Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Syrian Civil War Developments

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • astralis
    replied
    prior to Putin's wholescale involvement, removing Assad wouldn't have been difficult.

    but doing so back then would probably have led to even greater ISIS gains.

    now that Putin is involved and ISIS is mostly dead, no one cares enough to remove Assad. as far as the US is concerned, if Putin wants to waste money and lives there-- well, let him.

    from a strictly Ukrainian POV, every dollar Putin spends there and every merc that Putin sends over there is one less that Kiev will need to deal with.

    Leave a comment:


  • YoungIndia
    replied
    " But we definitely cannot remove Assad because we just don't care enough."

    Whom are you going to remove Assad with? with the kurds?

    There is no viable sunni option for the west.

    Leave a comment:


  • GVChamp
    replied
    Originally posted by snapper View Post
    I simply do not think it entirely outrageous to require our Governments which have signed up to these treaties to go after other Governments that have signed up to the same treaties but then broken them. How else is law to be upheld? If you want a world where nothing is enforced what is the point of international agreements? It becomes dog eat dog and far more lives will be lost in that. Nikki Haley was certainly talking tough at the UNSC earlier which is I suppose all she can do.
    Go after them in what manner, though? There's a scale of escalation. It's not like there'll be no response, it'll just be a limited response. And the US response is going to be more biting than, say, the French response. But we definitely cannot remove Assad because we just don't care enough.

    Leave a comment:


  • MIKEMUN
    replied
    The rhetoric is becoming fierce.

    https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/p...iends-with-you

    Leave a comment:


  • Ironduke
    replied
    More here: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-43694588

    Syria conflict: Israel blamed for attack on airfield

    The Syrian government and its ally Russia have blamed Israel for a deadly attack on a Syrian military airport.

    Monday's attack hit the Tiyas airbase, known as T4, near the city of Homs. Observers say 14 people were killed.

    Israel, which has previously hit Syrian targets, has not commented. Syria initially blamed the US for the strike.

    The incident comes amid international alarm over an alleged chemical attack on a Syrian rebel-held town. The US and France had threatened to respond.

    US President Donald Trump said there would be a "big price to pay" for the alleged chemical attack in Douma, in the Eastern Ghouta region, near the capital Damascus. He branded Syria's President Bashar al-Assad an "animal".

    Leave a comment:


  • Officer of Engineers
    replied
    Originally posted by snapper View Post
    My country has killed more Muscovites than all you lot together ever did.
    Your entire history couldn't come close to the two WW Germanys, Napoleonic France and your current conflict is a picnic compared to the Crimean War and WWI Siberian Intervention.

    But what has any of this got to do with Syria?

    Originally posted by snapper View Post
    I regret their deaths and ours but until you stop these goons they will not stop breaking the treaties and that in the end costs more lives than acting at the start.
    So what? Why don't you demand the Ukrainian military go after Assad?

    Originally posted by snapper View Post
    France could have stopped the Rhineland in 1936 - that in a way was when WW2 started. Not acting emboldens these dictators and makes the greater conflagration more likely.
    What? So you wanted France to stop Germans from wanting to protect their homes. Isn't that was you're doing with DNR and LNR?

    Your double standards is staggerring.
    Last edited by Officer of Engineers; 10 Apr 18,, 04:29.

    Leave a comment:


  • snapper
    replied
    Originally posted by WABs_OOE View Post
    It is certainly outrageous for you to require our Governments to do the work that your Government is unwilling to do herself.

    It is also outrageous that you insult Trump at every turn and then demand that he uphold your sense of justice that you're not willing to do anything about.

    The CWC obligates no one to enforce it.

    My country has killed more Muscovites than all you lot together ever did. I regret their deaths and ours but until you stop these goons they will not stop breaking the treaties and that in the end costs more lives than acting at the start. France could have stopped the Rhineland in 1936 - that in a way was when WW2 started. Not acting emboldens these dictators and makes the greater conflagration more likely.

