Would Assad's Best Option be to Attack First?

page: 2
4
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 12:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan
He has no 'best option'. Syria is to be the battleground for WWIII. Everyone around the world is involved. Syria. Russia. China. USA. France. UK. Saudi Arabia. Egypt. Iran. Muslim Brotherhood. Etc etc. There is no 'best option' ... it's all going to blow up ..... and it's going to be a mess no matter what he does.


FF, I think you are accurate in this assessment. But describing the Apocalypse as a "mess" seems a bit optimistic!!




posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 12:54 PM
link   
Unconfirmed reports of Russia moving its ships within missile range of Saudi Arabia are coming in. Umm, sorry, but if that is true, holy crap. Brilliant chess move. Touch Syria and bye bye Saudi. Two major effects with that- collapse US economy- and make his oil reserves worth a fortune.

Jesus. I gotta go- someone track that down please.



posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 01:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by TrueAmerican
reply to post by MrSpad
 


Yeah well a lot of that might depend on just how far Putin might go covertly. While presenting a public facade of "hands off," he still could provide Syria with satellite intelligence as to NATO fleet and ground positions. And also, so might Iran. Lord only knows what the hell is taking place behind the scenes right now. Even all the way to a shocking headline:

"Russia shocks the world and destroys most of the US fleet with nuclear weapons!!! - Threatens more if the US continues its meddling in its interests"

After all, their methodology has long been known to not invest much more in conventional weaponry. Just nuke em and be done with it. If that happened, I would not be all that surprised.
edit on Tue Aug 27th 2013 by TrueAmerican because: (no reason given)


Russias only interest in Syria is profit. Russia will sell Syria whatever it can afford and that is about it. Russia will use lip service and its UN veto to protect those sales. However, Russia has not done anything other than that. They have not left any treaties, they have not recalled their ambassador, they have not left NATOs PfP, they have not pulled out of the Russian NATO naval/air exercise in the fall, they have not stopped the joint NATO/Russian partnership and rebuilding the Afgan airforce etc. These would be very basic steps to let the US know it was serious about Syria. The idea Russia would start a nuclear war that would end Russia and the world for a nation they have not even bother to follow some basic diplomatic options to protect is laughable at best.



posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 01:17 PM
link   
reply to post by TrueAmerican
 


umm:
www.kavkazcenter.com...

Russia threatens to bomb Qatar and Saudi Arabia


A senior source in the Russian Air Force told to Moscow website Telegrafist that Russia had plans to bomb Qatar and Saudi Arabia.

He claims that the combat mission can be done by a unit of Su-27s, as well as by modern bombers Su-34s with extra fuel tanks, accompanied by the Su-27s.

"Today, the situation is such that even in case if the Su-34s do not have enough fuel to get out of Iran's airspace on return flight, they will be able to land right there", he said - "a combat radius of the Su-27s allows fly to the capital of Qatar and Saudi Arabia and return, the Su-34s do not have such radius".

On the question when and why these plans developed, the Russian Air Force officer replied:
"Saudi Arabia is a key US ally in the region, not Israel, as many suggest, namely the regime of King Abdullah who is willing to get involved where you want to please his masters, so of course the Soviet Union was preparing plans for the destruction of this regime because without it - Saudi Arabia will no longer be an integral state and Washington will get hordes of barbarians who destroy their bases by using the same US military hardware".

The Russians also claimed they needed no more than 24 hours for the entire operation to destroy the ruling circles of the two monarchies from the air.




Maybe the ship move reports are true... Dunno.
edit on Tue Aug 27th 2013 by TrueAmerican because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 01:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by maes2
reply to post by TrueAmerican
 

no never.
I am just thinking how Nethanyahu would let USA to attack Syria.
what if, just what if it becomes a domino against Israel.



And what if every one is dragged in.

What if a big earthquake shakes USA and they have to help their own people instead of invading another country.

And what if history of divine men is repeated. The history of the few people which could fight many fighters under the command of Talut.

Syrian people have not invaded any country , they are not like Iraqis. Their hands are clean. So few divine people in Syria can do the job. I mean Iraqis invaded Iran and they did horrible horrible things to Iranian people. I pray and every healthy heart should pray that this war doesn't start because it may be drag many countries.
edit on 27-8-2013 by mideast because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 01:30 PM
link   
dp
edit on 27-8-2013 by mideast because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 01:34 PM
link   
reply to post by camaro68ss
 
That is my thought as well. I mean why else would we give them 2-weeks notice or even a 2-day notice.

