Syrian Civil War Developments

[snapper]

Some people think Assad is in Tehran. If so I suppose he is safe for now.

[astralis]

tantalus,

If this could be a watershed moment in the history for the use of chemical weapons,

if the example of Saddam getting executed all the while surrounded by his chanting enemies wasn't enough to deter another tinpot dictator from using chems, i doubt there's much of a historical example that will do so. some people just don't learn from past experience.

[GVChamp]

If you DON'T use your chemical weapons, you might end up like Qaddafi.

[Mihais]

If you DON'T use your chemical weapons, you might end up like Qaddafi.

Assad has almost won.

[Versus]

Can anyone anticipate the next wave of "cultural enrichment" of Europe after this is done? God, they are playing both the West and Russia like a fiddle.

[TopHatter]

Russia appears to be readying for a naval battle with the US near Syria — but it could be a bluff


Russia's navy appears to have responded to President Donald Trump's warning that US missiles are headed to Syria after he accused the Syrian government of again conducting chemical warfare against its people.

The Russian military has said it is tracking the movements of the US Navy, Reuters reported Wednesday.

Last April, the US struck Syria over another chemical weapon attack, firing 59 cruise missiles from US Navy destroyers.

Now, satellite imagery and reports indicate that 11 Russian warships, including a submarine, have left a port in Syria.

Those missing naval vessels have now been deployed at sea due to possible near-future strikes. Only one Kilo-class submarine remained.

The US Navy says it has dispatched an aircraft carrier strike group to the region, though it is likely to take about a week to get in position.

The US regularly deploys aircraft carriers to the region to carry out airstrikes on ISIS fighters in Iraq and Syria.

Among the Russian ships that appear to have left the port in Syria is a Kilo-class submarine, thought to be one of the quieter and more advanced submarines in operation today.

While Russian ships are less advanced in some ways, they often field advanced anti-ship missiles that can pose a real threat to the US.

But Russia's movements may be a bluff, according to Ryan Bohl, a Middle East analyst at the geopolitical consulting firm Stratfor.

"Neither the Russians or the Americans want World War III — they know how to avoid it and have very strong lines of communications," Bohl told Business Insider.

"It's one thing to shoot down a Tomahawk" — a cruise missile used by the US Navy — "but another thing to shoot down a ship it came from," Bohl said, adding that the movement of Russia's navy was most likely a "way to try to raise the stakes for the Americans to pressure Trump to scale down whatever strike is coming."

Essentially, Russia may be trying to look tough by sailing out its navy.

"There's very little they can do from a conventional standpoint," Bohl said. Once the USS Harry S. Truman carrier strike group arrives, "the US will be able to clean up the eastern Mediterranean in a conventional fight any day." Link

Before and After Pictures At Tartus
____________

Looks like they're either going out to confront the US Navy...or, more likely, getting the hell out of Dodge while the getting is good.

[Ironduke]

I'll really really torn about this.

On the one hand, innocent civilians getting gassed to death makes my blood absolutely boil with rage, and I'd love to see every piece of US, UK and French ordnance in the surrounding region dropped on Assad's military and political infrastructure. And, if by some odd coincidence, a couple dozen state-of-the-art Russian aircraft also happen to get granulated, well shit, that's just too damn bad.

But at the same time, that just causes even more death and destruction and potentially invites retaliation from Russia, causing a downward death spiral.

Yes, Assad is using chemical weapons to inflict terror on a civilian population to force them to leave Ghouta, and weaken their will to resist. And while I certainly don't mean to make light of chemical weapon use, death is death. Choking to death from smoke inhalation from a fire caused by an incendiary device, slowly being crushed to death by a several hundred pound chunk of rebar and concrete, having your lungs cooked like haggis by a several thousand degree fire, getting shot in the groin and bleeding out over three days - there's no shortage of ways to die that are slow and terrible, with perfectly legal weapons. Yet the latter examples are all seen as a "clean fight" per say.

You got a good point though Top. But I don't think the Russians really have any state of the art fighter jets there. Just a couple of F-22 facsimiles with jet engines attached.

[tantalus]

Yes, Assad is using chemical weapons to inflict terror on a civilian population to force them to leave Ghouta, and weaken their will to resist. And while I certainly don't mean to make light of chemical weapon use, death is death. Choking to death from smoke inhalation from a fire cause by an incendiary device, slowly being crushed to death by a several hundred pound chunk of rebar and concrete, having your lungs cooked like haggis by a several thousand degree fire, getting shot in the groin and bleeding out over three days - there's no shortage of ways to die that are slow and terrible, with perfectly legal weapons. Yet the latter examples are all seen as a "clean fight" per say.

I'm inclined to disagree although I have empathy for your line of thinking, depending on the nature of the chemicals used, pain short and long term can be worse, effects can last a lifetime and into future unborn generations. Plus their inability to differentiate is total. I think one is worse than the other.

[tantalus]

tantalus,



if the example of Saddam getting executed all the while surrounded by his chanting enemies wasn't enough to deter another tinpot dictator from using chems, i doubt there's much of a historical example that will do so. some people just don't learn from past experience.

