The Euro crisis will look like a walk in the park if Syria explodes

I agree with this article. WHEN there is a ground invasion of Syria, the $hit will hit the fan. I think that the invasion of Syria will inevitably lead to the invasion of Iran, and eventually WWIII.

While the US and others hesitate to supply weapons to the opposition, they have tacitly encouraged consignments from elsewhere – into a region already awash with arms. Syria's violence is already spilling over into Lebanon, where power and demography – as between Christian and Muslim, Sunni and Shia, Lebanese and Palestinian – are so finely balanced. Tripoli, in northern Lebanon, has seen street fighting in recent weeks. South and west of Syria lie Israel, Gaza and the occupied Palestinian territories.

To the east, Iraq, with its majority Shia population and defeated Sunni minority, remains unstable, with the Kurdish region in the north independent in all but name. Iraq's Kurds now have representations abroad that look increasingly like diplomatic missions. Any hint of pressure from Baghdad, a more aggressive stance from Turkey, or more general regional turmoil, and the demand for full Kurdish independence could become urgent. That would inevitably precipitate a new surge of discontent in the Kurdish regions of Turkey, Iran and Syria. Kurdish statehood – beyond northern Iraq – has so far been an eventuality almost too sensitive to mention, lest the word fuel demands for the deed.

If the violence in Syria escalates, with or without Assad, and outsiders intervene, it will be almost impossible to confine the turmoil within that country's borders. Even in more self-contained Libya, the overthrow of Gaddafi had unforeseen cross-border fallout – producing a coup and a power vacuum in Mali. With Syria, the risk is already of a region-wide conflagration in which almost every national border and every seat of power could be up for grabs.

Walk in the park

That's a very interesting article. It's a very complex situation with lies coming from all sides. It's a really divided country with lots of different factions and other countries like Iran and Saudi are arming their own sides. Sunni against Shia.

You could apply this scenario to almost any middle easter country due to all the factions. We've had wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, overthrows of govs in Egypt and Libya and i havent seen any all out war because of it. There wont be any because of Syria either. Sensationislistic fearmongering journalism at best.

reply to post by princeofpeace


I know this is from RT, but if true, is a sign that Iran is standing strongly behind Assad and is willing to help fight any invading forces.

Iran is ready to mount a resistance against a possible outside attack on Syria, two senior generals of the Islamic Republic said. The statements come as the level of violence in war-torn Syria continues to escalate.

­The pro-Assad “resistance” would ensure that aggressors do not survive the conflict, a senior commander of Iran’s Revolutionary Guards, Brigadier Gen. Massoud Jazaeri told Mashregh, a media outlet run by the Guards.

Iran: Syria intervention "will be defeated"

Syria and Iran have had a mutual defense pact for years.

Outside "militants" attacking Syria is being crudely couched as a popular uprising, but it is no doubt meant to goad Iran into coming to Syria's defense, thus giving NATO all the excuse they need to attack Iran while looking as pure as the driven snow. Nothing they've tried against Iran so far has worked to get the desired reaction, and God knows they've tried, but this just might get it done and I doubt if the warhawks care whether it brings wwIII down on all our heads.

Having a "defense pact" and upholding a defense pact are TWO DIFFERENT THINGS. If either country starts getting the crap kicked out of it watch the other do nothing but sit their idly. Just watch...i guarantee it 100%.

reply to post by princeofpeace


Do you sit on the right hand of Ahmadinejad now, princeofpeace?

I am really puzzled as to what Russia's longterm strategy is regarding the Syria conflict - it seems to be more than
spoiling tactics due to getting burned over the Lybia/UN 1973 resolution - now they are insisting on Iran being involved in any peace conference knowing the west wont stomach that as they are one of the Assad regimes closest allies - has got me really wondering what their end game in all of this is .

I hope someone with far better geopolitical knowledge than me can weigh in on the subject .

reply to post by Masamune69


That's a good question. Russia seems very wishy washy and it seems they have something up their sleeve.

Why would i bother? He is too predictable to waste the time doing so.

Originally posted by frazzle
reply to post by princeofpeace

 

Do you sit on the right hand of Ahmadinejad now, princeofpeace?

To make sure their base at Tartus remains there.

Originally posted by Masamune69
I am really puzzled as to what Russia's longterm strategy is regarding the Syria conflict - it seems to be more than
spoiling tactics due to getting burned over the Lybia/UN 1973 resolution - now they are insisting on Iran being involved in any peace conference knowing the west wont stomach that as they are one of the Assad regimes closest allies - has got me really wondering what their end game in all of this is .

I hope someone with far better geopolitical knowledge than me can weigh in on the subject .

Originally posted by princeofpeace
To make sure their base at Tartus remains there.

Why didn't you mention why Tartus is important to Russia? ... because its Russia's only warm water port, maybe? I would think that's quite a strategic interest, wouldn't you?

Ummm yeah-thats why i mentioned it.

Originally posted by frazzle

Originally posted by princeofpeace
To make sure their base at Tartus remains there.

Why didn't you mention why Tartus is important to Russia? ... because its Russia's only warm water port, maybe? I would think that's quite a strategic interest, wouldn't you?

reply to post by princeofpeace


Hello Princeofpeace, ATS Readers, Writers,

Perhaps you are correct.... let us hope if that happens, your scenario is how it plays out.

