What "IF" reference Syria
This is a honest question that I have. What happens if when we are doing a short duration pounding of Syria (Setting aside if we should or should not) they sink United States Navy ships, killing hundreds maybe thousands. I do NOT want that to happen, but if it does..........then WHAT......???
Then Russian will jump in (as well as China) and then you and I, my friend, are screwed.
Why do I live in Alaska? Because I can.
Alaska, the Madness! Bloggity Stories of the North Country
"Building Codes, Alaskans don't need no stinking Building Codes." Sourdough
Yes, I have wifi in my outhouse!
It's a mess either way, we will accomplish nothing with what there talkin about doing.
I'm not sure Syria has the capabilities to inflict harm on the US Navy. The USN has simply amazing force protection capabilities.
The last ship known to be lost to enemy action (a mine) was USS Magpie (AMS-25) off the coast of Korea on Sept. 29 1950.
It is possible we lost the submarine USS Scorpion (SSN-589) to Soviet attack subs in May1968.
The USS Cole was suicide bombed in 12 October 2000, and the USS Liberty was attacked by Israel Defense Forces on June 8, 1967, but neither were sunk.
I had a compass, but without a map, it's just a cool toy to show you where oceans and ice are.
I don't know if this is true or Bull.
Russia has sold Syria highly advanced rocket launchers, anti-aircraft missiles and anti-ship missiles. In fact, the P-800 Yakhont anti-ship missiles that Russia has equipped Syria with are the most advanced anti-ship missiles that Russia has. When the United States strikes Syria, they might be quite surprised at how hard Syria can hit back. The Syrian military is the most formidable adversary that the U.S. military has tangled with in the Middle East by far. From Syria, P-800 Yakhont anti-ship missiles can cover much of the eastern Mediterranean and can even reach air bases in Cyprus. If the U.S. Navy is not very careful to stay out of range, we could easily see footage of destroyed U.S. naval vessels sinking into the Mediterranean Sea on the evening news. And once the American people see such footage, it will be impossible to stop a full-blown war between the United States and Syria
Source: http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/a...-ship-missiles
Looks like we can deal with the p-800
http://defense-update.com/20100920_y..._in_syria.html
P-800 has a 180 m range.
To compare, our bgm-109 "Tomahawk" cruise missle has a range of 1550 miles.
According to your link; "The Patriot Missiles will be hit and repealed with S300 SAM [already installed in Syria]. Putin also threatened to deliver the more advanced S400 anti-aircraft missiles"
That is utter nonsense. The s300-s400 are anti aircraft missiles and the patriot is both AA and antimissile. In essence, the Syrian press is saying they will shoot down our antimissile missiles with an antiaircraft missile.
Last edited by Winter; 09-04-2013 at 05:14 PM.
I had a compass, but without a map, it's just a cool toy to show you where oceans and ice are.
If history is any predictor of the future, it will escalate into a pissing match with Syria and other Arab countries who are already allergic to what they perceive to be another example of American aggression in that region. They'll get lots of support from Russia and China, and we are going to loose much more than we would have gained by minding or own business, or at most, acting through a coalition led by the Arab League.Originally Posted by Sourdough
It would escalate.
Maybe that is the hoped for plan........
Support Israel, n let the rest kill each other.
I really would expect it to escalate. If somebody lobbed a few missiles into one of our cities we would consider it an act of war. We should expect them to consider it an act of war as well and respond accordingly. I'll send you a PM on my thoughts since they do involve politics.
Would you be kind enough to cc me on that PM?
“Learning is not compulsory. Neither is survival.”
W. Edwards Deming
"Live free or die: Death is not the worst of evils."
General John Stark
Done - or will be as soon as I copy and paste it.
Me 2! (send pm)
Post it on facebook.
I had a compass, but without a map, it's just a cool toy to show you where oceans and ice are.
Thank you!
“Learning is not compulsory. Neither is survival.”
W. Edwards Deming
"Live free or die: Death is not the worst of evils."
General John Stark
+1, we have no strategic or tactical interests to protect in Syria. They are not a a threat except for the fact that domestic terrorism will most likely spike when we begin to strike military targets with stand off weapons. I'd rather see our taxes go to unscrew the economy, domestic energy ( oil ) and quite a few other more serious issues here at home.
I have NO idea if this is VALID...
http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/a...l-gas-pipeline
President Obama recently said that he couldn't send American troops into Syria without first having a mandate.
Honestly if he's that bothered, I'll go out with him.
A Syrian airstrike on a bakery today killed dozens, which is one more than you might think.
Obama announced today that he has changed his mind about military action against Syria
In other news....It was announced today there is no oil in Syria.
I was speaking to a man from Syria today and he said, "In my country, bear fighting is the most popular sport."
"That's revolting." I replied.
"No, that's our second most popular sport."
Barump bump!
Tracks Across the High Plains...Death on the Bombay Line...A Touch of Death and Mayhem...Dead Rock...The Griswald Mine Boys...All On Amazon Books.
Any action we take in Syria will be very limited. Obama has no interest or intention of risking any American lives, IMO. We will probably hit 'em with some missiles, and I'd be surprised if we did much for airstrikes. We have to do enough to "save face" (a terrible reason to kill people IMOHO, but I will leave my politics out of it) and "punish" Assad for using chemical weapons. The US is in that awkward position of not really knowing if we're still expected to be the policeman to the world. If chemical weapons were used and we take no action, there's a good chance that the next regime will consider their use a bit safer. Of course, if we only take measures to protect certain people then we demonstrated that some people are more equal than others.
At the risk of sounding political (and I suppose this is a little bit) the Founders gave us some pretty good advice when they said we should avoid permanent alliances and foreign entanglements. That's not the same as isolationism at all. Sadly the UN is a rigged game of Three Card Monty with the Ruskies making sure any actions will be blocked. Ideally we should only be acting with the rest of the world but that's not gonna happen. I'm a liberal and probably more of a dove than a hawk. I believe in being strong but not projecting power into other people's affairs.
Oh well...good thing it's not my call, I guess!
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks