The Syria Thread: Momentum building for Western military strike against Syria; President Bashar Assad's government responsible for chemical attack on civilians outside Damascus
Tweet Topic Started: 28 Aug 2013, 03:51 PM (5,675 Views)
Didnt know you were such an expert on migs Mike. Did you study jet defence capabilities in between investing in property. Perhaps you could advise the Kremlin about your experience on migs and long range warheads.
Didnt know you were such an expert on migs Mike. Did you study jet defence capabilities in between investing in property. Perhaps you could advise the Kremlin about your experience on migs and long range warheads.
Yes, all of my life since I could read. My knowledge of military affairs, international relations and geo-politics far exceeds my knowledge on investing although the later makes me far more money.
Ask me some questions.
Kulganis
8 Sep 2013, 08:59 PM
This is probably all about the natural gas pipeline that the Assad government is blocking.
Then why wait 2 and half years to do anything about it and do nearly everything possible to avoid a conflict with Syria?
The truth of the matter is Obama has no interest in Syria. Syria is of little strategic importance to the US, it offers little oil or natural gas of which the US does not need due to plentiful supplies under its own land. The only strategic issue is the port of Tartus which Russian ships use to refuel, it is not even a base just a filling station really. It is of little strategic interest to the USA as Russia only has a small Navy which is of little threat to the US Navy.
Why on earth would Obama want a war in Syria when it offers nothing to the USA. Send 100,000 troops into the middle of a civil war, no going to happen, nothing worth taking.
The only real threat to the USA are these. Chemical weapons being used on large scale. Chemical weapons falling into extremist hands. A broader regional war including Turkey, Jordan and perhaps Israel. Turkey has one of the largest Armies in Europe and the world, its military is far more updated then Russia's and Syria certainly offers no real threat to Turkey other then to destabilise its economy. Same with Israel, they could wipe the floor with Syria if they wanted to but once again, what is the gain for Israel. In fact Israel wants to keep Assad rather then another Islamist Government take over which would be more hostile to Israel existence.
Syria has one of the largest stockpiles of Chemical weapons in the world, this is the greatest danger. If employed on a massive scale Syria could kill hundreds of thousands of people if fired into large urban areas. Syria does have ballistic missiles to deliver the chemical weapons and aircraft. Imagine if Hezbollah gets hold of Chemical weapons and uses it on Israel. Israel would respond with nuclear weapons.
The biggest threat is the chemical weapons and Assad has now shown a willingness to use them on multiple occasions. It was confirmed back in march that other chemical weapon attacks occurred but on a small scale. Electronic intercepts from Syrian officials to army commanders who fire the rockets which held the chemical weapons confirms the attack was by Government sources, let alone the fact the Rebels do not have chemical weapons or the rockets to deliver them. The mistake made was the unit which fire the missiles use the wrong missiles which carried far more of the chemicals then previous smaller rockets. I believe Assads aim is to use these weapons on a small scale but a mistake was made which lead to massive civilian causalities.
It certainly appears some people have a warped sense of reality, quick to condemn the US when a missile/bomb misses a target and kills a few civilians but protects a brutal dictator that is slaughtering his own population with his powerful army and now uses chemical weapons on that population.
I wonder would be the world reaction if Obama launched a chemical weapon attack on say New York, Washington DC and killed a few thousand people, would you view that differently. If so should the world intervene to stop the madman Obama from launching such chemical weapon attacks or should we just let him carry on despite having massive quantises of these weapons.
I also do not recall a UN mandate when Russia invaded Georgia, nations will do what is in its best interest regardless of the UN which mostly sits around and watches people being slaughtered.
Yes, all of my life since I could read. My knowledge of military affairs, international relations and geo-politics far exceeds my knowledge on investing although the later makes me far more money.
Ask me some questions.
Then why wait 2 and half years to do anything about it and do nearly everything possible to avoid a conflict with Syria?
The truth of the matter is Obama has no interest in Syria. Syria is of little strategic importance to the US, it offers little oil or natural gas of which the US does not need due to plentiful supplies under its own land. The only strategic issue is the port of Tartus which Russian ships use to refuel, it is not even a base just a filling station really. It is of little strategic interest to the USA as Russia only has a small Navy which is of little threat to the US Navy.
