It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: baburak
originally posted by: MrPlow
Since ATS is the feeding and gestation grounds for all things conspiracy....try this one on for size...
The majority here think that strikes on ISIS within Syria preempts strikes on the Assad regime itself, thus taking Assad out...
I posit that nothing of the sort happens. Perhaps targets within Syria are hit - but there will be no slippery slope to Assads removal by U.S. forces.
Crazy right? No war with Syria. No war with Russia. No World War 3. Just coalition forces picking off ISIS fighters ....stretched out over several years.
And boring ole' life keeps lurching forward for all here
1. I don't think so. Syria has anti-aircraft weapons and can legally use them against any military violating it's airspace.
2. If Syria shoots down US fighter, US will bomb Assad.
3. If US bombs Assad, Iran is bound to help him because of the agreements they have.
4. If Iran helps Assad, Israel moves to Iran.
5. With many sides fighting on it's border, Turkey will be sucked in this new war.
All of this can and probably will be used as a chance to deal with 'conflicts' elsewhere - Armenia vs Azerbaijan, North Korea vs South Korea, China vs Japan.
WWI didn't start with just Austrian declaration of war to Serbia. Everyone just used this to deal with their own 'conflicts'.
originally posted by: TinfoilTP
Assad is a rouge regime and not the recognized government of Syria
originally posted by: daaskapital
originally posted by: TinfoilTP
Assad is a rouge regime and not the recognized government of Syria
The SNC may see itself as a government-in-exile, and it may be recognised as the 'representative of the Syrian people' by some states. But other states also recognise the Assad government as the legitimate authority. Syria also recently reelected the Assad government, which makes the overall situation even more convoluted.
As a result of the above, the situation is ultimately complicated and can't be concluded by quoting wikipedia.
On Wednesday, 170 Iranian parliamentarians released a statement in support of Assad, and warned the US and Israel against attacking Syria. The Iranian legislators warned that "any invasion of [Syria] will herald the collapse of the arrogant powers' tyrannical and cruel system," Fars reported.
"If the Islamic Republic decides, we will be ready to sacrifice our lives beside our Syrian brothers against the (front)line of infidels and oppressors," the statement said.
Despite the messages of support from Tehran, Iranian Defense Minister Hossein Dehqan ruled out sending troops or weapons to Syria.
So what'dya say we bookmark this is see where we're at 6 months from now?
I think countries only feel BOUND to lend aid to other countries when the first country sees lending that aid as beneficial to itself. Iran is not going see coming to the aid of Syria, against the US, as a move beneficial to Iran. Just an opinion.
originally posted by: Jungian
Think about the power of Russia. Back in the days of the Cuban Nuclear Missile crisis, an american spy plane called U-2 was shot down above Cuba. And nothing was done about that. In the end, Russia pulled away from Cuba with the missiles, but only after secret talks where the US was to dismantle the defense systems in Turkey. Russia got what they wanted.