US to announce aerial blockade on Syria

Originally posted by Vitchilo
reply to post by OldCorp

 

The Yakhont and the S-300 are not the same thing at all.

Yakhont : anti-ship missiles.

S-300s : anti-air missiles.

Dont forget the carrier killers that China have
and the satelites jammer they have developed over the yrs

Its been a long time since US didnt fight a war where the opponent had a chance to win
usualy US tend to destroy the weak enemies
or they would had already attack Russia and China by now

reply to post by Ben81


Not true the only reason Russia and China haven't been culled is the nuclear deterrent. Has nothing to do with being fearful of their military.

Originally posted by Xcathdra
reply to post by Ben81

 

Not counter NATO.. Russia is working with the UN security council on the cease fire issue. Russia is still against regime change by force, however with the spike in deaths they are trying to to find a happy medium.

Russia and China are about done with Syria. They can only take so much bad PR both at home and globally by putting trade interests above human lives. Syria seems dead set on not listening to them and they will use that as the final straw to walk away from the entire thing.

Originally posted by MrStyx
reply to post by Ben81

 

Not true the only reason Russia and China haven't been culled is the nuclear deterrent. Has nothing to do with being fearful of their military.

Yep. And that's why the US is building a missile shield.

reply to post by OldCorp


P-800 Yakhont, eh? Now that is one I hadn't seen before. I hadn't thought to look at Syria having some cutting edge, top of the line anti-ship missiles. Wow... Ramjet powered, no less. Well, that explains the Stratfor map which shows nothing for a major U.S. Naval asset ANYWHERE near Syria or the Med. Now that makes a bit more sense.

Your link on them says they are well beyond the Western Harpoon and other sub-sonic anti-ship missiles while Syria's can now fire at Mach 2 - 2.5. Yikes! Thanks Putin. They needed those...


So............. Someone fill in the blank? If we can't use a U.S. Carrier (and the link shows nothing remotely close) where are U.S. planners thinking it all comes from? Turkey, apparently...

More info on this blockade idea

It's that part at the end of the link there which bothers me the most....

The intercession is to be modeled after NATO's efforts in Kosovo, which brought an end to the Serbian control of the region. NATO's plan of action included prolonged aerial shelling.

I didn't realize anyone looked at the outcome of Serbia and Kosovo as some kind of stunning success for NATO. Eeek... With thinking like that, what could possibly go wrong here?

Originally posted by Vitchilo

The military official said in the interview that the plan is a cautious one, and takes into account the Syrian air force's advanced capabilities.

Is this a joke?

The Syrian air force has NO advanced capabilities.

And what will Hezbollah and Iran do if this plan is put into action? What will Russia do?

This could get real bad.

I think the S-300 is the concern. Not that they wont be easily jammed or bombed by anti-radar fighters. This could very well be what causes Iran to storm across Iraq towards Israel. I have the same opinion that OldCorp does. I also have my sources.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000

So............. Someone fill in the blank? If we can't use a U.S. Carrier (and the link shows nothing remotely close) where are U.S. planners thinking it all comes from? Turkey, apparently...

Well Turkey is part of NATO after all... and has the largest land army in NATO except the US. The Turkish army can kick some serious butts.

I didn't realize anyone looked at the outcome of Serbia and Kosovo as some kind of stunning success for NATO.

Indeed... remember that Kosovo nearly brought the world to WW3...
I stopped World War III, says James Blunt

James Blunt says he stopped World War III from happening by disobeying a general's order.

The singer, who served in the British army for six years, told the BBC yesterday he refused an order to seize an airfield during NATO's 1999 intervention in Kosovo after the Russians got to it first.

"It was a mad situation anyway," he told BBC Radio 5Live.
Advertisement: Story continues below

"We had 200 Russians lined up pointing their weapons at us aggressively and we've been told to reach the airfield and take a hold of it."

"I was given the direct command to overpower the 200 or so Russians who were there.