    Leave a comment:


  • Ironduke
    replied
    Originally posted by snapper View Post
    I simply do not think it entirely outrageous to require our Governments which have signed up to these treaties to go after other Governments that have signed up to the same treaties but then broken them. How else is law to be upheld? If you want a world where nothing is enforced what is the point of international agreements? It becomes dog eat dog and far more lives will be lost in that. Nikki Haley was certainly talking tough at the UNSC earlier which is I suppose all she can do.
    Sometimes it's like this:

    http://www.worldaffairsboard.com/sho...=1#post1038928

    Leave a comment:


  • Officer of Engineers
    replied
    Originally posted by snapper View Post
    I simply do not think it entirely outrageous to require our Governments which have signed up to these treaties to go after other Governments that have signed up to the same treaties but then broken them. How else is law to be upheld? If you want a world where nothing is enforced what is the point of international agreements? It becomes dog eat dog and far more lives will be lost in that. Nikki Haley was certainly talking tough at the UNSC earlier which is I suppose all she can do.
    It is certainly outrageous for you to require our Governments to do the work that your Government is unwilling to do herself.

    It is also outrageous that you insult Trump at every turn and then demand that he uphold your sense of justice that you're not willing to do anything about.

    The CWC obligates no one to enforce it.

    Leave a comment:


  • snapper
    replied
    I simply do not think it entirely outrageous to require our Governments which have signed up to these treaties to go after other Governments that have signed up to the same treaties but then broken them. How else is law to be upheld? If you want a world where nothing is enforced what is the point of international agreements? It becomes dog eat dog and far more lives will be lost in that. Nikki Haley was certainly talking tough at the UNSC earlier which is I suppose all she can do.

    Leave a comment:


  • GVChamp
    replied
    snapper,

    You want us to play a game of chicken over Syria because "international justice"? Maybe Putin doesn't want to start WWIII over Syria, but I DEFINITELY don't want to start WWIII over Syria. The difference is that Putin has already thrown tens of billions of dollars into Syria, and has a major naval installation there which Russia apparently considers crucial to their defense strategy, including their nuclear defense strategy. I'm betting they'll go just as hard in Syria as they do Ukraine if push comes to shove.

    Strategic patience doesn't always yield immediate results but we have a lot to lose, and we have more cards to play than Russia in the long-run (which works to our advantage).

    Leave a comment:


  • Officer of Engineers
    replied
    Ideally, you come back 12 hours, no longer than 24, with manned assets and start killing anyone and everyone you see. The first attack is to disable the base, cratering, repair shops, weapons and fuel depots. The 2nd attack, 12-24 hours later is to kill the people who can fix the damage. The reason why you need manned assets is so you can chase down the people running away.

    Leave a comment:


  • SteveDaPirate
    replied
    Any idea if the US still maintains TLAMs with sub-munition dispensers or is that role exclusive to air dropped weapons like the JSOW?

    How to put a runway out of commission and make it as big of a pain in the ass as possible to fix is probably something OOE can speak to.

    From what I understand the French favor rocket powered projectiles to burrow beneath a runway and physically move the slab of concrete out of position so you can't just fill a hole, while the British preferred to use cluster munitions to make lots of little craters and scatter mines that had to be cleared before the holes could be patched. I'm not sure what method the US utilizes.
    Last edited by SteveDaPirate; 09 Apr 18,, 22:35.

    Leave a comment:


  • Officer of Engineers
    replied
    Originally posted by TopHatter View Post
    Understood, but the name of the nation is simply "Ukraine". Please refer to as such. Thank you.
    Will try but 60 years of habbit is at play.

    Leave a comment:


  • TopHatter
    replied
    Originally posted by WABs_OOE View Post
    I was refering to the country, not the people.
    Understood, but the name of the nation is simply "Ukraine". Please refer to as such. Thank you.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X