America wants to attack Syria soon.

It looks as if America has the idea that Russia has no reason to be within the Middle East today, so America is going to remove there last friend from that part of the world. The thing is America may not get it right, so it could be quite a costly war if things go wrong, remember the UK have no Navy to back up America today, and even some USA forces personal are saying they are well in danger if things go bad and Russia do back Syria in war.

www.worldwar3news.com...

reply to post by Alternative4u


Im about to read the article, but wanted to point out the website being called "World War 3 News" and also the opening line:

*This Blog is updated to show current events that might lead up the the next World Confrontation between World Powers and possible escalation points around the Globe.*

..may make it automatically biased in favor of the world war 3 scenario seeing as that's what they have limited themselves in writing about.


All I can tell so far is that Syria isn't going down easy, and US plans seem to have stalled. If they do make an attack I expect Russia to sit it out. Hopefully the US will stop supporting terrorism before we have to throw all of them into secret prison camps indefinitely without trial.

I just don't think the US public will stand for another war in the middle east, I really think the people know that this has nothing to do with them.
Obama and co really messed up, I think If they could go back and not say the things they have they would, I think they thought they would overthrow Assad and co quickly but they have not.
A civil war is between the people there, it is their business not ours, yes help bring about peace by giving both sides a chance to sort things out but the last thing anyone needs is our troops (UK here but we will have to go with you) getting killed in a fight which just isn't ours.

reply to post by boymonkey74


That cat will be bald soon!

I agree. What bothers me about the whole business is that tiny nagging thought that the USA Government would rather go to war if their economy looks as though it will fail. I suspect that like here in the UK what the public there want is utterly irrelevant.

Its OK if you are on the other side of the world to start wars but for us in Europe we will bear the brunt were this to happen and most countries are struggling as it is.

China and Russia may not want a war particularly but the Chinese have the ships, technology and the Russians have the experience.

I also don't want to see parts of Syria annexed by Israel which is involved in the Syrian war right up to its neck.

So is the UK when Cameron gave some £60 million in 'aid' to Turkey recently and who flies from there and what they do is open to question.

I still get annoyed when I think of the number of Assad's own group of Muslims who have been butchered its reported to be in the 40,000 + so ethnic cleansing is certainly on this war's agenda.

reply to post by Shiloh7


The thing is about the USA I do not like and I think many USA'ers don't even know is their country is based on war, perpetual war.
The USA have been involved in war for 214 years out of 237 of their existence, so what is going to change that?

Originally posted by Alternative4u
It looks as if America has the idea that Russia has no reason to be within the Middle East today, so America is going to remove there last friend from that part of the world. The thing is America may not get it right, so it could be quite a costly war if things go wrong, remember the UK have no Navy to back up America today, and even some USA forces personal are saying they are well in danger if things go bad and Russia do back Syria in war.

www.worldwar3news.com...

Personally i think you're very deluded and misinformed, but on the most part intentionally

The US would dismantle Russia in Syria slowly but surely, but wont and wouldn't have to, Russia now has its own little Afghanistan so enjoy it

Anyway

The US has 10 times the units to throw at Russia yet everyone thinks Russia will some how knock it all out with a missile or a few PAK-FA T-50s which arn't even in service till 2017 and in numbers 2030?, since when did an overrated plane single handedly win an all out sustained war? not to mention the US is just as far along in developing 6th gens? since when did a few good missiles win a war because the last time i looked Nazi Germany fire many hundreds unchallenged into London and got steamrolled with sheer numbers

Russia has no Navy? how does it intend to push across the Atlantic? in paddle boats? Russia current Navy would be run down and sunk before it could ever get anywhere near the US

The US has 11 Carriers and 10 assault ships which could easy convert into another 10 aircraft carriers

And where not even factoring in NATO's assets yet

The US & NATO would have close to 25,000 aircraft against Russia's 4,400



And as for the UK not having a Navy







The Royal Navy is the most modern and advanced Navy on the planet right now

That bear is not another kids in the block to “#¤% up with, it may grab the good old bald eagle, shave its head and making it real bald in confrontation with the Syria.

Remember that there are Iranians to deal with (with Quds Force ready to go to war with whomever/whatever), Russian army. Chinese, Hezbollah, Palestinians, perhaps Egyptians and Iraqis.

Leave no choice but the nuclear attack and armaments.

Hope the leaders of the Western front have enough economy and man power plus courage before they pushing the button. All in all your sons and daughters will be gone waste if that happens. In real world no parents should die after they kids.

reply to post by Alternative4u


Really OP once again, you create the exact same thread.