What's with the 2-week thing anyway, I think that was the standard when dealing with N. Korea too?



posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 01:47 PM
link   
reply to post by TrueAmerican
 


Pre-emptive attack - Syrian gov't may well decide to use the U.S. policy as their own, for the reasons you've cited.

They may be falsely accused of initiating hostilities against U.S. forces even if they chose not to respond militarily to a U.S. first strike, given the controlled U.S. media.

The ultimate consequences for Syria, and perhaps the whole world, are going to be terrible in any case of direct U.S./Syrian military confrontation.

A big question in my mind is how would we really know the truth anyway?

To answer your initial question, if in Syria's position, considering all, having certain capabilities, I would lean toward using U.S. policy (Pre-emptive attack) as my own.
edit on 27-8-2013 by WashingtonDeathCult because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 01:54 PM
link   
If I was Assad and I knew it was the enemy that used the chemical weapons to frame me I as Assad would launch a few chemical weapons at my ally Iran so they would think it was the rebels and confuse the hell out of everybody.



posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 02:02 PM
link   
No, as suggested his best option is to just take it.

He doesn't have the capacity to defeat or deter the USA and allies. His best plan is to just ride it out hoping that increased support from Iran / Russia can make up the damage before the rebels can capitalise.

Meanwhile, make good PR out of the civilians that the strikes will kill by mistake. Given that the majority of the population in western nations is opposed to this before it starts thats unlikely to improve Dave or Obamas popularity.



posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 02:57 PM
link   
reply to post by TrueAmerican
 


There is moral high ground if Assad just tries to keep things under control in Syria and presents the case that the chemical weapon attack was an opposition one, or possibly an unrelated Al Qaeda attack. The United States is going to attack him, I mean the U.S. is going to fall right into a trap,

If I were Assad, I suppose I would let the U.S. attack and at the exact same time send anti-ship missiles to destroy the fleet in the Mediterranean (I'm guessing) and do a coordinated ambush and attack with Iran.

Basically, I would wait until the U.S. struck without U.N. approval and then go all out. Seriously, what kind of troop presence does the U.S. have in the area that could stop that kind of counter-attack?

One thing I would probably not do is not counter-attack. If we are simply talking about tactics here, there should be enough between Syria and Iran to win this particular battle
edit on 27-8-2013 by darkbake because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 04:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by darkbake
reply to post by TrueAmerican
 


There is moral high ground if Assad just tries to keep things under control in Syria and presents the case that the chemical weapon attack was an opposition one, or possibly an unrelated Al Qaeda attack. The United States is going to attack him, I mean the U.S. is going to fall right into a trap,

If I were Assad, I suppose I would let the U.S. attack and at the exact same time send anti-ship missiles to destroy the fleet in the Mediterranean (I'm guessing) and do a coordinated ambush and attack with Iran.

Basically, I would wait until the U.S. struck without U.N. approval and then go all out. Seriously, what kind of troop presence does the U.S. have in the area that could stop that kind of counter-attack?

One thing I would probably not do is not counter-attack. If we are simply talking about tactics here, there should be enough between Syria and Iran to win this particular battle
edit on 27-8-2013 by darkbake because: (no reason given)


The US does not have many troops in region outside of Kuwait but they do have allied Armys in Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, UAE, Qatar, Oman, Turkey, and Israel. Of course the fact what forces Assad has left are fully commited to keep him from being overun means the Syrians have nothing attack anybody with.



posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 04:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by TrueAmerican

"Russia shocks the world and destroys most of the US fleet with nuclear weapons!!! - Threatens more if the US continues its meddling in its interests"


You assume Russia's nuclear arsenal still works. Thats the thing about nukes ... they take a lot of time and money to keep in working order and Russia's nuclear arsenal has been critically underfunded and shorthanded for the last 25 years,



posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 04:40 PM
link   
reply to post by MrSpad
 


Thanks, I was hoping you might bring in some more information. What about if they used some Russian anti-ship missiles, or Russia had some ships? Or Iran? I'm not sure about actual troop counts in the region.



posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 04:50 PM
link   
reply to post by TrueAmerican
 




So what would YOU do if you were Assad, and knew you were about to be obliterated?


