The Syria Crisis

[Flinch]

Gotta love how this is front page news, yet no one gives a damn about Myanmar. Most likely it's because it's nothing more than publicity, as the old regimes fall in the middle east to be replaced with completely unstable regimes unable to effectively run themselves. "The Devil You Know" is apparently unheard of in Washington, along with many other things.

[Ithekro]

Likely because the situation in Myanmar (or Burma for those that never bothered to keep up with the name changes) is improving along democratic lines since the elections and the last time there was a major UN veto issue there was 2007. At least that is what is publicly known.

[Vallen Chaos Valiant]

Originally Posted by Flinch

Gotta love how this is front page news, yet no one gives a damn about Myanmar. Most likely it's because it's nothing more than publicity, as the old regimes fall in the middle east to be replaced with completely unstable regimes unable to effectively run themselves. "The Devil You Know" is apparently unheard of in Washington, along with many other things.

Burma had always been out of bounds because it is under China's direct protection. It was the case then, it is the case now. It just happens that the leading force of democracy in the country is actually the daughter of the founding father of the nation, so she couldn't be murdered. Not many other force for democracy is so lucky to have such a politically and mythologically iron clad figure as their symbol.

Actually, that's one of the reason why attempts to democratise Iraq and Afghanistan is so difficult. You couldn't find anyone to actually run it that would be acceptable to the population.

[ganbaru]

Syrian borders in rebel hands, battles in Damascus
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/...8610SH20120719

Romney says Obama has "abdicated leadership" on Syria
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/...86I1IW20120719
As if Obama could do much on this...

[killer3000ad]

Regime issues 48-hour deadline in Damascus battle

The Syrian military gave residents 48 hours to leave the parts of Damascus now held by rebel forces as it prepared a counterattack aimed at retaking control of its power base and pushing back four days of dramatic rebel gains.

The rebel Free Syria Army on Thursdaycontinued to hold ground it had seized in key parts of the capital during this week's major attack, and was bracing for a decisive battle against loyalist forces who appear to have been caught off guard by the co-ordinated assault.
....

[AnimeFan188]

Syria says could use chemical arms against foreigners:

"Western states expressed alarm after Syria acknowledged for the first time that
it has chemical and biological weapons and said it could use them if foreign
countries intervene."

See:

http://news.yahoo.com/assads-forces-...010158222.html


=========================================


Satellite Spots Syria’s Iranian-Made Drones:

"Since at least February, the Syrian government has been using Iranian-built
drones to track and target Free Syrian Army rebels in their strongholds, including
Homs and Hamah. Now some fresh commercial satellite imagery provides new
details about the unmanned aerial vehicles’ possible tactics and capabilities."

See:

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/07/syria-drones/

[Vallen Chaos Valiant]

The US military really isn't afraid of anything short of a nuclear strike. So the Bio/Chemical weapon is only useful to wipe out the less equipped rebel forces.

But then, that should be enough by themselves. America really doesn't want to put their own boots on the ground as they don't want to occupy it. So if the rebels are wiped out, America would have to drop the case. The Rebels need to survive to have legitimacy.

[Ithekro]

Though I wonder about the Europeans more than the Americans at this point. Libya was mostly a French and British operation with NATO allies and US support.

[ganbaru]

Originally Posted by Vallen Chaos Valiant

The US military really isn't afraid of anything short of a nuclear strike. So the Bio/Chemical weapon is only useful to wipe out the less equipped rebel forces.

The NBC gears are stil troublesome to use and there still the possibility of problems so the possibility of casuality are still high, even for the US .

[Vallen Chaos Valiant]

Originally Posted by ganbaru

The NBC gears are stil troublesome to use and there still the possibility of problems so the possibility of casuality are still high, even for the US .

That only matters in pitch battle. As it is, asymmetrical warfare means there wouldn't be many US infantry that would be targetable. Defensively it is problematic if you start to throw gas and toxins around your own buildings. And with the troops being give advanced warning, everyone would be in BC gear even if they do properly invade.

No, the casualties for US troops from BC will not be high. BC is only banned not because of effectiveness, but because of the "cruelty" factor. As it is, I am prepared to say roadside bombs would be more of a threat than gas or toxins. BC is great for terror and offence; not so good for defending yourself.

[ganbaru]

Originally Posted by Vallen Chaos Valiant

No, the casualties for US troops from BC will not be high. BC is only banned not because of effectiveness, but because of the "cruelty" factor. As it is, I am prepared to say roadside bombs would be more of a threat than gas or toxins. BC is great for terror and offence; not so good for defending yourself.