"I was the lead officer with my troop of men behind us ... The soldiers directly behind me were from the Parachute Regiment, so they're obviously game for the fight.

"The direct command [that] came in from General and [NATO Supreme Commander Europe] Wesley Clark was to overpower them. Various words were used that seemed unusual to us. Words such as 'destroy' came down the radio."

But Blunt, who said he was "party to the conversation" about the possible attack, said "we were querying our instruction" as it would have meant fighting the Russians.

"Fortunately, up on the radio came [British] General Mike Jackson, whose exact words at the time were, 'I'm not going to have my soldiers be responsible for starting World War III'.

Thanks God that crazy bastard Clark ain't general anymore.

It seems pissing off the Russians back then and in August 2008 with the attack on Russian peacekeepers wasn't enough... time to piss them off yet again in Syria.

Timeline for such action? Russian election on March 4... which will be followed by riots across Russia... me thinks it'll happen during that time.

This could very well be what causes Iran to storm across Iraq towards Israel.

I don't think that's possible. Iraq would stop them.

reply to post by MrSpad


Not to mention their elections are coming up, like ours.

Putin is going to have a difficult time getting elected.

Libya light... let's see how long the blockade goes before the bombs/drones start falling.
Syria does not even come close to the capabilities that Libya had.

Originally posted by Ben81

Its been a long time since US didnt fight a war where the opponent had a chance to win
usualy US tend to destroy the weak enemies
or they would had already attack Russia and China by now

it's within this reasoning that I believe, since it's been "a long time", wouldn't you think that they would launch a full assault, with the entirety of their arsenal, if they were attacked directly?

that would mean, EMP/ tact nuke any major naval battle group heading for a shoreline invasion + cyber attacks on running networks + psychological warfare and proxy terrorist attacks internally.

the thing about America is they take apart their enemies slowly, piece by piece, unless attacked directly.
then the American mindset radically shifts towards complete and utter annihilation of the enemy in the shortest time possible.

Libya being the latest piece chipped away.
They won't attempt to take out China or Russia directly, that will happen systematically, removing the pawns first.
Eventually they will corner their leadership through other means, checkmate.

Talk about the perfect storm.

Putin and The Russian Federation have serious domestic issues, as do Syria, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, The United States and most of Europe. What is the best solution for a ruthless leader to handle SERIOUS domestic unrest and anger? Give the people something ELSE to hate even more and forget about those pesky local problems.

It isn't one nation... It's ALL the nations. They/We ALL have every reason to WANT this war. China is the sole exception, as they still just shoot or stomp their dissent on the spot. They're lined up to play the coming war in whatever way they see the best angles for their own advancement and positioning in the post-war world afterward. China plays Chess while the world plays Checkers. (And yeah..I really do think at least China have already thought in post-war terms for a war that hasn't even started yet)


And so...with the Aerial blockade of Syria, it will probably begin.

I do not know if this report is true or not but, but Assad will fall very fast if airspace will be closed to Syrian airforce. And even super advanced anti-ship missiles will not help one bit since NATO will have several unsinkable "aircarriers" in Turkey (that they will use) and in Israel (that they will not use, at least openly ).
Frankly i do not think that it will happen soon though.
Massive relocation of NATO aircrafts ,maintanence crew and ground forces will take time. Turkey will probably stay out of active role due to "Ottoman empire" issue and Israel will not take any role due to "evil genocidal land grabbing Zionists" issue.

well I am eagerly awaiting to see the US show what we have been hiding for the last
several years.
kinda tired of waiting.. let the destruction begin

This could get real bad.

This is gonna get real bad, there is no could to it. Syria is nothing more than a stepping stone to Iran and TPTB are quite possibly trying to coerse Iran into firing the first shot with their "blockade". Russia just invested 1 billion dollars into the Iranian nuclear program and there is no way in hell they are going to let things slide when we end up at war with Iran.