I wonder though if what you were/are thinking is right along the same lines that Hitler was thinking when he mighta thought...

"Hey, ONE MORE country... no one will get pissed, hey, I have already invaded several. Hey they're just a bunch of Pollocks anyhow!" Nobody wants to try and stop Germany, we are too powerful...

I would hope your scenario would play out if it was Syria... and sadly; it looks more and more that big powers will start striking soon...

But for the world, and/or folks to think it WONT blow up into a shizzlestorm of death and destruction; is sadly fairly flippant, for lack of a better word...

But I do guarantee you one thing, if it isn't Syria, you can bet yer sweet bippy that an attack on Iran most likely WOULD..start WW3..

When Russia says dont do it, and then starts building up troops in the area.. only a FOOL pushes the Russian army into acting upon state threats of retaliation, or acts of protecting a huge business partner and ally..

Or will the world blindly think.. ahhhh its just Iran, aint worth starting WW3 over...?? Then they find out Russia and China are really serious! OOOops, sorry thousands of innocent dead folks... We/the world didnt think it would make WW3 start?

Strange that we live in a world where the Department of State, actually foments war to a large degree.

There was a time that a Secretary of State was considered a HUGE FAILURE if war broke out...they are supposed to be the peaceful diplomats.. make peace not war types...right?

Example for the moment might be Chamberlain of the UK prior to WW2 and Churchill stepping in..??

Anyhow, most would agree there is WAY TOO MUCH meddling in other nations affairs going on these days.
Coupled with the economy, mass unemployment, and the current world of currency manipulation, etc...

Historically, the above ingredients have eventually led to a global conflict when the volitile ingredients get mixed in the kettle and the heat turned up..

Just saying.. hope yer right that no war will blow up out of it..think we are bankrupt enough persuing losing war in Afghanistan and basic failure in Iraq as well..gazillions of dollars spent, thousands dead, no make that millions probably by the butterfly effect...to make a small handfull of warhawks very wealthy.

Same "story" just different locations, the names on the headstones are still the same though...

Pravdaseeker

reply to post by princeofpeace


If Syria, or even Syria and Iran together existed in a vacuum and NATO attacked them it would probably be a wipeout. Maybe both countries could inflict some pain on us. But both Russia and China have strategic interests in both countries and they know the road to Tehran goes through Damascus. So Iran might not lift a finger to defend Syria on its own knowing that's the trigger the US is hoping Iran will finally break down and pull, even though cooler heads are trying to avoid escalation. But if pushed hard enough against the wall and with two super powers behind them, all bets are off.

reply to post by SUICIDEHK45


Howdy SUICIDEHK45, ATS Readers, Writers.

I'd like to propose a possible/probable thought-train on your comment, and the post you replied to by Mesamune69.

What we are seeing on MSM and etc, is the "face" of the conflict, or "spat" that the powers that be WANT you to see. It is how the whole dang mess is presented, or SOLD to the public.

I.E. FAKE news stories, each side claiming the other side did the dirty deed, FAKE photos to the public, swaying the masses to cry out for revenge and war... Heglian dialectics in motion. Has worked since the beginning of time.

Propaganda has reached a creshendo of finesse with our digitally enhanced world.

Woodrow Wilson wrote in his after office memories book, of the "shadow government" that is there, and tells the President what he will and will NOT do..its a fact folks.. SUICIDEHK45 knows this too Im sure, just saying for our readers of ATS.

Another example is after the supposed "Arab Spring", some time down the road, we see G. Soros on CNN bragging on how HE WAS INSTRUMENTAL in financing the revolts... hmmm..via NGO's.. supposedly Non Governmental Organizations.. I think it means..well wow, a loophole before our eyes.

What is a "businessman" doing helping foment, and paying for wars? Isnt THAT the governments "job" to do? And we were "lead" to believe these uprisings were spontaneous... by MSM.. ok.. yeah right... cough cough...

Perhaps Soros is just a small turd, in comparison.. who grovels at the evil but very rich dung heap of the Rothschild empire.. and is only doing their bidding??

I am quite concerned all these old nutbag psychopathic geezers who run the world are not going to pass into the night quietly... Hey if you were a old geezer NWO psycho nutbag...lol.... wouldnt you rather go out with a HUGE FLASH AND BANG, and maybe have your name go down in history as well, right up there with Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Bush, Blair; some of them are more than one foot in the grave too... so someone just might go for the golden ring on the merry go round of global warfare.

Someone said, nothing in politics just happens... and boy its more true today than ever.

We just gotta try to get through the blows and cuts the leaders throw us..and pray we do not get thrust into a situation where survival is a question. Just like these poor folks getting caught between fighting factions in the ME countries.

I am betting the poor citizens of Syria right now could give a #$^&#%^* less who is in power... just quit frikking blowing up our town and killing the folks who try to live here.. eh what??

Some call it end game... and some are trying get it started now...

Pravdaseeker

Originally posted by SUICIDEHK45

I think that the invasion of Syria will inevitably lead to the invasion of Iran, and eventually WWIII.

I completely agree, and believe that the decision has already been made for a deployment of ground troops and a roll-out of air-strikes etc. The PTB are playing a dangerous game, and if my dreams are anything to go by, it may well blow up in their faces.