Re: CBS News: Pentagon Preparing for Cruise Missile Attack on Syrian Government Forces

by Marconius Wed Aug 28, 2013 12:33 am

I don't trust the powers behind either side and don't put it past either of them to use gas on innocents. That is why we should stay out of it. We will get burned either way.

by Marconius Wed Aug 28, 2013 12:34 am

I am definately tired of seeing our boys go into crap storms.

by Dennis324 Wed Aug 28, 2013 12:35 am

Marconius wrote:And what if UN inspectors find out that the AQ rebels, that we have been supporting, are the ones who used the weapons???

That's what I'd like to know! I've been a little suspicious about this whole thing.

Basically the thing we are faced with is....do we want to side with Hitler or Stalin?

by **Bryant** Wed Aug 28, 2013 12:37 am

Marconius wrote:And what if UN inspectors find out that the AQ rebels, that we have been supporting, are the ones who used the weapons???

Is It Possible The Syrian Rebels (Not Assad) Used Chemical Weapons?

by Marconius Wed Aug 28, 2013 12:41 am

Bryant wrote:
Marconius wrote:And what if UN inspectors find out that the AQ rebels, that we have been supporting, are the ones who used the weapons???
Is It Possible The Syrian Rebels (Not Assad) Used Chemical Weapons?

Good article.

Next question(and you ain't gonna like it):

What about an outside agency trying to force our hand???

Hey, our three letter agencies have done some messed up stuff in the past.

by Dennis324 Wed Aug 28, 2013 12:43 am

Yeah, most everyone keeps saying 'we know the Syrian regime made these attacks'. But I've seen no evidence. Only speculation.

Look, they probably did make the attacks, but given that the other side is made up of liars, thieves and killers...why should I believe them either?

by Dennis324 Wed Aug 28, 2013 12:44 am

Marconius wrote:
Bryant wrote:
Marconius wrote:And what if UN inspectors find out that the AQ rebels, that we have been supporting, are the ones who used the weapons???
Is It Possible The Syrian Rebels (Not Assad) Used Chemical Weapons?
Good article.

Next question(and you ain't gonna like it):

What about an outside agency trying to force our hand???

Hey, our three letter agencies have done some messed up stuff in the past.

And outside agency like Iran maybe?

by Marconius Wed Aug 28, 2013 12:45 am

Dennis324 wrote:
Marconius wrote:
Bryant wrote:
Marconius wrote:And what if UN inspectors find out that the AQ rebels, that we have been supporting, are the ones who used the weapons???
Is It Possible The Syrian Rebels (Not Assad) Used Chemical Weapons?
Good article.

Next question(and you ain't gonna like it):

What about an outside agency trying to force our hand???

Hey, our three letter agencies have done some messed up stuff in the past.
And outside agency like Iran maybe?

Nope, many of our own three letter agencies(CIA) have done stuff outside the knowledge of our own government many times in the past.

Cue conspiracy music in.....3.....2.....1

by **Bryant** Wed Aug 28, 2013 12:50 am

Marconius wrote:
Bryant wrote:
Marconius wrote:And what if UN inspectors find out that the AQ rebels, that we have been supporting, are the ones who used the weapons???
Is It Possible The Syrian Rebels (Not Assad) Used Chemical Weapons?
Good article.

Next question(and you ain't gonna like it):

What about an outside agency trying to force our hand???

Hey, our three letter agencies have done some messed up stuff in the past.

Now there's some deep strategy!

by Marconius Wed Aug 28, 2013 12:54 am

Bryant wrote:
Marconius wrote:
Bryant wrote:
Marconius wrote:And what if UN inspectors find out that the AQ rebels, that we have been supporting, are the ones who used the weapons???
Is It Possible The Syrian Rebels (Not Assad) Used Chemical Weapons?
Good article.

Next question(and you ain't gonna like it):

What about an outside agency trying to force our hand???

Hey, our three letter agencies have done some messed up stuff in the past.
Now there's some deep strategy!

Well, it seems experts agree that neither side benefits from it. I can see the logic in both arguments. So if it makes no sense for either side, from a tactical perspective,some other explanation has to fit.

by Dennis324 Wed Aug 28, 2013 12:55 am

Oh man! Lets hope we didn't do this. What would be our motive?

by Dennis324 Wed Aug 28, 2013 12:58 am

Honestly I wondered if Al Qaida or the Syrian rebels (not much difference there) did this to try to draw us into the war. As I understand it, the attack site was in a region held largely by the rebels. Thus it would "look" like Assad did this. And he may have. I'm no fan of anyone over there. But its funny how shortly AFTER Obama said something about that red line, this gas attack happened. The rebels desperately want our aid and air power. Bad guys over there have no qualms about using our military might to achieve their goals. I suspect we are being played for fools.

by Dennis324 Wed Aug 28, 2013 1:02 am

I think if it were me, I would just make a statement saying that new intel leads us to believe that Assad may not be responsible. This would be a way to gracefully pull out of this escalating situation.

