Just Breaking on CNN, Strike on Syria Within Hours Without Congressional Approval

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by Xcathdra

 

There's quite a bit to show the attack is imminent, if you know where to look. There are moves that have been made recently that are generally only done when something is close. They just moved a substantial tanker force to the region, and not near any of our other bases, but close to Syria. The E-4B just landed in Turkey today, they don't just fly them around to other countries for no reason, as there are only 4 of them. If you know where you're looking, and what you're looking at the evidence is there.

They did the same when Iran pulled their Sharks and Jets routine over closing the straights.

Pre Positioning is not the same as going to war.

reply to post by Xcathdra


They don't send a large number of tankers to preposition unless something is going to happen. They don't send an E-4 to preposition unless something is going to happen. When Iran threatened to close the straits, they didn't send 18 KC-135s to the area, minus any kind of strike aircraft. They didn't send an E-4 to Turkey. I know what prepositioning is, and I know what getting ready for a strike it. This is not prepositioning.

reply to post by victor7


I have to agree with your statement. If Syria should respond with chemical weapons, it's game over. I truly fear that this will somehow escalate to a nuclear attack on Damascus.

It's only going to get a hell of a lot uglier before it's all said and done.

I hope cooler heads prevail in the coming weeks.

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by Xcathdra

 

They don't send a large number of tankers to preposition unless something is going to happen. They don't send an E-4 to preposition unless something is going to happen. When Iran threatened to close the straits, they didn't send 18 KC-135s to the area, minus any kind of strike aircraft. They didn't send an E-4 to Turkey. I know what prepositioning is, and I know what getting ready for a strike it. This is not prepositioning.

As a matter of fact they did.. They also deployed B-2's to Diego Garcia in addition to deploying Stealth fighters to the region. Not to mention they deployed several aircraft carriers to the region, and actually delayed the return of one aircraft carrier to its home port.

Pre positioning does not equate into military action. The concept of prepositioning is to have assets in placed on the off chance hostilities start.

reply to post by Xcathdra


No, when Iran threatened to close the gulf they already had tankers in the area that they used, as well as the air bridge through Mildenhall. They also didn't send the E-4 over there. Again, I'm aware of prepositioning, and this is more than that.

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by Xcathdra

 

No, when Iran threatened to close the gulf they already had tankers in the area that they used, as well as the air bridge through Mildenhall. They also didn't send the E-4 over there. Again, I'm aware of prepositioning, and this is more than that.

Being there are only 4 in existence its understandable.. Since they are used specifically for the NCA there would not have been a reason to deploy one.

** You are correct one was not deployed with Irans threats - my mistake **

reply to post by Xcathdra


They are not only used for the NCA mission. That is their primary mission, but they're also used as command and control aircraft if there is a strike going on. Being as there are only four in existence, they don't just fly around the world for no reason.

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by Xcathdra

 

They are not only used for the NCA mission. That is their primary mission, but they're also used as command and control aircraft if there is a strike going on. Being as there are only four in existence, they don't just fly around the world for no reason.

Pre positioning does not equate into imminent hostile action. Advanced command and control aircraft are present on ground bases in addition to similar platforms on our aircraft carriers. A limited airstrike / naval strike is not going to need advanced command and control.

Originally posted by Xcathdra

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by Xcathdra

 

They are not only used for the NCA mission. That is their primary mission, but they're also used as command and control aircraft if there is a strike going on. Being as there are only four in existence, they don't just fly around the world for no reason.

Pre positioning does not equate into imminent hostile action. Advanced command and control aircraft are present on ground bases in addition to similar platforms on our aircraft carriers. A limited airstrike / naval strike is not going to need advanced command and control.

Syria possesses an advanced air defence system. Command and control would be an outright necessity to coordinate an effective attack through that defense curtain.

reply to post by Xcathdra


There are already command and control units in the area. There are a number of E-3s, E-8s, and other aircraft in the area. If all they needed was regular command and control they'd use those. You don't fly an E-4 in for no reason.

I will be making a major thread on the supposed alleged CW attack in Damascus.

reply to post by IamAbeliever
The only way cooler heads will prevail is if The Figurehead's handlers are happy with his poll numbers.If not expect more strikes and fear mongering.

