Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Syrian Civil War Developments

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

  • 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:


  • Officer of Engineers
    replied
    Originally posted by TopHatter View Post
    Sir, a request: Please refer to the people of Ukraine as "Ukrainians". Thank you.
    I was refering to the country, not the people.

    Leave a comment:


  • TopHatter
    replied
    Originally posted by WABs_OOE View Post
    No one is going to nuke the Ukraines.
    Sir, a request: Please refer to the people of Ukraine as "Ukrainians". Thank you.

    Leave a comment:


  • SteveDaPirate
    replied
    Originally posted by snapper View Post
    What were the targets then? If planes were taking off the next day it seems it was not air control. However whatever the target may have been it clearly did not work to convince the Assad regime to desist from it war crimes.
    Here's a good damage assessment via satellite (pictures from before and 10 hours afterwards) that shows what structures at the airfield were hit. Most of the targets that were hit were actually hit twice, but the runway itself wasn't targeted. Tomahawks with unitary HE warheads are great for destroying structures and equipment, but probably not capable of penetrating and cratering a runway.

    More images and damage assessment at the link.

    Click image for larger version

Name:	Syria-1-1024x586.png
Views:	2
Size:	662.5 KB
ID:	1476306
    Click image for larger version

Name:	Workshops-1-1024x441.png
Views:	2
Size:	429.9 KB
ID:	1476307
    https://www.imagesatintl.com/us-strike-syria/
    Last edited by SteveDaPirate; 09 Apr 18,, 22:17.

    Leave a comment:


  • Officer of Engineers
    replied
    Originally posted by snapper View Post
    Respecting nuclear weapons is one thing. Respecting a person is another.
    Goes to show you're not mature enough to be a real diplomat. A Gorilla maynot be able to do complex mathematics but piss him off at your peril.

    Originally posted by snapper View Post
    Trump has done nothing to earn respect
    He won the Election as the underdog and speaks with the voice of the US whether you like it or not.

    Originally posted by snapper View Post
    but he is not the US, nor is Putin Muscovy.
    In matters of Foreign Affairs, yes, they are.

    Originally posted by snapper View Post
    What were the targets then?
    Is it too hard for you to google the answers or do you have to be spoonfed?

    Originally posted by snapper View Post
    If planes were taking off the next day it seems it was not air control. However whatever the target may have been it clearly did not work to convince the Assad regime to desist from it war crimes.
    They ceased chem attacks for several months.

    Originally posted by snapper View Post
    Putin is never going to start WW3 over Syria.
    Are you this freaking dense? It's not starting WWIII over Syria. It is 2 nuclear superpowers going head to head anywhere in the world. It's one thing for Syria to fight the US and the Israelis to fight the Russians. It's completely a different thing when two armies can call up nukes for support. There was a reason why we asked the Russians where they were before we bombed their mercs.

    Originally posted by snapper View Post
    Like "Moskals", "krauts" etc... some might consider that disrespectful.
    How is it disrespectful? The Ukraines is adjective followed by a noun. It is not deragotory. Your terms, however, ARE DERAGOTORY.

    Originally posted by snapper View Post
    Well I would make the proposal to Muscovy and Iran to get rid of Assad themselves or...
    Or what? Goto war against a nuclear superpower?

    Originally posted by snapper View Post
    Only because we did not stop this long ago - and yea Obama bears guilt on that count too.
    Oh for freak sakes, this goes back all the way to the Sack of Damascus. In case you have not noticed, Assad's army is bristling with new recruits.

    Originally posted by snapper View Post
    "The Czechs gave up when they lacked the political support". If Chamberlain had supported them the greater war may have been averted and millions of lives saved.
    Chamberlain was preparing for war and he used the Sudetenland to buy time. Make no mistake, the Sudetenland was lost one way or the other. The Germans was going to take it. They were going to pay a heavy price for it and it would deny them any future military adventures but it was a foregone conclusion that the Czechs could not hold out. The best they were going to do was to bleed the Germans white.
    Last edited by Officer of Engineers; 09 Apr 18,, 22:13.

    Leave a comment:


  • snapper
    replied
    Originally posted by WABs_OOE View Post
    10,000 nukes don't really care for your respect. You, however, can disrespect it at your peril, not mine.
    Respecting nuclear weapons is one thing. Respecting a person is another. Trump has done nothing to earn respect but he is not the US, nor is Putin Muscovy.