If asked about the intel, just say its classified. People will complain but let em. Obama doesn't seem to care about that.

by Marconius Wed Aug 28, 2013 1:02 am

Dennis324 wrote:Oh man! Lets hope we didn't do this. What would be our motive?

We may not have. Many have a reason to see us involved.

I'm just thinking out loud.

by Dennis324 Wed Aug 28, 2013 1:07 am

NEW YORK – Iranian and North Korean experts are directing an operations room for the Syrian army ahead of a possible showdown with Western powers, according to informed Middle Eastern security officials speaking to WND.

The Iranians and North Koreans, based inside Syria, are focusing their efforts on ensuring the viability of Syria’s air defense systems while maintaining the embattled country’s vast missile arsenal, the officials said.

The officials said Iran has gone so far as to pledge soldiers to Syria if such mercenaries are needed in a confrontation.

Russian military experts are also participating in the preparation efforts by advising the Syrian army, but Moscow has not met the expectations of Bashar al-Assad’s regime regarding the extent of their involvement, the officials said,

The Middle Eastern security officials further told WND they have information Iran failed to convince the Hamas command in the Gaza Strip to fire rockets into the Jewish state in the event of a Western attack on Syria.

The officials believe that if a Western attack against Damascus is surgical and is carried out without the goal of regime change, the Syrians may not retaliate against Israel.

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/08/iran-n-korea-run-operations-room-in-syria/#khAWz2iy3AgAiAEI.99

That's difficult to believe. Iran wants to get someone else to go to war with Israel. This may be all part of the plan. And if we attacked it would give them the perfect excuse to retaliate on Israel...our ally.

by **Bryant** Wed Aug 28, 2013 1:13 am

Marconius wrote:
Dennis324 wrote:Oh man! Lets hope we didn't do this. What would be our motive?
We may not have. Many have a reason to see us involved.

I'm just thinking out loud.

Lets run with this line of inquiry. Who would 1) want to and 2) be capable of it?

For us not to have seen it, I would think that the POI would have to be either in Syria or a neighbor. I don't know how easy it would be for a non-adjacent nation to get large volumes of toxic gasses and distribution system into the country, so that leaves us with neighbors. That would leave us with:

Turkey
Jordan
Iraq
Israel
Lebanon

I don't know how Turkey or Jordan, both pro-US and anti-Assad, would gain. I doubt Iraq has chemical weapons. Lebanon (Hezbollah) backs Assad, and thus would loose if we got involved (and I doubt they have chemical weapons). While I'm sure Israel would love for us to get involved, if they did this and it became public they'd loose all that US cash.

by **Bryant** Wed Aug 28, 2013 1:18 am

Dennis324 wrote:
NEW YORK – Iranian and North Korean experts are directing an operations room for the Syrian army ahead of a possible showdown with Western powers, according to informed Middle Eastern security officials speaking to WND.

The Iranians and North Koreans, based inside Syria, are focusing their efforts on ensuring the viability of Syria’s air defense systems while maintaining the embattled country’s vast missile arsenal, the officials said.

The officials said Iran has gone so far as to pledge soldiers to Syria if such mercenaries are needed in a confrontation.

Russian military experts are also participating in the preparation efforts by advising the Syrian army, but Moscow has not met the expectations of Bashar al-Assad’s regime regarding the extent of their involvement, the officials said,

The Middle Eastern security officials further told WND they have information Iran failed to convince the Hamas command in the Gaza Strip to fire rockets into the Jewish state in the event of a Western attack on Syria.

The officials believe that if a Western attack against Damascus is surgical and is carried out without the goal of regime change, the Syrians may not retaliate against Israel.

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/08/iran-n-korea-run-operations-room-in-syria/#khAWz2iy3AgAiAEI.99
That's difficult to believe. Iran wants to get someone else to go to war with Israel. This may be all part of the plan. And if we attacked it would give them the perfect excuse to retaliate on Israel...our ally.

How does this benefit Iran? If we go for regime change they loose their sole Mediterranean ally.