If you DON'T use your chemical weapons, you might end up like Qaddafi.

Both good points, but the more you deliver the message the more likely it is to be learnt. Plus I am not sure that's how most view the fall of saddam, using a different lenses,and inferring other conclusions.

Assad has almost won.

Ideology, optimism, opportunity, we still need these tools no matter the realisms of the world. Deliver this message to Assad, now, one nobody can forget, let Putin watch, and there will be future wars were the precedent may have lasting value, even if Assad grows fat and lives to a hundred in Damascus. ( Edit. or Tehran)

[Ironduke]

I'm inclined to disagree although I have empathy for your line of thinking, depending on the nature of the chemicals used, pain short and long term can be worse, effects can last a lifetime and into future unborn generations. Plus their inability to differentiate is total. I think one is worse than the other.

You do have a point regarding some conventional weapons. But to borrow a saying, it's not what you got, it's how you use it. Conventional weapons are also being used by the Assad and Putin regimes as terror/indiscriminate weapons, and I regard the intentional indiscriminate use of a conventional weapon as a weapon of terror much the same way as using chemical weapons.

There's these international conventions regarding the use of certain weapons, but when the Assad regime removes all medicine except for scabies and lice creams from a UN medical convoy, doesn't that have much the same effect as using an infectious biological agent, in a roundabout way?

[tantalus]

You do have a point regarding some conventional weapons. But to borrow a saying, it's not what you got, it's how you use it. Conventional weapons are also being used by Assad and Putin as terror/indiscriminate weapons, and I regard them much the same way.

Agreed, but we should view this through the potential of what could be achieved, not all the things that can't. Chemical weapons are the low hanging fruit in this narrative, one that may be reachable and definitely worth picking.

[Ironduke]

But at the same time, that just causes even more death and destruction and potentially invites retaliation from Russia, causing a downward death spiral.

Well, if there's a nuclear war, I know what I'll do. I live two miles from downtown Minneapolis, so there will be 20-30 minutes tops. I won't be able to get away fast enough. I'll just grab some beers or a bottle of liquor and a pack of cigarettes, take my little plastic chair, get a good northward facing view, and just sit back and enjoy the show. The Russian MIRVs will look like a laser light show from outer space, hopefully there's some decoys mixed in there for good effect before the real one goes off.

I'll look at the flash, because hey, I won't be around long enough to even be able to see the mushroom cloud. Yes, my retinas will be burnt to a crisp by sudden increase in brightness, but within a few seconds I won't have eyeballs to worry about anymore. I'll just be a cloud of ash traveling thousands of miles per hour in a southward direction, along with some carbon dioxide and water vapor.

Such is nuclear war. That's the fate that idiots like me, living in a backwater flyover state, with no say in these matters, would have to suffer.

Hopefully we don't go to the brink.

[TopHatter]

Well, if there's a nuclear war, I know what I'll do. I live two miles from downtown Minneapolis, so there will be 20-30 minutes tops. I won't be able to get away fast enough. I'll just grab some beers or a bottle of liquor and a pack of cigarettes, take my little plastic chair, get a good northward facing view, and just sit back and enjoy the show. The Russian MIRVs will look like a laser light show from outer space, hopefully there's some decoys mixed in there for good effect before the real one goes off.

I'll look at the flash, because hey, I won't be around long enough to even be able to see the mushroom cloud. Yes, my retinas will be burnt to a crisp by the flash, but within a few seconds I won't have eyeballs to worry about anymore. I'll just be a cloud of ash traveling thousands of miles per hour in a southward direction, along with some carbon dioxide and water vapor.

Such is nuclear war. That's the fate that idiots like me, living in a backwater flyover state, with no say in these matters, would have to suffer.

Hopefully we don't go to the brink.

"Oh it's all right! I've planned ahead. We're just three miles from a primary target. A millisecond of brilliant light and we're vaporized. Much more fortunate than millions who wander sightless through the smoldering aftermath. We'll be spared the horror of survival."

[Ironduke]

"Oh it's all right! I've planned ahead. We're just three miles from a primary target. A millisecond of brilliant light and we're vaporized. Much more fortunate than millions who wander sightless through the smoldering aftermath. We'll be spared the horror of survival."

That's a good Cliff's Notes way of putting it. I might watch Dr. Strangelove again tonight for good measure.

[TopHatter]

But I don't think the Russians really have any state of the art fighter jets there. Just a couple of F-22 facsimiles with jet engines attached.

Leaving aside the flying Potemkin Village that is the Su-57, Latakia is hosting:


Su-30SM Flankers (4 at last count)
Su-27SM3 Flankers (Probably 3)
Su-35S Flanker E (Probably 6)
Su-34 Fullbacks (Probably 6)
MiG-29SMT Fulcrums (Unknown how many)
A-50U Mainstay (1 at last count)

There's also a dozen or so legacy aircraft
Su-25 Frogfoots (3 at last count)
Su-24 Fencers (Probably 10 left)