Add to all of this that Pakistan, Hamas, The Palistinian State, and Turkey have all came out publicly with support for Iran plus the fact that Syria and Pakistan have very close ties along with Hamas. Add all this together and you have the perfect ingredients to create a defacto attack retalitory attack on Isreal and thus starting what will in escence be at the least a hemisperical war. Personally I see it expanding into a rather large global conflict.


This scenario right here is exactly why I have been preparing for the last 3 years.

Originally posted by Ben81

Originally posted by Vitchilo
reply to post by OldCorp

 

Dont forget the carrier killers that China have
and the satelites jammer they have developed over the yrs

Its been a long time since US didnt fight a war where the opponent had a chance to win
usualy US tend to destroy the weak enemies
or they would had already attack Russia and China by now

China's so called carrier killer is nothing more than an ICBM. Last time I checked the Aegis system and the SM-3 missile killer will make quick work of that threat. The Satellite jammer's wont last long when they will provide a great target for laser guided bombs dropped from our B-2s and god knows what else we have been hiding.

The B-2 is old school anymore. America did not unveil the F-117 till the first bombing raid over Iraq, so don't be surprised if we do it again with something that can cloak and haul butt at the same time.

reply to post by mugger

Syria does not even come close to the capabilities that Libya had.

Say what?

Syria is weak, but not as weak as Libya was.

Syria got hundreds of scuds with chemical weapons. They got high tech anti-ship missiles. Possibly high tech S-300s missiles. They might get help from Hezbollah and Iran.

Syria is almighty compared to what Libya was.

Don't know if anyone brought this yet...

Counterpsyops

The Pentagon is readying for the possibility of intervention in Syria, aiming to halt Syrian President Bashsar Assad’s violent crackdown on protesters, the newspaper Asharq Al-Awsat reported Saturday, citing a US military offical.

According to the official, the intervention scenario calls for the establishment of a buffer zone on the Turkish border, in order to receive Syrian refugees. The Red Cross would then provide the civilians humanitarian aid, before NATO crews would arrive from Turkey and join the efforts.

The measure would pave the way for the US to declare an aerial blockade on Syria.

There's that "in the name of a Humanitarian Corridor we invade thee" sound again. The very sound the Russians and Chinese voted against in the UN. Why? Because they were duped by that in regards to Libya when NATO (read that the US) used that as a ploy to begin the invasion of LIBYA and escalate the "corridor" into Regime change. The Russians and Chinese no longer trust America at her word. So NOW we calling it a "buffer zone"...

From Libya to Syria

As the intervention in Libya progressed China and especially Russia voiced regrets over having abstained, claiming that the NATO forces has overstepped their mandate for enforcing a no fly zone, escalating their action into one of enforcing regime change.

... Russia and China complained rather disingenuously they had been duped by the West, claiming that the NATO allies were dishonestly converting R2P into a regime change instrument.

And then the spotlight switched to Syria, and immediately Russia declared that it would block any R2P resolution, because the West could not be trusted to stick to a limited mandate.

Buffer zone indeed. How many ways can they lie to justify their agenda of dominance and control of the region?

Putin is going to have a difficult time getting elected.

reply to post by Xcathdra


He isn't, Those Protesters are nothing more then Communists and Neo Nazi Nationalists, these two groups that i have mentioned are very radical, worse then Putin himself.

reply to post by Vitchilo


How the hell would Iraq stop the Iranian Army when half of Iraq is loyal to Iran? Never mind Iraq does not have the weapons to do so.

reply to post by Nucleardiver

This is gonna get real bad, there is no could to it.

Yeah...

Russia's Putin: Attack on Iran would be 'truly catastrophic'

Russian PM Vladimir Putin also warns West and Arab nations against military intervention in Syria.

Prime Minister Vladimir Putin said Russia is concerned about the "growing threat" of an attack on Iran over its nuclear program, warning that the consequences would be "truly catastrophic".

In an article on foreign policy for publication on Monday, six days before a March 4 presidential election he is almost certain to win, Putin also warned Western and Arab nations against military intervention in Syria.