Starting from the idea that all would be lost and I would have no chance of victory I would dedicate my efforts in self preservation, preservation of command and control and valuable assets (I would have already cleared all my monetary investments as to avoid any attempt to freeze them, probably moving them into Russia, Iran and China). I would then wait for a way to return to power, even if using a puppet...

First I would move my main command and control OPs into Iran (and move there) it would be clear by now that if Syria is a stepping stone (I would also move most of the air-force there and military stockpiles and build the supply chain out of Iran as much as possible (including moving armament and training facilities out of Syria as much as possible). I would also start to accept recruits from Iran and other aligned forces as to bolster my efforts, heck I would even welcome an expeditionary force from North Korea, Indonesia as the conflict even more internationalized (in similar lines to how many nations permitted their citizens to participate in the Spanish civil war).

The next step would be moving civilian state infrastructures also into Iran, all ministries could be run from the there as to survive the dismantling of the Syrian state that would continue to be eroded.

I would place my military efforts in cutting the "mercenary terrorist" supply channels and infiltrate as much as possible those forces. I would even create a false faction to join the rebels.

Next I would make all the military material that I had no ready operational use into friendly forces across all boarders (Iraq, Kurds, Jordan and Lebanon) as to augment the area of conflict and make progress slower.

I would have long ago had established sleeper cells inside the nations that are supporting those mercenaries, terror attacks would focus not in killing civilians but in destroying economic interests especially oil and energy and communication targets (sea bed cables would be primary targets) and food and water production this last ones could be done cheaply and covertly. I would also try to make crossing the Suez and Panama canals also extremely risky...

Of course that beyond having to commit real atrocities this would all be for not in the long run, so having the choice I would probably just submit and get a good deal from the attackers. But this would not work against a Theocracy like Iran there will be utterly hell, remember those stories about volunteers for martyrdom in clearing mine-fields...



posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 08:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by darkbake
reply to post by MrSpad
 


Thanks, I was hoping you might bring in some more information. What about if they used some Russian anti-ship missiles, or Russia had some ships? Or Iran? I'm not sure about actual troop counts in the region.


Russia has two smaller warships in Med. The Russians have a few more ships in the black sea but, mostly old stuff and it would have to pass through NATO member Turkeys straights. So Russia naval influence is almost non existant. The Syrian Navy has also pretty much ceased to exist. Any missles will never be able to get in range. The Med is full of allied Navys from the US, France, UK, Italy, Turkey, Greece, Spain and other NATO allies. Irans navy is designed for two things costal defence and disrupting oil tankers with mines and small naval raids in the persian gulf. However the Gulf states along with NATO allies have forces in place to counter this.



posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 08:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by TrueAmerican

Originally posted by minkmouse
@TA...Yes, I would light the whole box of fireworks right about now if I were Assad!


Well I mean crap. If they framed me for supposedly using chemical weapons, when I didn't, then how about... Screw it! Time to use chemical weapons! And whatever else I've got. And the whole time I'd be on the phone with Putin, giving him a piece of my mind. Some ally.




I'm utterly surprised that no one has gone after the Israeli leadership and nuke facilities. Same thing with the US fleets/bases that are constantly engaged in "gunboat" diplomacy.

Every time you think the US "government" can't go any lower .......



posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 08:44 PM
link   
reply to post by TrueAmerican
 


If I were Assad, I would gather all my Spec-Ops guys and release them upon the world. Right along with all my spooks who could leave trails of deception pointing to all who have attacked my country.

But that's only if I were Assad.



posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 08:51 PM
link   
reply to post by TrueAmerican
 



If I were the war strategist I would recommend that he immediately call for inspectors from the UN led by Russia and China. The next thing I would tell him is to plead his governments right to exist and to quell civil insurrection that is killing many thousands of people, and to do it via international media.

I would suggest that he commit no aggression against Israel or US assets. After the attacks are done, I would seek aid from friends like Russia and China and Iran.

The best wars are fought with words and words alone.




edit on 27-8-2013 by Fromabove because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 27 2013 @ 09:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by TDawgRex
reply to post by TrueAmerican
 


If I were Assad, I would gather all my Spec-Ops guys and release them upon the world. Right along with all my spooks who could leave trails of deception pointing to all who have attacked my country.

But that's only if I were Assad.


The loyal troops he has needs to keep close. Most of his key guys desert as soon as they get out of the country. You would basicly be giving the rebels all you special ops guys.





new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join