I have to agree than IED's would probably be more efficient but the ''cruelty'' factor have some advantages; the psychological impact on the troups and the public back on the US. The image of the firsts GI's victim of BC weapon would probably create 2 sentiment back home; ''get our boy home where they shouldn't even had be send'' and ''lets nuke thoses bas_ards'' and both scenario would lead to much trouble.

[kyp275]

There's no need to put US troops on the ground anyway, the rebels can handle that part with air and naval support.

[Vallen Chaos Valiant]

Originally Posted by kyp275

There's no need to put US troops on the ground anyway, the rebels can handle that part with air and naval support.

That's the thing. The rebels would be far more likely to be less prepared for a BC attack. And the civil war can't continue if they get wiped out.

[kyp275]

Originally Posted by Vallen Chaos Valiant

That's the thing. The rebels would be far more likely to be less prepared for a BC attack. And the civil war can't continue if they get wiped out.

BC weapons are like nuclear weapons, they're most powerful when used as a leverage. If Assad uses his WMDs, he will have effectively signed his own death warrant.

[Vallen Chaos Valiant]

Originally Posted by kyp275

BC weapons are like nuclear weapons, they're most powerful when used as a leverage. If Assad uses his WMDs, he will have effectively signed his own death warrant.

Not when he uses them against the rebels and only rebels. There is very little danger to Assad as long as he doesn't actually use it on Americans. And as I say, there is no need for him to actually attack Americans at all.

If he can harm the resistance to the point when they are no longer able to lead the forces against him, the international community is unlikely to step in and take over. There is no political will to control the nation from the outside with actual troops.

[kyp275]

Originally Posted by Vallen Chaos Valiant

Not when he uses them against the rebels and only rebels. There is very little danger to Assad as long as he doesn't actually use it on Americans. And as I say, there is no need for him to actually attack Americans at all.

If he can harm the resistance to the point when they are no longer able to lead the forces against him, the international community is unlikely to step in and take over. There is no political will to control the nation from the outside with actual troops.

Eh, the political pressure (and pretext) for intervention will be so strong after a chemical weapon attack you can almost be guaranteed that there will be international intervention. Also, it's not like there is a "This is where all the rebels are" city in Syria, they're all dispersed throughout the major population centers, and Assad can't very well kill the entire country.

[ganbaru]

Originally Posted by kyp275

Also, it's not like there is a "This is where all the rebels are" city in Syria, they're all dispersed throughout the major population centers, and Assad can't very well kill the entire country.

The entire country ? probably not. But given the current situation so far, he might go to kill half of it if might save his ass.

[kyp275]

Originally Posted by ganbaru

The entire country ? probably not. But given the current situation so far, he might go to kill half of it if might save his ass.

which it won't, and he certainly won't have enough support within his own faction to launch a genocide against half the country, would would be over 13 million.

Assad may be a tyrant, but he's certainly not stupid.

[Vallen Chaos Valiant]

Originally Posted by kyp275

Eh, the political pressure (and pretext) for intervention will be so strong after a chemical weapon attack you can almost be guaranteed that there will be international intervention. Also, it's not like there is a "This is where all the rebels are" city in Syria, they're all dispersed throughout the major population centers, and Assad can't very well kill the entire country.

Originally Posted by kyp275

which it won't, and he certainly won't have enough support within his own faction to launch a genocide against half the country, would would be over 13 million.

Assad may be a tyrant, but he's certainly not stupid.

It really depends on what kind of Tyrant. We have seen all kinds in the Middle East in the last few years.

In the end, I am just not sure there would be enough "outrage" for the UN to step in, even if BC was used. China and Russia is already making things difficult, Obama would rather not get into another war, and Europe can't afford it financially.

Yes, it would be extreme to kill half the country. But it HAS happened before historically. So it can happen again. It depends on how angry Assad is.

[ganbaru]

Insight: Cautious on Syria, Obama moves to help rebels
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/...86Q04U20120727

... Reuters has learned that the White House has crafted a presidential directive, called a "finding," that would authorize greater covert assistance for the rebels, while still stopping short of arming them.

It is not clear whether Obama has signed the document, and U.S. officials declined to comment on the finding, which is a highly classified authorization for covert activity.

But in recent days, the Obama administration has signaled publicly it plans more help for the rebels.

"I have to say that we are also increasing our efforts to assist the opposition," Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said on Tuesday...