Syria

felter · Post by **felter** » Mon, 9. Apr 18, 04:20

So the Assad has once again attacked the rebels using gas, this has upset more than a few people and rightly so. Right now it is being reported that there has been a missile attack on the Tayfur airport. No one knows anything about it and currently no one is taking responsibility for it. The Reuters news agency are reporting that a senior US official has said there is no truth to reports that the US carried out strikes against government bases in Syria.

SO who has attacked the Syrians? that is the question.

muppetts · Post by **muppetts** » Mon, 9. Apr 18, 10:45

Not sure it really matters at this point, everyone deny, everyone point fingers, UN issues STRONG worded statement, life goes on. This will drag on until the complete genocide of the non assad people is complete and then that will be that.

Len5 · Post by **Len5** » Mon, 9. Apr 18, 12:00

It's hard to do anything about it. Assad can pretty much do whatever he likes.
Russia supports the regime, because the naval base gives Putin a connection to the Mediterranean and he wants to keep selling weapons to Assad.
Turkey, a NATO partner, supports the regime, because Erdogan wants to kill the Kurds.
Iran supports the regime, because they want military bases near Israel to attack the Jews.

ISIS wants to start the end of days in Syria with a world war. Apparently some holy scriptures say it's supposed to go down there. They might get what they want.

Chips · Post by **Chips** » Mon, 9. Apr 18, 14:55

Israel on the airport; they never really admit attacks but they've attacked the same one before.

From memory, many people on here said there's no evidence about the previous Assad/Chemical weapons, or no evidence it was the Syrians. "Could be Isis or rebels" etc.

Just a wait and see what happens, don't see there's much to talk about tbh. Am sure it'll be updated/reported heavily to keep abreast and once more is known various actors will take some form of action.

Morkonan · Post by **Morkonan** » Mon, 9. Apr 18, 18:13

Len5 wrote:It's hard to do anything about it. Assad can pretty much do whatever he likes.
Russia supports the regime, because the naval base gives Putin a connection to the Mediterranean and he wants to keep selling weapons to Assad.
Turkey, a NATO partner, supports the regime, because Erdogan wants to kill the Kurds.
Iran supports the regime, because they want military bases near Israel to attack the Jews.

ISIS wants to start the end of days in Syria with a world war. Apparently some holy scriptures say it's supposed to go down there. They might get what they want.

/agree

Though, I will add that Iran supports Syria because it's their only other ally in the region.

greypanther · Post by **greypanther** » Tue, 10. Apr 18, 20:00

Almost reads like a film script doesn't it? Just how far will Trump go to deflect news away from being all about him?

Oh wait there has been a film already made, from 1984 with a very similar storyline. Threads.

Surely both him and Putin will sort this out without any real escalation, both are sane really...

Post by **Terre** » Tue, 10. Apr 18, 20:04

greypanther wrote:Well the BBC claim that the Pentagon has released a video of them launching cruise missiles at the airfield.

Article is dated 07 Apr 2017

greypanther · Post by **greypanther** » Tue, 10. Apr 18, 20:27

That will teach me to be more observant. Sorry about that.

Now edited to remove the offending article, though I doubt it will be long before such is launched again, probably from the British and French too.

clakclak · Post by **clakclak** » Tue, 10. Apr 18, 23:26

muppetts wrote:Not sure it really matters at this point, everyone deny, everyone point fingers, UN issues STRONG worded statement, life goes on. This will drag on until the complete genocide of the non assad people is complete and then that will be that.

The UN can hardly do anything as long as Russia and the US are members of the security council. They more or less control the UN and stop anything they do not like from coming to pass. Seing how the US was simply able to block a third party investigation into the recent deaths that that occured during the clashes between Israel and Palestine, the system (of having a supreme security council) seems to be massivly flawed.

felter · Post by **felter** » Wed, 11. Apr 18, 00:46

It is a shame and an embarrassment when the consensus is that there is nothing we can do about it, that we should just sit back and watch and let it happen.