Why would Syria look to North Korea or Iran for military tips? North Korea hasn't fought a war since before their leader was born. Iran got its ass handed to it by Iraq in their last war. Syria has atl east fought numerous border skirmishes with Israel over the last couple decades...

by Dennis324 Wed Aug 28, 2013 1:42 am

Bryant wrote:
Dennis324 wrote:
NEW YORK – Iranian and North Korean experts are directing an operations room for the Syrian army ahead of a possible showdown with Western powers, according to informed Middle Eastern security officials speaking to WND.

The Iranians and North Koreans, based inside Syria, are focusing their efforts on ensuring the viability of Syria’s air defense systems while maintaining the embattled country’s vast missile arsenal, the officials said.

The officials said Iran has gone so far as to pledge soldiers to Syria if such mercenaries are needed in a confrontation.

Russian military experts are also participating in the preparation efforts by advising the Syrian army, but Moscow has not met the expectations of Bashar al-Assad’s regime regarding the extent of their involvement, the officials said,

The Middle Eastern security officials further told WND they have information Iran failed to convince the Hamas command in the Gaza Strip to fire rockets into the Jewish state in the event of a Western attack on Syria.

The officials believe that if a Western attack against Damascus is surgical and is carried out without the goal of regime change, the Syrians may not retaliate against Israel.

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/08/iran-n-korea-run-operations-room-in-syria/#khAWz2iy3AgAiAEI.99
That's difficult to believe. Iran wants to get someone else to go to war with Israel. This may be all part of the plan. And if we attacked it would give them the perfect excuse to retaliate on Israel...our ally.
How does this benefit Iran? If we go for regime change they loose their sole Mediterranean ally.

Why would Syria look to North Korea or Iran for military tips? North Korea hasn't fought a war since before their leader was born. Iran got its ass handed to it by Iraq in their last war. Syria has atl east fought numerous border skirmishes with Israel over the last couple decades...

All true. Just speculating here. But Iran may be gambling that if the regime falls, most likely an Iranian stooge will assume power. Hamas is a part of this and they are everywhere over there. North Korea wont have to go to war over this. But they are partners with Iran, who are allies with Syria, so its not unreasonable to assume that N Korean experts may be helping Syria right now. And, as you said, Syria has fought many skirmishes with Israel. Practically everyone over there hates Israel. Iran is under tremendous pressure from Israel over its nuclear program at the moment. So drawing the US into a war while officially staying out of it is a clever tactic for Iran to play right now. It would give them and everyone else the excuse to retaliate against our ally...Israel.

Al Qaida hs already admitted to firing rockets into Israel from Lebanon last week.
Israel is supposedly supplying us with intel over the Syrian situation.

Now, jhaving said all this, I just read a report from the Times of Israel that said Real-time Israeli intelligence confirmed Assad behind horrific assault last week, German weekly reports. So perhaps Assad is behind the gas attacks after all.

I have suspected for many many years that just before we went into Iraq and sought WMDs, Sadaam moved its chem weapons into Syria and hid them. Intel had supposedly indicated this might happen. So its no surprise that Syria has all these WMDs.

Here's another interesting article: For Israel, US response on Syria may be harbinger for Iran. I promise ya I was speculating on allt his prior to reading these articles.

Syria has become Iran’s testing ground,” Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Sunday following a meeting with French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius. “Now the whole world is watching. Iran is watching and it wants to see what would be the reaction on the use of chemical weapons.”

The Israeli government repeatedly has broadcast concern about the possibility that the Syrian conflict could spill over and destabilize what has long been one of Israel’s quieter borders. As the war has intensified, Israel has taken steps to protect its northern frontier along the Golan Heights, where it recently built a security fence.

“The most dangerous regimes in the world must not be allowed to possess the most dangerous weapons in the world,” Netanyahu said. “Our finger must always be on the pulse. Ours is a responsible finger and if necessary, it will also be on the trigger.”

Now this last comment makes me wonder if a deal is in the works for a joint US-Israel plan to annihilate Syria, Hamas and everyone else in the way. Add Great Britain and France to this and you've got an overwhelming force that could eliminate anti-Israeli regimes for good. They might not even stop with Syria but roll on over Iran.

Would Russia and now China intervene? Saudi probably wouldn't. Turkey wouldn't. Egypt has its own problems. Jordan is an ally. And nearly everyone else hates Iran.

Its a gamble.

by Dennis324 Wed Aug 28, 2013 1:48 am

Bryant wrote:
Lets run with this line of inquiry. Who would 1) want to and 2) be capable of it?