Almost all of your threads are about the same thing some big grand war between America, the UK and Russia (sometimes also China) all over Syria. Yet you demonstrate time after time total ignorance of the policies of each of these state players, you totally ignore the facts.


Take this for example.

t looks as if America has the idea that Russia has no reason to be within the Middle East today, so America is going to remove there last friend from that part of the world.

really what about Iran, who doesnt even make the top ten of Russian trading partners, yes Russia has a vested interest in Syria i have written about it but that interest is not so vast that they are going to go to war with the US and UK over it.

Besides, OP, your links takes us to a site about the lack of US Navy reinforcements, yet here you are once again talking about a war between US, UK and Russia something that i dont think is even mentioned in your link.

But seriously this....

the UK have no Navy

Serously, you honestly believe that the United Kindom has "NO NAVY"!!!!!

If there is anything that we do have it is a Navy, and a pretty darn good one at that!

I..... What?

really i dont know what you are talking about claiming the UK has "NO NAVY".

Unless you are confusing the UK with the Republic of Ireland I fail to see any excuse for you making such a claim unless your in some kind of parallel universe where monkeys in suits do the typing.

Anyway...

As i have said above this i just more of the same form the OP who posts a thread on this exact same topic all the time, just go through is previous threads and you will see.

"NO NAVY!"... tut tut.

reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin


I joined the navy to see the world, what did I see I saw the sea
Bloomin great navy we have too.

Originally posted by amkia
That bear is not another kids in the block to “#¤% up with, it may grab the good old bald eagle, shave its head and making it real bald in confrontation with the Syria.

Remember that there are Iranians to deal with (with Quds Force ready to go to war with whomever/whatever), Russian army. Chinese, Hezbollah, Palestinians, perhaps Egyptians and Iraqis.

Leave no choice but the nuclear attack and armaments.

Hope the leaders of the Western front have enough economy and man power plus courage before they pushing the button. All in all your sons and daughters will be gone waste if that happens. In real world no parents should die after they kids.

Oh and the that old chest nut too "China"

China has 1.6 billion mouths to feed

China also doesn't have much of a Navy to challenge US/NATO at sea

It would be very easy to strangle and starve China via Naval blockade of food and oil this is not just a theory but a move used in many other previous wars and most recently WW2

Hitler was cut of from the Middle east in Africa campaigns by the allies and starved of resources for his war machine the same would be done to the likes of Russia & China in this theoretical war, Russia & China would be boxed in and battered repeatedly

At the same time BOTH Russia & China would need to out produce the US & NATO in the war effort, and would also need to make up the odds of 10/1 in the early hours of this theoretical war

I think you lot are all dreamers personally, none of you understand just how vast the US/NATO's military combined is or any of the tactic that would be used... which ever way you look at this theoretical war, Russia and or China fail

The U.K has no reason to attack Syria so its a good thing we scrapped our navy,the yanks cant pull the WW2 card and drag us into wars that we have no business been in.drag Germany and France and Poland into the war for a change why do they always get to sit back and do nothing.

Originally posted by Alternative4u
It looks as if America has the idea that Russia has no reason to be within the Middle East today, so America is going to remove there last friend from that part of the world. The thing is America may not get it right, so it could be quite a costly war if things go wrong, remember the UK have no Navy to back up America today, and even some USA forces personal are saying they are well in danger if things go bad and Russia do back Syria in war.

www.worldwar3news.com...

Also you need to get your facts right on this

The US is not trying to remove anybody in Syria

Syria opposition is

If you was more concern with facts other than hating the US/West you'll find out that Syria is a Civil war between Sunni & Shia Muslims

Assads government is a "minority in power" the rest of the country "majority" are Sunni Muslims



Russia Funds the ruling minority along with Iran

Saudis & Qatar support the Sunni majority being Sunni Muslim states who buy BILLIONS in arms per year from western countries

Now go work it out

Originally posted by SupersonicSerpent
The U.K has no reason to attack Syria so its a good thing we scrapped our navy,the yanks cant pull the WW2 card and drag us into wars that we have no business been in.drag Germany and France and Poland into the war for a change why do they always get to sit back and do nothing.

No i agree...