    Originally posted by WABs_OOE View Post
    Didn't matter. The targets were stuff that can't be moved.
    What were the targets then? If planes were taking off the next day it seems it was not air control. However whatever the target may have been it clearly did not work to convince the Assad regime to desist from it war crimes.

    Originally posted by WABs_OOE View Post
    A direct fight between two nuclear superpowers with 20,000 nuclear warheads between them is not an angle.
    Putin is never going to start WW3 over Syria.

    Originally posted by WABs_OOE View Post
    Don't care. I will keep using the Ukraines.
    Like "Moskals", "krauts" etc... some might consider that disrespectful.

    Originally posted by WABs_OOE View Post
    Because it was not an direct engagement between two nuclear superpowers.
    And their response will be tough cookies.[/QUOTE]

    Well I would make the proposal to Muscovy and Iran to get rid of Assad themselves or...

    Originally posted by WABs_OOE View Post
    Don't know. Don't care. The Syrian opposition is more interested in fighting each other than they are about fighting Assad.
    Only because we did not stop this long ago - and yea Obama bears guilt on that count too.

    Originally posted by WABs_OOE View Post
    It was 100% Czech decision. They had the Sudetenland fortified up the ying-yang. There was no way that Britain nor France could come to their aide in time. If it was going to be war, it would be the Czechs alone. The Czechs gave up when they lacked the political support but everyone knew that they would be on their own.
    "The Czechs gave up when they lacked the political support". If Chamberlain had supported them the greater war may have been averted and millions of lives saved.

    Leave a comment:


  • Officer of Engineers
    replied
    Originally posted by snapper View Post
    Should I also respect Putin then?
    10,000 nukes don't really care for your respect. You, however, can disrespect it at your peril, not mine.

    Originally posted by snapper View Post
    After warning the Muscovites first who did not warn their Assad allies?
    Didn't matter. The targets were stuff that can't be moved.

    Originally posted by snapper View Post
    Very unlikely in my view. Syria is not crucial to Putin. It is merely an angle. The only thing that really matters to him - or any dictator - is staying in power at home.
    A direct fight between two nuclear superpowers with 20,000 nuclear warheads between them is not an angle.

    Originally posted by snapper View Post
    Ukraine; not "the Ukraine" or "Ukraines".
    Don't care. I will keep using the Ukraines.

    Originally posted by snapper View Post
    I am happy to hear your view but if Ukraine was under "Moscow's nuclear umbrella" and they will not nuke us why would start a nuclear war over Assad?
    Because it was not an direct engagement between two nuclear superpowers.

    Originally posted by snapper View Post
    Then perhaps the Muscovites and Iranians should be warned that they need to get rid of Assad.
    And their response will be tough cookies.

    Originally posted by snapper View Post
    Well yes I am not a Syrian but we have our own war against a common foe so I can sympathise. I knew a guy who went to fight for the Syrian Christians - only met him at his leaving party. Dead I would guess.
    Don't know. Don't care. The Syrian opposition is more interested in fighting each other than they are about fighting Assad.

    Originally posted by snapper View Post
    It was not a Czech decision - they were prepared to fight. Chamberlain undercut them as do you every time that say international agreements should not necessarily be enforced. It just leads to more. It does not save lives but costs them long term.
    It was 100% Czech decision. They had the Sudetenland fortified up the ying-yang. There was no way that Britain nor France could come to their aide in time. If it was going to be war, it would be the Czechs alone. The Czechs gave up when they lacked the political support but everyone knew that they would be on their own.

    Leave a comment:


  • snapper
    replied
    Originally posted by WABs_OOE View Post
    Good God, he's one of two people on this planet with 10,000 nukes at his disposal. The other is Putin. If you CANNOT show professionalism respecting that kind of power, then your views are just non-sequittor.
    Should I also respect Putin then?

    Originally posted by WABs_OOE View Post
    They were not targetting the runways. They were targetting delivery assets.
    After warning the Muscovites first who did not warn their Assad allies?

    Originally posted by WABs_OOE View Post
    How about from the Iranians themselves?

    https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/...yria-1.5979943
    I can accept that.