Morkonan · Post by **Morkonan** » Wed, 11. Apr 18, 04:55

clakclak wrote:
muppetts wrote:Not sure it really matters at this point, everyone deny, everyone point fingers, UN issues STRONG worded statement, life goes on. This will drag on until the complete genocide of the non assad people is complete and then that will be that.
The UN can hardly do anything as long as Russia and the US are members of the security council. They more or less control the UN and stop anything they do not like from coming to pass. Seing how the US was simply able to block a third party investigation into the recent deaths that that occured during the clashes between Israel and Palestine, the system (of having a supreme security council) seems to be massivly flawed.

And, Russia just blocked a resolution that there should be an independent investigation of the use of chemical weapons in Syria.

felter wrote:It is a shame and an embarrassment when the consensus is that there is nothing we can do about it, that we should just sit back and watch and let it happen.

There are only three alternatives:

Assad agrees to more representation in power sharing and agrees to not seek re-election.

Assad abdicates and a new government is formed.

Open war with Syria, possibly leading to a conflict between the United States and Russia. (Don't forget Israel, Iran and Turkey, either...)

Of course, the alternative of "just watching the deathfest" is the most likely until Assad runs out of bullets or everyone runs out of people to kill.

It's a fooked-up mess that should have been taken care of as soon as open hostilities began. The US should NEVER have gotten involved like it has. NEVER. But, some moron thought it would be a good idea... I really don't know how some people get to the point where they have the power to set or recommend policy like that. WTF?

greypanther · Post by **greypanther** » Wed, 11. Apr 18, 10:20

According to the BBC, ( from only an hour ago,

) the Russians have warned, the Americans against military action.

Russia has urged the US to avoid taking military action in response to an alleged chemical attack in Syria.

"I would once again beseech you to refrain from the plans that you're currently developing," Moscow's UN envoy Vasily Nebenzia said on Tuesday.

He warned Washington that it will "bear responsibility" for any "illegal military adventure" it carries out.

But Western leaders say they have agreed to work together to target those responsible for the attack in Douma.

French President Emmanuel Macron said any strikes would target Syrian government chemical facilities.

US President Donald Trump has promised a "forceful" response, and he and his Defence Secretary, James Mattis, have cancelled travel plans this week.
.......
Mr Nebenzia accused the US of "planting this resolution" as a "pretext" to justify military action.

"We could find ourselves on the threshold of some very sad and serious events," he said.
.......
Several senior Russian figures have warned of a Russian response to a US attack. Alexander Zasypkin, Moscow's ambassador to Lebanon, is the latest, repeating a warning by the head of the military that missiles would be shot down and their launch sites targeted.

So how long before missiles, or air strikes are launched? Can Macron and May restrain Trump at all? The chance for rapid and dreadful escalation is huge.

mrbadger · Post by **mrbadger** » Wed, 11. Apr 18, 11:03

Trump desperatelly needs a non domestic distraction. He doesn't care about the Syrians at all.
What he cares about is getting the news headlines off him.

He can't *lauch an offensive* against Syria, because who would it be against? There is no single place to attack that would stop the war. There hasn't been for a long time.

The risk of killing Russians would be too high, and he loves Russia to an extent worrying for a US president. To an extent worrying for a leader of any soveriegn nation if I'm honest.

The most he can do is bluster, try to create some headlines, then accept the futility of military intervention let diplomats do their thing.

Only not US diplomats, because he fired all of the ones working for Obama and still hasn't replaced the majority of them I beleive.

greypanther · Post by **greypanther** » Wed, 11. Apr 18, 11:31

From what I have read the targets will be Syrian airfields and the like, where they think the chemical strikes came from. As you say he doesn't care, just needs to be seen as doing something to deflect attention away. Problem is the Russians say they will shoot down the missiles and attack the missile launch sites.

How will Trump react if the Russians do as they say and sink an American ship?

mrbadger · Post by **mrbadger** » Wed, 11. Apr 18, 12:57

greypanther wrote: How will Trump react if the Russians do as they say and sink an American ship?

With private delight and public anger.

Bishop149 · Post by **Bishop149** » Wed, 11. Apr 18, 13:03

greypanther wrote:How will Trump react if the Russians do as they say and sink an American ship?

Russia sure are making a hell of a threat, promising to destroy the source of any missiles launched.

