What will happen if America initiates an unprovoked military attack against Syria?

One word's wrong in your thread title - not "if" but "when". Will Russia really strike against the US? I doubt it. Will they and their allies obliterate Israel? Very likely.

Well ... maybe I have an Optimism or Normalcy bias, but I'd still prefer to consider "IF" more appropriate.

Surely the DC think tanks have considered the very probabilities I cited above.

Bill O'Reilly has expressed his adamant support for the United States getting involved in Syria, going so far as to call opponents of such measures "loons," but it appears that two of Fox News' own military analysts fall squarely in O'Reilly's "loon" box. Lt. Col. Ralph Peters and Col. David Hunt both told O'Reilly there are still too many uncertainties, like whether the chemical weapons were really used by the Assad regime or if, in fact, they were used by the rebels.

Peters told O'Reilly the U.S. cannot be "helping al-Qaeda" in the name of responding to a brutal "murderer" in charge, saying there are two sides to pick from: a "despicable... monster" with an army behind him, or "the team that brought you 9/11." In other words, "our enemies are killing each other." He claimed that President Obama only wants to send in missiles to redeem his "personal image," but O'Reilly insisted this is a humanitarian issue and letting Assad get away with using chemical weapons would be a dangerous precedent.

Hunt piped up to say it's not been one hundred percent confirmed that chemical weapons have been used, let alone which side used them. O'Reilly told the two men they sound like the people who argued against U.S. involvement in World War II.

Peters shot back that O'Reilly's "absolutely wrong," likening the present situation to Hitler fighting the Japanese and making the U.S. choose sides. When O'Reilly said the WMD threat makes Syria as big a threat now as Iraq was when the U.S. intervened, Peters asked, "You want to do that again?"

I'm not sure the UK can get a military attack voted through Parliament. One Labour Cabinet Minister's already threatened to resign if the vote goes through.

If we don't build a coalition, Obama could give the order to strike unilaterally.

Your predictions are laughable. Go see a doc.

Kucinich: Striking Syria Will Make U.S. Military "Al-Qaeda's Air Force"

[link to www.nationalreview.com]

It's all about change.

I am not sure...

Things like "close the Suez" might seem bad, but that would be equally bad for China.. no iPhones in Europe for example.. lack of stock in the Chinese Shops in Spain (if you've ever been to Spain you'll know what I mean)

Besides Russia has signed the convention to ensure it always remains open to all ships regardless of flag or war.. so does that mean Russia would have to side with the West on that issue.. prickly pear situation..

Another, dumping US bonds... well the last time that happened Britain brought up most for a song... sell high buy low... win win for US and UK.

Some of this you have to wonder who it is really meant to hamstring..

Just some thoughts... there are games within games being played and I for one am reluctant to be drawn in..

As for the murder death kill... I am honestly against killing/maiming/harming anyone.. but it seems to me all sides have been heading towards a conflict for a long time.

What if the Suez canal and the Strait of Hormuz were closed only for the USA and her allies?

On the lighter side, check out this FB spoof...

[link to www.caintv.com]

There will be limited strikes on Syria soon but don't expect any major flare up. Syria, Iran and Lebanon aren't stupid. They'll wait until it's over and watch the political damage to America and UK in the region backfire. It'll be the final nail in the coffin for US/UK/Israeli strategy in the Middle East.

In other words, it'll solidify support for the Syrian-Iranian-Lebanese power bloc simply by default of it being done against Arabs, unprovoked and outside the UNSC.

Iraq 2003 all over again. Watch another radical tidalwave of anti-western sentiment weaken America's grip on the region.

It's all very easy to understand if you step back and look at the broader chess game being played. US and UK are in check.

1(a)Panic sex

then we take it over

fix it up

ewatch them kill each other

sell some stuff and wait till like next year's superbowl or somethng

no big deal

Suez canal closed to US

Thread: BREAKING: Egypt Closes Suez Canal for US Ships

you guys are fucking idiots

Keep electing these progressives like Bush, Clinton, Bush and Obama and what do you expect would happen? Unprovoked wars and nation building.

Russia warns US of 'catastrophic consequences' of Syria intervention

[link to www.csmonitor.com]

I told you what will happen;NOTHING LESSER THAN THIS:
Thread: Report of Iron Mountain and the Implications of the imminent Middle East war for regular Joe

If we are going to ignore all convensions for a moment the Iranians can only close the part of the Strait that is in their waters, so the US and her allies could use the waters they are permited to by their ally.

The only way Iran could block both sides is if they invade their neighbours waters and take control of both sides of the straits of Hormuz.. in which case they could block the passage of the ships of the USA and her allies.

On the other hand the EU can close the Strait of Gibralta and the Strait of Dover as both sides of those straits are in their waters, no need to attack or invade anyone to do that.

As for the Suez, all the bigs boys agreed that anyone of any flag could navigate down the canal and they've promised not to blockade the canal.. so while Egypt could and has blocked the Canal that does not mean the US and her Allies couldn't insitute a blockade of their own, or out of spite invade and capture the region. Which was the basis of the Suez Crisis, so that has happened already..

and I am sure if the Eyptians did impose a ban on American and Western warships mixed with intervention in Syria we'll see another Suez invasion.

You make a lot of good points in that thread.

Iranian Official: Israel to Be 'First Victim' of U.S. Attack on Syria

[link to freebeacon.com]

Bill O'Rielly OBVIOUSLY knows FAR more about military affairs than people who have actually been in the military.

Love Kucinich... He is the voice of reason.

Laughable I dont think so, hes pretty close to what will happen I think. After all hes right already on one count!

Thread: BREAKING: Egypt Closes Suez Canal for US Ships

Real meaning of Syria "limited strikes"

[link to www.presstv.ir]

(toward the end, this article seems like one written by an avid GLPer)

His wife ain't that bad to look at either ;)

OP is 100% right, and sometimes optimistic.

The number of victims will be counted in hundred of millions.


When the economies around the world are half way to the drain, war is inevitable.Considering that most economies are fucked up, a world war is inevitable.

Last Edited by Recollector on 08/28/2013 06:57 AM

I think we (meaning me are seeing far to many games within games to be sure where this is going right now.. lots of distractions and threats..

This has the scale and scope to evolve into a major world wide conflict.. which is very worrisome, but some of the negative things people are pointing out could be seen as positives depending on whos hand is actually manipulating things..

I.e getting supposed naughty nations to dump US bonds misses they'll be brought on the cheap, then when the fighting kicks off and the Western nations move their money into US bonds those bonds will sky rocket in value.. the loser would be the nations that dumped US bonds..

I tend to look for those kinds of games being played.. It started when I learned as a child there was a WW2 blackops (PWE) base close by, and I read up on the secret stuff they did and it has stuck with me, and has always clouded my judgement. lol

[link to en.wikipedia.org]

Indeed!

Last Edited by Phree Non-Phixion on 08/28/2013 07:08 AM