Originally posted by clay2 baraka

Originally posted by Xcathdra

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by Xcathdra

 

They are not only used for the NCA mission. That is their primary mission, but they're also used as command and control aircraft if there is a strike going on. Being as there are only four in existence, they don't just fly around the world for no reason.

Pre positioning does not equate into imminent hostile action. Advanced command and control aircraft are present on ground bases in addition to similar platforms on our aircraft carriers. A limited airstrike / naval strike is not going to need advanced command and control.

Syria possesses an advanced air defence system. Command and control would be an outright necessity to coordinate an effective attack through that defense curtain.

Even S-300s cannot stop the F-22s from unleashing their weapons load 200km away. I think S-300s can only detect and track F-22s from 60km distance.

Syria does not have S-300s. So its advanced air defense is advanced only for the neighbors not the USAF.

USAF modus operendi is
1) Cruise missile attacks on radars, air defense, missiles, air hangers etc.
2) Stealth Bombers B2s do another few runs.
3) Main items like S-200s and similar goodies taken out will open the skies for F-15/16/18s to start bombing from 15,000 feet.
4) In two weeks enough degrading of enemy air war assets has occured.
5) Theatre is clear to attack ground army assets like tanks, APCs, artillery etc.

Pro's like Zaphods should comment and fine tune the points........hopefully!

Btw, Wikipedia reports Syrians have few Buk-M1 missiles, so they can cause some problems initially, but it is mostly point defense i.e. 30km range although rises upto 45,000 feet.

The posts on here are such BS! The US admin has even come out and said this evening that the attack would only last a few hours and just be lobbing missles. You guys on here act like they are gearing up for WWIII!!!!

reply to post by victor7


The S300 question is an interesting one. Some reports say that Russia never sent them to Syria, some say they did. I personally would gamble on them being there, and plan for the worst, just in case.

As for the doctrine, even if they only had S200s, those would be effective against Tomahawk strikes, as well as the other systems the Syrian military has in place. That's one reason that I think we'll see some SEAD strikes to kick the door open, followed by JASSM and JDAM use. JASSM is a semi-stealthy cruise missile that gives them plenty of stand off range, while at the same time being able to get past defenses that would take out a normal cruise missile.

reply to post by Zaphod58


Problem with S-200 is it is stationary missile and unlike S-300 not mobile so it is a sitting duck. Even if protected by Buk or Pantsir point defense deals, a swarm of cruise missiles will get to it soon. Not to forget the ruthless jamming etc. as you mentioned.

Won't take more than one or two days for USAF to start sending F series non stealthy jets to do the main work.

reply to post by princeofpeace


I don't think they're gearing up for WWIII at all, but I also don't think they're going to come out and say "this is our plan" and announce it. I think that we're going to see more than just a few hours of missile strikes, but less than a full up all out attack.

reply to post by victor7


Oh, I wasn't saying that they wouldn't have them hammered out within a few days, just that they have to take out the air defenses first, before they try to send the Tomahawks in, because they're just too vulnerable, even against older systems like the S200. And if they do have the S300, they'll get swatted even more.

Originally posted by princeofpeace
The posts on here are such BS! The US admin has even come out and said this evening that the attack would only last a few hours and just be lobbing missles. You guys on here act like they are gearing up for WWIII!!!!

It seems as if it could be a quick get in and get out thing but it also might not be. The US is not anticipating returned fire or worse with this assessment I assume. I also doubt they would tell us their strategy. If they're saying this that is really stupid as military ops should be classified. Why don't they also give the date and hour they plan to begin the attacks.

There is a small possibility this could escalate into something far bigger. It won't be known until it happens without intelligence on Syrias plans, and if plans are in the works for Iran. Will Israel be attacked as a retaliatory thing as an example? IMO it has the potential to grow into something much bigger.

S-300? That is laughable!!! That is NOTHING. Israel has had countermeasures to that thing for a while and if tyhey do then most certainlky the US does.

Put another way: The US knows they have them, the US doesnt care. Must mean to mea that the US knows their ordinance will make it through regardless.