If it wasn't for this I'd say that Trump will do what he did last time.
Pick a single target they have intelligence might have been involved with the incident, flatten it with a missile strike. Sit back looking smug as say "Look I DID something about it. . . . now lets all quietly forget all about it again."

In the face of that threat however, I'm not sure the US would risk it. . . . . Trump would but he's an idiot and thankfully not really in charge of such decisions.

clakclak · Post by **clakclak** » Wed, 11. Apr 18, 13:14

Morkonan wrote:
clakclak wrote:
muppetts wrote:Not sure it really matters at this point, everyone deny, everyone point fingers, UN issues STRONG worded statement, life goes on. This will drag on until the complete genocide of the non assad people is complete and then that will be that.
The UN can hardly do anything as long as Russia and the US are members of the security council. They more or less control the UN and stop anything they do not like from coming to pass. Seing how the US was simply able to block a third party investigation into the recent deaths that that occured during the clashes between Israel and Palestine, the system (of having a supreme security council) seems to be massivly flawed.
And, Russia just blocked a resolution that there should be an independent investigation of the use of chemical weapons in Syria.[...]

Yep, brilliant system.

greypanther · Post by **greypanther** » Wed, 11. Apr 18, 14:43

Bishop149 wrote: I'd say that Trump will do what he did last time.
Pick a single target they have intelligence might have been involved with the incident, flatten it with a missile strike.

Except from what I read about that he did not flatten anything in reality, things were up and running pretty much immediately. He did not even deny the use of the runway!

But yes, fair point.

Edit: Update, according to the BBC, Trump has warned Russia to get ready for inbound missiles.

US President Donald Trump has tweeted that Russia should "get ready" for missiles to be fired into Syria, in response to an alleged chemical attack at the weekend.

Senior Russian figures had threatened to meet any US strikes with a response.

Mr Trump had promised a "forceful" reply to the suspected attack.

President Bashar al-Assad's government, which receives military backing from Russia, denies being behind any chemical attack.

In his tweet, Mr Trump called Mr Assad a "gas killing animal".

Trump tweeted:

Russia vows to shoot down any and all missiles fired at Syria. Get ready Russia, because they will be coming, nice and new and “smart!” You shouldn’t be partners with a Gas Killing Animal who kills his people and enjoys it!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) April 11, 2018

**** me, who needs diplomats when you have twitter!
I hope Putin does not react as his rhetoric suggests.

greypanther · Post by **greypanther** » Wed, 11. Apr 18, 14:53

greypanther wrote:
Bishop149 wrote: I'd say that Trump will do what he did last time.
Pick a single target they have intelligence might have been involved with the incident, flatten it with a missile strike.
Except from what I read about that he did not flatten anything in reality, things were up and running pretty much immediately. He did not even deny the use of the runway!

But yes, fair point.

Edit: Update, according to the BBC, Trump has warned Russia to get ready for inbound missiles.

US President Donald Trump has tweeted that Russia should "get ready" for missiles to be fired into Syria, in response to an alleged chemical attack at the weekend.

Senior Russian figures had threatened to meet any US strikes with a response.

Mr Trump had promised a "forceful" reply to the suspected attack.

President Bashar al-Assad's government, which receives military backing from Russia, denies being behind any chemical attack.

In his tweet, Mr Trump called Mr Assad a "gas killing animal".
Trump tweeted:
Russia vows to shoot down any and all missiles fired at Syria. Get ready Russia, because they will be coming, nice and new and “smart!” You shouldn’t be partners with a Gas Killing Animal who kills his people and enjoys it!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) April 11, 2018
**** me, who needs diplomats when you have twitter!
I hope Putin does not react as his rhetoric suggests.

I imagine the crew of the USS Donald Cook may be a little twitchy around about now...

Bishop149 · Post by **Bishop149** » Wed, 11. Apr 18, 15:45

greypanther wrote:I hope Putin does not react as his rhetoric suggests.

I imagine the crew of the USS Donald Cook may be a little twitchy around about now...

I'm no expert on Russian politics but from what I've seen, Putin's popularity seems built on his image as an international strongman viciously defending and expanding Russia's interests.
This doesn't make him seem like the type to make an idle threat as he might suffer significant political damage if he then fails to follow through.

egosoft.com

egosoft.com

Syria

Syria