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.

 

Military strikes on Syria 'as early as Thursday,' US officials say

page: 5
21
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 01:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


So your quite confident then that this won't spark into something much bigger?




posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 01:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by muse7

This feels like we're living under the Bush administration all over again. We're about to attack a country based on some "evidence" no one has seen.


worldnews.nbcnews.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



This is John Kerry reporting live from Skull & Bones.

What else could that change in Obama administration mean ?
edit on 27-8-2013 by mideast because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 01:58 PM
link   
reply to post by Senduko
 


I'm fairly confident. I'd give it a 70-75% of staying within Syria, and less than 10% of blowing up into something huge (worldwide).



posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 01:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


Goodnight sleep here i come lol! thanks, Yesterday you seemed a bit more worried lol.



posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 02:00 PM
link   
reply to post by Senduko
 


Yeah, I was, because of all the tankers already in the region (I found a pic of one base last year that had 13 KC-10s already there), but having talked to some of my buddies, and some other sources about it, it makes more sense and doesn't seem to be as bad as originally thought.



posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 03:09 PM
link   
Gotta love how the US media and many citizens love the idea of the war machine cranking up. It's really sad since the proof has been a statement of there is 'very little doubt'.



posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 03:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Senduko
 


Now that I have a few minutes more than I did earlier, I sat down and did the math. If they were to launch all 18 tankers at once, at what used to be maxed out at 180,000 lbs of fuel, that's 3.2 million pounds of fuel (474,000+ gallons of fuel. Even if they only launched 9-10 at a time, that's over 1 million pounds of fuel in a sortie. That's a lot of fuel to be moving around. Now if you add all the tankers that are already over there into the mix (which is what I was doing yesterday before I talked to my buddy), then you're looking at probably an additional 40-50 tankers minimum that are available (looking at just two of the bases in the region on Google Earth, I counted 13 KC-10s, and another 15-20 KC-135s). If those were to be added into the mix, you're looking at massive air strikes, the likes of Iraq or even bigger.

That's why I was so nervous yesterday.



posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 04:27 PM
link   
reply to post by camaro68ss
 





HUGE BLUFF?

Who in there right mind would warn and give the exact date on when they would strick?


Your right, it would be really stupid to leak we are going to attack on "X" day or even around "X" days. Obama doesn't want to attack at all. I think he's secretly trying to get the french and Brits to do it and we will back them up with support stuff ala Libya. It also could be they put out the news we are going to attack as a way of measuring public reaction. Like licking the finger and putting it in the air. Who knows with this bunch.


V



posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 04:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Variable
 



I've heard different dated reports on here some saying yesterday was the date for strikes, then within a dew hours to 2 weeks now to Thursday.

I'd say an offensive will take place when they decide without a given date. It could be in the next hour or next week.



posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 04:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Variable
 



[ It also could be they put out the news we are going to attack as a way of measuring public reaction.


Nope... I think it's more like advertising for sweeps week.

Can't be another made-for-TV event without proper advertising.



posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 04:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zarniwoop
reply to post by Variable
 



[ It also could be they put out the news we are going to attack as a way of measuring public reaction.


Nope... I think it's more like advertising for sweeps week.

Can't be another made-for-TV event without proper advertising.



They don't care what the general public think.

CNN needs the lead to get reporters ready to broadcast 24/7.



posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 04:37 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


Thats going to be a lot of Airstrikes BIG airstrikes.

Is this the US alone or with UK and France involved ?

This isn't panning out good as I;m nervous of the rhetoric coming out of Iran and threatening Israe could beef things up with they didl.


and the airstrikes are supposed to be surgical strikes in israel.



posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 04:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Variable
reply to post by camaro68ss
 





HUGE BLUFF?

Who in there right mind would warn and give the exact date on when they would strick?


Your right, it would be really stupid to leak we are going to attack on "X" day or even around "X" days. Obama doesn't want to attack at all. I think he's secretly trying to get the french and Brits to do it and we will back them up with support stuff ala Libya. It also could be they put out the news we are going to attack as a way of measuring public reaction. Like licking the finger and putting it in the air. Who knows with this bunch.


V


With Syria it doesn't matter if the attack is pre announced to the minute. The targets are known, tracked, cannot hide. The reaction of Syria is what will matter. If the strike is not big enough and leaves him room to launch strikes on Israel, then it is going to be an all out war of annihilation that won't end until Assad ends up like Hussein or Gaddafi. If he is crippled, Assad might take the permanent vacation in Venezuela that none of the other dictators before him optioned on. Or maybe he can bunk with Snowden up in Russia.



posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 04:37 PM
link   
I'm hearing Thursday at the earliest. There are four Arleigh Burkes off the coast, a couple of subs in the area, the tankers are in place, and the C3I assets are already over there, along with a number of strike assets not counting bombers from the US heading over and back.



posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 04:39 PM
link   
reply to post by deviant300
 


Most likely you're looking at SEAD missions and B-2s as the primary strikes to kick things off. Followed by strikes by allies and missiles. But the US is going to have to take the lead to kick the door down I think.



posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 05:56 PM
link   
I am glad we tell people when we are going to start shooting at them, Maybe we should send them a map and let them know exactly which building we will be bombing also so they have enough warning.



posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 06:09 PM
link   
reply to post by mwood
 



Maybe we should send them a map and let them know exactly which building we will be bombing also so they have enough warning.


I think they know which buildings we will be going after. It's the ones with all the blowy-up things.

I'd be surprised if they were not moving women and children near them as we speak.



posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 06:20 PM
link   
I would hate to be on duty at a SAM site in Syria in the upcoming weeks.



posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 06:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by FlySolo
reply to post by Dreine
 





Sure, we'll all get up in arms about Miley Cyrus, but about something that actually matters?


You know, I had a strange sense of deja vu when I read that. Can anyone else from remember from the top of your head what all the past silly celebrity distractions were?


Brittany Spears' "performance" on the VMA's was a big distraction right before 9/11. It was the one where she was dancing with a huge live snake wrapped around her neck.



posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 07:00 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


Well I though the US would boot the door down first and make the mess.

Even though the British Army is small and tactical we're a very capable force and a force to be reckoned with too as much as the US.

I'm just worried about the rapid response will be from Syria whether they will put them Warship Busters to use that they got from Big Bro Russia.

Not forgetting they have a fleet of Russians over there as we speak.

And whether Iran will play the hell fire card they suppose



new topics

top topics



 
21
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join