Why on earth would Obama want a war in Syria when it offers nothing to the USA. Send 100,000 troops into the middle of a civil war, no going to happen, nothing worth taking.
The only real threat to the USA are these. Chemical weapons being used on large scale. Chemical weapons falling into extremist hands. A broader regional war including Turkey, Jordan and perhaps Israel. Turkey has one of the largest Armies in Europe and the world, its military is far more updated then Russia's and Syria certainly offers no real threat to Turkey other then to destabilise its economy. Same with Israel, they could wipe the floor with Syria if they wanted to but once again, what is the gain for Israel. In fact Israel wants to keep Assad rather then another Islamist Government take over which would be more hostile to Israel existence.
Syria has one of the largest stockpiles of Chemical weapons in the world, this is the greatest danger. If employed on a massive scale Syria could kill hundreds of thousands of people if fired into large urban areas. Syria does have ballistic missiles to deliver the chemical weapons and aircraft. Imagine if Hezbollah gets hold of Chemical weapons and uses it on Israel. Israel would respond with nuclear weapons.
The biggest threat is the chemical weapons and Assad has now shown a willingness to use them on multiple occasions. It was confirmed back in march that other chemical weapon attacks occurred but on a small scale. Electronic intercepts from Syrian officials to army commanders who fire the rockets which held the chemical weapons confirms the attack was by Government sources, let alone the fact the Rebels do not have chemical weapons or the rockets to deliver them. The mistake made was the unit which fire the missiles use the wrong missiles which carried far more of the chemicals then previous smaller rockets. I believe Assads aim is to use these weapons on a small scale but a mistake was made which lead to massive civilian causalities.
It certainly appears some people have a warped sense of reality, quick to condemn the US when a missile/bomb misses a target and kills a few civilians but protects a brutal dictator that is slaughtering his own population with his powerful army and now uses chemical weapons on that population.
I wonder would be the world reaction if Obama launched a chemical weapon attack on say New York, Washington DC and killed a few thousand people, would you view that differently. If so should the world intervene to stop the madman Obama from launching such chemical weapon attacks or should we just let him carry on despite having massive quantises of these weapons.
I also do not recall a UN mandate when Russia invaded Georgia, nations will do what is in its best interest regardless of the UN which mostly sits around and watches people being slaughtered.
Re "The biggest threat is the chemical weapons and Assad has now shown a willingness to use them on multiple occasions." Proof ?
No definitive evidence at all. In fact, there are many claiming the UK, French, US, Israel backed Syrian Front did the attack.
Putin: Syria chemical attack is ‘rebels' provocation in hope of intervention
Give us proof it was an Israeli, US, French or UK plot.
How did the rebels get the chemical weapons? How did the rebels get the Russian & Iranian made missiles which carried the chemical weapons as shown in the video footage of the remains of the missiles.
The CIA has communication intercepts from Syrian officials to the commander of the unit which fired the weapons. It appears the official was most upset with the commander as the wrong missiles were fired. German intelligence also says it Naval ships picked up the same communications and believes it was a mistake by a military commander, the Germans are against military action but there intelligence supports the US intelligence that it was Syrian Government forces the launched the missiles.
Further to this, Israel and the US operate a joint Radar installation used for ballistic missile defence to operate the Arrow I & II anti ballistic missile system. Primarily used to detect Iranian missile launches. This radar tracked the missile launches from a Government controlled area fired into the rebel controlled area. It was not just one missile, it was between 11-15 missiles which were fired and hit 11 different locations.
The Russians also have this data as its own radars can track missile launches in Syria, but they wont release it despite releasing data showing Israeli missile tests last week in the Med. Why wont the Russians release the same data which shows the tracking information of the missile launches, they were very quick to release data on Israel's launches, which the Russian mistook for a US missile attack on Syrian and warned the Syrians about, once again intercepted by US and NATO forces in the area.
Why does Russia not release the tracking data that shows the missiles were fired from Rebel held locations into area attacked, that would end the matter right away. Why it does not is it does not exist as the tracking data from its own Russian radars confirms the launches were by Syrian Government forces. Send an email to you're buddy Putin asking for the same tracking data the released of the Israeli missile test last week for August 21 2013 and see what it shows.