For us not to have seen it, I would think that the POI would have to be either in Syria or a neighbor. I don't know how easy it would be for a non-adjacent nation to get large volumes of toxic gasses and distribution system into the country, so that leaves us with neighbors. That would leave us with:

Turkey
Jordan
Iraq
Israel
Lebanon

I don't know how Turkey or Jordan, both pro-US and anti-Assad, would gain. I doubt Iraq has chemical weapons. Lebanon (Hezbollah) backs Assad, and thus would loose if we got involved (and I doubt they have chemical weapons). While I'm sure Israel would love for us to get involved, if they did this and it became public they'd loose all that US cash.

Turkey is allied with us and we have bases there. They might use WMDs but I dunno. they probably hate the Kurds worse.
Jordan is an ally and a pretty good one. They don't love Israel, but otherwise they are our friends. Plus they are tiny.
Iraq has its own problems. I think the WMDs came from there several years ago.
Israel is our best friend. I just cant imagine them striking Syria with WMDs unless there was a greater us-Israeli plan in effect. And I cant imagine the US would go along with using WMDs.
Lebanon? Hezbollah has saturated that country. Hezbollah is controlled for the most part by Iran. They would use WMDs on jews, but on Syrians? I dunno.

BTw...didn't I read somewhere that a whole bunch of missiles got stolen right after the attacks in Benghazi? Could some of those missiles been WMD gas bombs?

by Sir Pun Wed Aug 28, 2013 7:23 am

If you want a conspiracy theory, this is the only one that makes sense. Assad did order the chem attacks (like he did months back), because maybe he wants foreign intervention, so then he can try to rally his ppl against the us and israel, rather than against himself.

by Marconius Thu Aug 29, 2013 12:10 am

Bryant wrote:
Marconius wrote:
Dennis324 wrote:Oh man! Lets hope we didn't do this. What would be our motive?
We may not have. Many have a reason to see us involved.

I'm just thinking out loud.
Lets run with this line of inquiry. Who would 1) want to and 2) be capable of it?

For us not to have seen it, I would think that the POI would have to be either in Syria or a neighbor. I don't know how easy it would be for a non-adjacent nation to get large volumes of toxic gasses and distribution system into the country, so that leaves us with neighbors. That would leave us with:

Turkey
Jordan
Iraq
Israel
Lebanon

I don't know how Turkey or Jordan, both pro-US and anti-Assad, would gain. I doubt Iraq has chemical weapons. Lebanon (Hezbollah) backs Assad, and thus would loose if we got involved (and I doubt they have chemical weapons). While I'm sure Israel would love for us to get involved, if they did this and it became public they'd loose all that US cash.

Judging from the levels of infected victims, the quantities used weren't that great. That would widen the net.

I doubt Iran. Turkey, Jordan, Israel, and Lebanon are a no go as well. There are very few with the means to use these weapons undetected. Course the best place to hide things is in plain sight.

Gonna stop here.

by Marconius Thu Aug 29, 2013 12:16 am

Sir Pun wrote:If you want a conspiracy theory, this is the only one that makes sense. Assad did order the chem attacks (like he did months back), because maybe he wants foreign intervention, so then he can try to rally his ppl against the us and israel, rather than against himself.

Dangerous game though. He will incur the wrath of more than just us. He knows he cannot win. He would even lose Russia. He would do his best to hide any and all war crimes as best he could.

by Sir Pun Thu Aug 29, 2013 7:53 am

No, russia is still on his side. I think assad knows he doesnt have to worry about a bush sytle regime change from obama. I think he also knows a protracted campaign is something we dont want. So lets say he survives our missile storm, and then uses more chemical attacks? We are to HAVE to get involved again. And israel may have to launch some retaliatory strikes in response. And this will only serve to further unifythe anti- us israel coalition of russia syria and iran, and whatevergroups involved. It ceases to be about assad, and becomesabout us

by Sir Pun Thu Aug 29, 2013 7:54 am

I mean alrdy all the talk has ceased to be abt assaf, and has centered on us

by Miles1 Thu Aug 29, 2013 1:44 pm

Read this a few mins ago on The Onion:

So, What’s It Going To Be?
By Bashar Al-Assad

Well, here we are. It’s been two years of fighting, over 100,000 people are dead, there are no signs of this war ending, and a week ago I used chemical weapons on my own people. If you don’t do anything about it, thousands of Syrians are going to die. If you do something about it, thousands of Syrians are going to die. Morally speaking, you’re on the hook for those deaths no matter how you look at it.

So, it’s your move, America. What’s it going to be?

I’ve looked at your options, and I’m going to be honest here, I feel for you. Not exactly an embarrassment of riches you’ve got to choose from, strategy-wise. I mean, my God, there are just so many variables to consider, so many possible paths to choose, each fraught with incredible peril, and each leading back to the very real, very likely possibility that no matter what you do it’s going to backfire in a big, big way. It’s a good old-fashioned mess, is what this is! And now, you have to make some sort of decision that you can live with.