    Originally posted by WABs_OOE View Post
    Because going after Assad will do exactly that.
    Very unlikely in my view. Syria is not crucial to Putin. It is merely an angle. The only thing that really matters to him - or any dictator - is staying in power at home.

    Originally posted by WABs_OOE View Post
    Don't change the subject. No one is going to nuke the Ukraines.
    Ukraine; not "the Ukraine" or "Ukraines". I am happy to hear your view but if Ukraine was under "Moscow's nuclear umbrella" and they will not nuke us why would start a nuclear war over Assad?

    Originally posted by WABs_OOE View Post
    If we go for regieme change? Yes, especially when the Russians have actual active combat assets in the area.
    Then perhaps the Muscovites and Iranians should be warned that they need to get rid of Assad.

    Originally posted by WABs_OOE View Post
    They won't get rid of him and neither will we, unless accidently meaning he was at the wrong place at the wrong time when our bombs hit but he won't be on a target list. Stop spouting high and mighty crap especially when you're not the one doing the dirty work going after him.
    Well yes I am not a Syrian but we have our own war against a common foe so I can sympathise. I knew a guy who went to fight for the Syrian Christians - only met him at his leaving party. Dead I would guess.

    Originally posted by WABs_OOE View Post
    Well, the Czechs were not as callous as you are.
    It was not a Czech decision - they were prepared to fight. Chamberlain undercut them as do you every time that say international agreements should not necessarily be enforced. It just leads to more. It does not save lives but costs them long term.

    Leave a comment:


  • Officer of Engineers
    replied
    Respect and contempt are not mutually exclusive. I have comptempt for Hitler and Stalin but that does not mean that I do not respect what they have done with their power.

    In this case, you have to respect Trump precisely because of the power he wields. He maybe a horse's ass but his actions have major consquences. Disrespect that at your peril as Assad is now learning. Trump cannot control his anger and Assad just got him angry.

    Leave a comment:


  • TopHatter
    replied
    Originally posted by WABs_OOE View Post
    Good God, he's one of two people on this planet with 10,000 nukes at his disposal. The other is Putin. If you CANNOT show professionalism respecting that kind of power, then your views are just non-sequittor.
    Sir, I would submit the notion that respect for the power the Trump wields (like a small child playing with firecrackers) and respect (or not) for the kind of person that Trump is, are two entirely different kinds of things.

    One can respect the power of the Office of President while utterly despising the horse's ass that sits in the aforementioned office.

    Leave a comment:


  • Officer of Engineers
    replied
    Originally posted by snapper View Post
    I do not respect Trump; the man is a lowlife money laundering crook. If he started WWlll I would respect less if that were possible.
    Good God, he's one of two people on this planet with 10,000 nukes at his disposal. The other is Putin. If you CANNOT show professionalism respecting that kind of power, then your views are just non-sequittor.

    Originally posted by snapper View Post
    Planes were using it the next day.
    They were not targetting the runways. They were targetting delivery assets.

    Originally posted by snapper View Post
    Certainly not but I question your claim that the Israeli's were after drone command there. Do you have proof of this?
    How about from the Iranians themselves?

    https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/...yria-1.5979943

    It helps greatly if you stop speaking out of your garbage and do actual real time reading

    Originally posted by snapper View Post
    First not sure what has got to do with me not wish to see WW3.
    Because going after Assad will do exactly that.

    Originally posted by snapper View Post
    Second I seem to recall you saying that Ukraine was also under Moscow's "nuclear umbrella" yet it hasn't stopped us sending them home Cargo 200 trucks.
    Don't change the subject. No one is going to nuke the Ukraines.

    Originally posted by snapper View Post
    You really think Moscow would launch nuclear weapons for Assad?
    If we go for regieme change? Yes, especially when the Russians have actual active combat assets in the area.

    Originally posted by snapper View Post
    Like I said I don't give a hoot if the Muscovites and Iranians get rid of him themselves. He can go live out his days in Tehran or Moscow.
    They won't get rid of him and neither will we, unless accidently meaning he was at the wrong place at the wrong time when our bombs hit but he won't be on a target list. Stop spouting high and mighty crap especially when you're not the one doing the dirty work going after him.

    Originally posted by snapper View Post
    If it had prevented WW2 which cost 50 - 80m lives it would have been cheap but the French should have stopped it at the start; the re-occupation of the Rhineland which was contrary to the Treaties.
    Well, the Czechs were not as callous as you are.

