraq

Nothing will happen. Russia won't intervene. Israel will do what it always does. We install a cool new puppet. Win-win.

I highly doubt that Russia would intervene militarily. Even Iran. It might continue helping out the Syrian army logistically, but definitely nothing outside of Syria.
I think there will be continued loss of civilian lives whether there is intervention or not.

Either it all explodes or it it all dies in an anti-climax.

Skrivet av Grimm, 10.09.2013 at 16:51

I highly doubt that Russia would intervene militarily. Even Iran. It might continue helping out the Syrian army logistically, but definitely nothing outside of Syria.
I think there will be continued loss of civilian lives whether there is intervention or not.

There wouldnt be any loss of life over the past year if the West didnt keep supplying and arming Insurgents. Assad would have won. No more civilian losses, Syria back on its feet and back to trading and communicating. The same thing could have happened in Libya where Gaddaffi stamps out Insurgents and goes back to business, building the largest man made river in the world, sharing oil profits with the people and creating a gold standard currency.

But no, lets arm and fund insurgents and they claim the horros of their acts and tension are soley the problem and blame of the leader who could have stamped it out with ease.

Iran might intervene, it is actually highly likley depending on whether actual US troops enter Syria. If Iran intervenes, then the power keg explodes.

Skrivet av Tik-Tok, 10.09.2013 at 20:11

Skrivet av Grimm, 10.09.2013 at 16:51

I highly doubt that Russia would intervene militarily. Even Iran. It might continue helping out the Syrian army logistically, but definitely nothing outside of Syria.
I think there will be continued loss of civilian lives whether there is intervention or not.

There wouldnt be any loss of life over the past year if the West didnt keep supplying and arming Insurgents. Assad would have won. No more civilian losses, Syria back on its feet and back to trading and communicating. The same thing could have happened in Libya where Gaddaffi stamps out Insurgents and goes back to business, building the largest man made river in the world, sharing oil profits with the people and creating a gold standard currency.

But no, lets arm and fund insurgents and they claim the horros of their acts and tension are soley the problem and blame of the leader who could have stamped it out with ease.

Iran might intervene, it is actually highly likley depending on whether actual US troops enter Syria. If Iran intervenes, then the power keg explodes.

The west provided only minimal support to insurgents in the beginning. You're leaving out the support from the islamists, which was more important initially. Without western support, the regime might have won, but I doubt that loss of life would have been minimal.
I may be wrong, but I don't think that the current Iranian "administration" would intervene directly, with troops, to openly fight US troops. It may assist logistically or covertly. Then again, I don't think that the US will actually send many troops, if any.

Citera:

Skrivet av Grimm, 10.09.2013 at 22:55

There wouldnt be any loss of life over the past year if the West didnt keep supplying and arming Insurgents.

The west provided only minimal support to insurgents in the beginning.

The insurgents were helped on massive scale from the get go. Where do you think does all their ammunition come from, all their weapons? You don't fight two years of a war without foreign support. There was a weapons ban for Syria, but then there's always been ways to arm people beyond state contracts.

Take this one for example -> http://www.worldtribune.com/2013/04/09/20000-u-s-m-16s-stolen-from-unguarded-warehouse-in-kuwait/
This is so obvious it's not even funny anymore. How many people do you need to steal so much weapony? And how can such a huge warehouse be ungarded even for a minute?

I got a Lebanese friend who visits his home country every year. When he came back this time we sat down and he told me about the war in Syria. Half of the males in his family from Lebanon are fighting the war of the insurgents there, everyone of them get's 5000 US Dollar per month. Nobody knows where the money comes from, everyone's just taking their guess at the Saudis, CIA etc.
And it's not just Lebanese mercenaries, that's only the tip of the iceberg. Google mercenaries + Syria, inform yourself. Now who pays all this?

Israel is somewhere in there too. Remember when it bombed Syrian state army? Not just once, but multiple times until Russa decided to supply some high tech AA?

The insurgends had massive aid from the beginning and all this meatgrinding in Syria serves only the interest of a few people who all sit outside of Syria. The people dying right now in Syria do so for nothing, as their country already has no future anymore. I see Assad as the best solution for the country. A Syria without Assad is like the Egypt of today, except without a strong army to keep things tight. It might just end up as pre 2001 Afghanistan.

Skrivet av learster, 11.09.2013 at 04:36

The insurgents were helped on massive scale from the get go.

Not by western powers (excluding Turkey). Not massively and not in the beginning. At least not officially. Mind you I don't have inside sources like you do, so I can't speculate on covert support. That said, western powers only recently started sending "lethal weapons" to Syrian rebels. And just today, it seems Obama has backed down from direct involvement.
Countries known to have given significant direct support at the beginning of the conflict, including actual troops, were mostly middle-eastern powers.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_involvement_in_the_Syrian_civil_war#Support_for_the_opposition

Looks like their will be no bombing in Syria

Skrivet av Grimm, 10.09.2013 at 22:55

The west provided only minimal support to insurgents in the beginning. You're leaving out the support from the islamists, which was more important initially. Without western support, the regime might have won, but I doubt that loss of life would have been minimal.
I may be wrong, but I don't think that the current Iranian "administration" would intervene directly, with troops, to openly fight US troops. It may assist logistically or covertly. Then again, I don't think that the US will actually send many troops, if any.

The insurgets came from actoss the Middle East and especially Libya where they were funded and armed by the West. The Insurgents have been Western backed from the beginning. Loss of life would have been very small had Assad stamped it out straight away.

Skrivet av Grimm, 11.09.2013 at 11:16

Not by western powers (excluding Turkey). Not massively and not in the beginning. At least not officially. Mind you I don't have inside sources like you do, so I can't speculate on covert support. That said, western powers only recently started sending "lethal weapons" to Syrian rebels. And just today, it seems Obama has backed down from direct involvement.
Countries known to have given significant direct support at the beginning of the conflict, including actual troops, were mostly middle-eastern powers.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_involvement_in_the_Syrian_civil_war#Support_for_the_opposition

''At least not officially.''

Well no shit. They send the arms and cash through fronts in the Middle East. When the Saudis give arms or the Turks, they are playing as middle men for the US and other western powers. Thats how the CIA works.

Skrivet av Unleashed, 13.09.2013 at 09:09

so gullible it's not even funny

You're missing my point. Moving from unofficially helping, the extent of which is unclear (how "massive" was this help? what sources can provide accurate information on this?), to officially helping was a significant change in political stance for the US. I'm just questioning that the initial, unofficial, US help was "massive". Prudent rather than gullible.

Skrivet av Tik-Tok, 13.09.2013 at 18:32

Well no shit. They send the arms and cash through fronts in the Middle East. When the Saudis give arms or the Turks, they are playing as middle men for the US and other western powers. Thats how the CIA works.

Interesting point about them acting as middle men. But do you think that the US is actually funding the rebellion entirely? Is all the money donated by the Saudis, Turks or Quataris actually US money? These are, after all, relatively wealthy countries...