The world should just sit back and let Syria burn, Assad & Russia created this mess

Russia should step in and act as peace keeper

But instead is funding and arming the ruling minority so it can keep its minority puppet

On the other hand Saudis, Qatar and other Sunni ME states are backing the Sunni majority

All the West is doing is pondering on making a #load of money supplying the Syrian majority with arms to even the fight,

reply to post by Alternative4u


I'm just wondering with others, what your logic is in saying the UK has no Naval power capable of supporting US efforts just about anywhere in the world? The US has more power ..but look what we've done to our nation to accomplish that, too? The trade off hasn't been worth it in my personal opinion. Still..... England without a capable and very effective Navy is unthinkable. It's like England without the Royals. It's pretty well defined England in important ways for it's entire history.

Originally posted by boymonkey74
I just don't think the US public will stand for another war in the middle east, I really think the people know that this has nothing to do with them.

The US Public will stand and allow for another war. The public has been told that we're all being spied on, and no one cares. Watch and see, when the bombs fall in Syria, no one here will raise a finger.

The only time that the peons of my country get riled up when it is a stupid issue of skin color.

When the bottom falls out, we all deserve the hell that awaits.

Originally posted by Shiloh7
China and Russia may not want a war particularly but the Chinese have the ships, technology and the Russians have the experience.

Not that I'm advocating war, I'm not! But, what experience does Russia have? When was the last time their troops actually fought? When was the last time China field tested their combat equipment? From what recent history has shown Russia has fought in Georgia and previous to that Afghanistan. Not exactly grand examples of their 'Experience' China hasn't fought a fully modern military in decades. Their incursion into Vietnam back in 1979 didn't go over all that well. Korea was a fine example of what not to do.

Those are legitimate questions.

reply to post by TritonTaranis

well Russia considers Syria a strategic point for itself against west, it is true.
Iran considers Syria a strategic point for itself against Israel, it is true.
but lets face it directly. the battle in Syria is just in favor of Israel. again everything just ends with Israel.
moreover Assad and his family, they are Alawite not Shia and the oppositions are Wahabist or radical salafists not Sunni. Islam has many sects !
I just want to insist that the battle of Syria is just a fake revolution. or better to say a hard overthrowing. there are some political exchanges rather than religion or democracy, or ..........
there are some facts which shows the battle of Syria is neither a pro_democracy war nor a religion war.
1- arab monarchies who are funding terrorists they are not democratic, and they are suppressing their own people.
2- after the coup of Egypt, now those arab monarchies are funding the new government of Egypt which is saying that it is not after any intervention in Syria explicitly, while Muslim brotherhood (the government before the coup of Egypt) had Salafist roots and it was near the opposition of Syria.
3- as I said before there is no Shia government in Syria. and the opposition is not Sunni. actually, those who eat human, they are not followers of monotheistic religions !

anyhow Israel loves to overthrow Assad government but not with a democratic manner, because people will not vote for the radical oppositions, they will not vote for a government worse than Assad ! and they will not vote for arab monarchies. moreover people of Syria and Egypt regard Israel as an occupier because some parts of Syria is occupied by Israel.
any democratic government will not fulfill the needs of Israel. maybe Israel prefers just to tolerate more moderate governments.

reply to post by SLAYER69

what experience does Russia have? When was the last time their troops actually fought?

Well Russia did have the conflict in south Ossetia and they have been invovled in conflicts in Chechnya in addition to a number of CT operations so they do have some experiance but not quite on par with the decade worth of fighting that American troops have had in since 9/11.

I do know what you mean though the idea that Russia could possibly defeat the combined might of the USA and UK is a bit of a joke.

Like i have said above the OP has some kind of odd facination with the idea of a new world war all because of Syira with UK USA Russia and China all fighting against each other.

reply to post by Alternative4u


So, serious question here....

How in God's name does the Navy reducing their Gulf presence to one carrier, and having the Kearsarge and San Antonio in the region as a backup, and saying that they won't have much in the way of a surge force if necessary, equate to "Russia doesn't deserve to be in that region, and we want to attack Syria soon"? Seriously. Please explain that. Did you both to READ the article, and if you did, did you bother to UNDERSTAND the article?

Oh wait, it's that they mention Syria one time in it, isn't it. Since they mentioned Syria, that means the US is ready to attack on a moments notice.

reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin


1.6 Billion citizens would keep China's military busy.

I wish all parties involved [Iran, Russia, The Sauds, NATO the US and her Allies etc] would keep their noses out the Syrian issue. But one camp here seems to be frothing at the mouth for WW-III not realizing if WW-III really did in fact break out then their little angry myopic worlds of sitting safely behind their screens advocating a full on global conflict while championing one side over the other would come to a conflagrational end.