You also need to broaden your view on why Russia opposes military action. Syria does buy about $2 billion worth of Russian weapons a year, not a great deal. What Russia does not want is yet another demonstration of US military superiority in technology vs Russian weapons as every time this happens Russia's military sales plummet for years after while the US weapon sales soar. This represents a lot of money for the Russian arms industry which is struggling at best to stay afloat.
What do you think will happen to Russian weapon sales in the next few years if US missiles and warplanes can penetrate the so called formidable air defences of Syria with impunity.
You also need to look at the bigger strategic environment. Iran is watching closely and if it see's Russian defences unable to protect Syria then why would Iran continue to buy Russian weapons if they prove useless to protect Syria. Not that Iran has many options due to sanctions but it could certainly help bring Iran to negotiating table seeing Syria defenceless against US weapons despite the presence of Russian air defences and advanced anti ship missiles.
Then why wait 2 and half years to do anything about it and do nearly everything possible to avoid a conflict with Syria?
The truth of the matter is Obama has no interest in Syria. Syria is of little strategic importance to the US, it offers little oil or natural gas of which the US does not need due to plentiful supplies under its own land. The only strategic issue is the port of Tartus which Russian ships use to refuel, it is not even a base just a filling station really. It is of little strategic interest to the USA as Russia only has a small Navy which is of little threat to the US Navy.
Why on earth would Obama want a war in Syria when it offers nothing to the USA. Send 100,000 troops into the middle of a civil war, no going to happen, nothing worth taking.
Qatar, an ally of the USA, want to build a pipeline across Syria, this would increase the output of natural gas to Europe and Qatar would profit. While Syria, an ally of Russia are blocking it.
Perhaps they have been trying diplomatic channels for the last few years to get this pipeline passed. Whatever they have tried, obviously hasn't worked, Qatar needed something to happen so they could make a case for installing their own government, one that is sympathetic to their needs.
Remember the old adage, "Follow the money"
"If man is to survive, he will have learned to take a delight in the essential differences between men and between cultures. He will learn that differences in ideas and attitudes are a delight, part of life's exciting variety, not something to fear." - Gene Roddenberry
"Balloon animals are a great way to teach children that the things they love dearly, may spontaneously explode" -- Lee Camp
The thing that really bugs me is how close it is to the plot line of Tom Clancy's Red Storm Rising.
I love that book. I liked how they called the F-117 Nighthawk stealth bomber a Frisbee when it was still classified and only rumours of its existence.
Kulganis
9 Sep 2013, 04:08 PM
Qatar, an ally of the USA, want to build a pipeline across Syria, this would increase the output of natural gas to Europe and Qatar would profit. While Syria, an ally of Russia are blocking it.
Perhaps they have been trying diplomatic channels for the last few years to get this pipeline passed. Whatever they have tried, obviously hasn't worked, Qatar needed something to happen so they could make a case for installing their own government, one that is sympathetic to their needs.
Remember the old adage, "Follow the money"
No that does not make sense the reward for effort is now where near enough.
You want a stable Government to build a pipe line even if it is a dictator, nota full blown civil war. Not the best place to build a pipe line. Qatar is also one of the biggest exporters of seaborne LNG, far easier to ship it to Europe rather then transit an unstable region with a pipeline.
It’s about the rivalry between competing gas pipeline projects – one that has been proposed to take gas from Quatar to Europe – via Syria and Turkey. The other proposed from Iran, via Iraq, Syria and Turkey: The Battle of Pipelineistan - fought by US troops – on behalf of Quatar, Israel, Turkey, Europeans – everybody but Americans - to resolve who gets the concession to build a pipeline through Syria.
Russia does not want the proposed Qatar gas pipeline to Europe, where they export most of their gas. So they support the Assad military dictatorship, their client and puppet, who has blocked it on their behalf – until Assad proposed the Iranian pipeline to Europe. That’s when his troubles began.
The gulf Arabs want a new gas pipeline to Europe. The Turks want the pipeline to Europe. So they both support the imported al Qaeda fighters who are trying to overthrow Assad.
Civil war broke out shortly after the Assad regime signed on for the Iran, Iraq, Syria, Turkey route, cutting Quatar out and elevating Iran. The Syrian rebels are bankrolled by Qatar. Once Assad is gone, Qatar will get its pipeline to Europe. Mission accomplished. The same way that US troops died to get Exxon the northern Iraqi oil concession.