So, where do I begin? Well, this is just the tip of the iceberg, but let’s start with the fact that my alliance with Russia and China means that nothing you decide to do will have the official support of the UN Security Council. So, right off the bat, I’ve already eliminated the possibility of a legally sound united coalition like in Libya or the First Gulf War. Boom. Gone. Off the table.

Now, let’s say you’re okay with that, and you decide to go ahead with, oh, I don’t know, a bombing campaign. Now, personally, I can see how that might seem like an attractive option for you. No boots on the ground, it sends a clear message, you could cripple some of my government’s infrastructure, and it’s a quick, clean, easy way to punish me and make you look strong in the face of my unimaginable tyranny. But let’s get real here. Any bombing campaign capable of being truly devastating to my regime would also end up killing a ton of innocent civilians, as such things always do, which I imagine is the kind of outcome you people would feel very guilty about. You know, seeing as you are so up in arms to begin with about innocent Syrians dying. Plus, you’d stoke a lot of anti-American hatred and quite possibly create a whole new generation of Syrian-born jihadists ready to punish the United States for its reckless warmongering and yadda yadda yadda.

Okay, what else? Well, you could play small-ball and hope that limited airstrikes to a few of my key military installations will send me the message to refrain from using chemical weapons again, but, c’mon, check me out: I’m ruthless, I’m desperate, and I’m going to do everything I can to stay in power. I’d use chemical weapons again in a heartbeat. You know that. And I know you know that. Hell, I want to help you guys out here, but you gotta be realistic. Trust me, I am incapable of being taught a lesson at this point. Got it? I am too far gone. Way too far gone.

Oh, and I know some of you think a no-fly zone will do the trick, but we both know you can’t stomach the estimated $1 billion a month that would cost, so wave bye-bye to that one, too.

Moving on.

I suppose you could always, you know, not respond with military force at all. But how can you do that? I pumped sarin gas into the lungs of my own people, for God’s sake! You can’t just let me get away with that, can you? I mean, I guess you easily could, and spare yourself all of this headache, but then you would probably lose any of your remaining moral high ground on the world stage and make everything from the Geneva Conventions to America’s reputation as a beacon for freedom and democracy around the world look like a complete sham.

And, hey, as long as we’re just throwing stuff out there, let’s consider a ground invasion for a moment. Now, even if you could reasonably fund a ground invasion, which I’m pretty sure you can’t, what exactly would such an invasion accomplish in the long term? I suppose it’s possible that you could come in and sweep me out the door and that would be the end of it. It’s possible. You know, like, in the sense that seeing a majestic white Bengal tiger in the wild is possible. Or, more likely, you could find yourself entrenched in a full-blown civil war that drags on for 15 years and sets off further turmoil in the rest of the region, leading to even more dead bodies for your country and mine, and even more virulent hatred of America. In fact, boy, maybe this is the one option that should be totally off the table.

Oh, and speaking of me being toppled from power, let’s say, just for fun, that tomorrow I were to somehow be dethroned. Who’s in charge? Half of these rebel groups refuse to work with one another and it’s getting harder to tell which ones are actually just Islamic extremists looking to fill a potential power vacuum. We’ve got Christians, Sunnis, and Shias all poised to fight one another for control should I fall. You want to be the ones sorting through that mess when you’re trying to build a new government? I didn’t think so.

So, all in all, quite the pickle you’re in, isn’t it? I have to say, I do not envy you here. Really curious to see where you go with this one.

I’ll leave you with this: I am insane. Not insane enough to generate worldwide unanimity that I cannot remain in charge of my own country. That would make this a lot easier. No, unfortunately, I’m just sane and stable enough to remain in power and devise cunning military and political strategies while at the same time adhering to a standard of morality that only the most perverse and sociopathic among us would be capable of adopting. But nevertheless, I am insane, so do with that information what you will.

Long story short, I’m going to keep doing my best to hold on to my country no matter what the cost. If that means bombing entire towns, murdering small children, or shooting at UN weapons inspectors, so be it. I’m in this for the long haul. And you will do...whatever it is you’re going to do, which is totally up to you. Your call.

Anyway, let me know what you decide. I’ll be waiting.

Between this and their spoof CNN editor's reponse to the Miley Cyrus VMA coverage earlier in the week, is getting scary when The Onion is looking more like a hard-hitting news source than the so-called "serious" press....

by Sponsored content