    Leave a comment:


  • snapper
    replied
    Originally posted by WABs_OOE View Post
    Your lack of respect for Trump means that even if he starts WWIII, you would think it's damned little.
    I do not respect Trump; the man is a lowlife money laundering crook. If he started WWlll I would respect less if that were possible.

    Originally posted by WABs_OOE View Post
    The destruction of 14 aircrafts, an entire squadron, reduced his delivery vehicles for 6-8 months until the Russians replaced those planes. Even if we take Assad's words that those were wrecked planes to begin with, they were clearly a source of spare parts that kept his other planes in the air that were now denied. Like I said, the AARs provided a much clearer assessement than your fantasy island assesements.
    Planes were using it the next day.

    Originally posted by WABs_OOE View Post
    Are you now an expert in signal management? T4 to Israel ain't that big.
    Certainly not but I question your claim that the Israeli's were after drone command there. Do you have proof of this?

    Originally posted by WABs_OOE View Post
    Syria is under the Russian nuclear umbrella.
    First not sure what has got to do with me not wish to see WW3. Second I seem to recall you saying that Ukraine was also under Moscow's "nuclear umbrella" yet it hasn't stopped us sending them home Cargo 200 trucks. You really think Moscow would launch nuclear weapons for Assad?

    Originally posted by WABs_OOE View Post
    Which means whatever actions we take will NOT include takiing Assad to the Hague.
    Like I said I don't give a hoot if the Muscovites and Iranians get rid of him themselves. He can go live out his days in Tehran or Moscow.

    Originally posted by WABs_OOE View Post
    Yes, you detest Chamberlanis "Peace In Our Time." But what you are ignoring that the alternative was turning the Sudetenland into a bloodfest worst than the Somme. 200,000 dead easily.
    If it had prevented WW2 which cost 50 - 80m lives it would have been cheap but the French should have stopped it at the start; the re-occupation of the Rhineland which was contrary to the Treaties.


    P.S See https://www.thedailybeast.com/the-is...er&via=desktop
    Last edited by snapper; 09 Apr 18,, 19:46.

    Leave a comment:


  • SteveDaPirate
    replied
    Originally posted by TopHatter View Post
    I wonder if the Kremlin has the balls to retaliate against Israel. It could turn the Israel-Syria area into a shooting gallery very quickly.
    I think the timing of the strike has more to do with Iran honestly.

    In the aftermath of the chemical attack and with the POTUS talking about a "big price to pay" Iran can't overtly retaliate against Israel for the strike on T4. At least not without running the risk that their forces deployed in Syria start looking like appealing targets to the Americans just as the US is putting together a reminder that there are bigger fish in the pond and consequences when you don't play by the rules.
    Last edited by SteveDaPirate; 09 Apr 18,, 18:45.

    Leave a comment:


  • Officer of Engineers
    replied
    Originally posted by snapper View Post
    So what do you think Trumpkins "big price" may entail?
    Your lack of respect for Trump means that even if he starts WWIII, you would think it's damned little.

    Originally posted by snapper View Post
    I mean clearly hitting that empty airbase last year did not work.
    The destruction of 14 aircrafts, an entire squadron, reduced his delivery vehicles for 6-8 months until the Russians replaced those planes. Even if we take Assad's words that those were wrecked planes to begin with, they were clearly a source of spare parts that kept his other planes in the air that were now denied. Like I said, the AARs provided a much clearer assessement than your fantasy island assesements.

    Originally posted by snapper View Post
    T4 is where they run drones from? Seems a bit distant from the Israeli border.
    Are you now an expert in signal management? T4 to Israel ain't that big.

    Originally posted by snapper View Post
    I most certainly do not want that.
    Syria is under the Russian nuclear umbrella.

    Originally posted by snapper View Post
    On the contrary I think doing nothing to protect international law makes a wider war more likely not less.
    Which means whatever actions we take will NOT include takiing Assad to the Hague.

    Originally posted by snapper View Post
    It was the same with Hitler.
    Yes, you detest Chamberlanis "Peace In Our Time." But what you are ignoring that the alternative was turning the Sudetenland into a bloodfest worst than the Somme. 200,000 dead easily.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X