We are dependent on Arab oil. The Turks are our allies, as are the Israelis. So the Obama Administration supports Qatar, Turkey and Israel in opposition to the Russians, Syrians and Iranians. Over the ‘preferred’ route of a gas pipeline. For which Obama now proposes to bomb Syria – in lieu of a diplomatic resolution of the matter – over the route of a gas pipeline.
Come on, this makes much more sense than going to war over the use of chemical weapons.
"If man is to survive, he will have learned to take a delight in the essential differences between men and between cultures. He will learn that differences in ideas and attitudes are a delight, part of life's exciting variety, not something to fear." - Gene Roddenberry
"Balloon animals are a great way to teach children that the things they love dearly, may spontaneously explode" -- Lee Camp
Australian Property Forum is an economics and finance forum dedicated to discussion of Australian and global real estate markets and macroeconomics, including house prices, housing affordability, and the likelihood of a property crash. Is there an Australian housing bubble? Will house prices crash, boom or stagnate? Is the Australian property market a pyramid scheme or Ponzi scheme? Can house prices really rise forever? These are the questions we address on Australian Property Forum, the premier real estate site for property bears, bulls, investors, and speculators. Members may also discuss matters related to finance, modern monetary theory (MMT), debt deflation, cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin Ethereum and Ripple, property investing, landlords, tenants, debt consolidation, reverse home equity loans, the housing shortage, negative gearing, capital gains tax, land tax and macro prudential regulation.
Forum Rules:
The main forum may be used to discuss property, politics, economics and finance, precious metals, crypto currency, debt management, generational divides, climate change, sustainability, alternative energy, environmental topics, human rights or social justice issues, and other topics on a case by case basis. Topics unsuitable for the main forum may be discussed in the lounge. You agree you won't use this forum to post material that is illegal, private, defamatory, pornographic, excessively abusive or profane, threatening, or invasive of another forum member's privacy. Don't post NSFW content. Racist or ethnic slurs and homophobic comments aren't tolerated. Accusing forum members of serious crimes is not permitted. Accusations, attacks, abuse or threats, litigious or otherwise, directed against the forum or forum administrators aren't tolerated and will result in immediate suspension of your account for a number of days depending on the severity of the attack. No spamming or advertising in the main forum. Spamming includes repeating the same message over and over again within a short period of time. Don't post ALL CAPS thread titles. The Advertising and Promotion Subforum may be used to promote your Australian property related business or service. Active members of the forum who contribute regularly to main forum discussions may also include a link to their product or service in their signature block. Members are limited to one actively posting account each. A secondary account may be used solely for the purpose of maintaining a blog as long as that account no longer posts in threads. Any member who believes another member has violated these rules may report the offending post using the report button.
Australian Property Forum complies with ASIC Regulatory Guide 162 regarding Internet Discussion Sites. Australian Property Forum is not a provider of financial advice. Australian Property Forum does not in any way endorse the views and opinions of its members, nor does it vouch for for the accuracy or authenticity of their posts. It is not permitted for any Australian Property Forum member to post in the role of a licensed financial advisor or to post as the representative of a financial advisor. It is not permitted for Australian Property Forum members to ask for or offer specific buy, sell or hold recommendations on particular stocks, as a response to a request of this nature may be considered the provision of financial advice.
Views expressed on this forum are not representative of the forum owners. The forum owners are not liable or responsible for comments posted. Information posted does not constitute financial or legal advice. The forum owners accept no liability for information posted, nor for consequences of actions taken on the basis of that information. By visiting or using this forum, members and guests agree to be bound by the Zetaboards Terms of Use.
This site may contain copyright material (i.e. attributed snippets from online news reports), the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such content is posted to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific, and social justice issues. This constitutes 'fair use' of such copyright material as provided for in section 107 of US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed for research and educational purposes only. If you wish to use this material for purposes that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. Such material is credited to the true owner or licensee. We will remove from the forum any such material upon the request of the owners of the copyright of said material, as we claim no credit for such material.
Privacy Policy: Australian Property Forum uses third party advertising companies to serve ads when you visit our site. These third party advertising companies may collect and use information about your visits to Australian Property Forum as well as other web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services of interest to you. If you would like more information about this practice and to know your choices about not having this information used by these companies, click here: Google Advertising Privacy FAQ
Australian Property Forum is hosted by Zetaboards. Please refer also to the Zetaboards Privacy Policy
