• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The leaked Stratfor memo

Montecresto

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 9, 2013
Messages
24,561
Reaction score
5,507
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Remember what the 2012 leaked Stratfor memo said about the focal point of western airborne power? Here it is again: "Syrian air defenses are a lot more robust and are much denser, esp around Damascus and on the borders with Israel, Turkey. THey are most worried about mobile air defenses, particularly the SA-17s that they've been getting recently. It's still a doable mission, it's just not an easy one. The main base they would use is Cyprus, hands down. Brits and FRench would fly out of there. They kept stressing how much is stored at Cyprus and how much recce comes out of there. The group was split on whether Turkey would be involved, but said Turkey would be pretty critical to the mission to base stuff out of there. EVen if Turkey had a poltiical problem with Cyprus, they said there is no way the Brits and the FRench wouldn't use Cyprus as their main air force base." (sic) Well, it has begun. Guardian reports that "Warplanes and military transporters have begun arriving at Britain's Akrotiri airbase on Cyprus, less than 100 miles from the Syrian coast, in a sign of increasing preparations for a military strike against the Assad regime in Syria."


http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-08-26/western-warplanes-begin-arriving-cyprus
 

MMC

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 26, 2012
Messages
56,981
Reaction score
27,029
Location
Chicago Illinois
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Private
Remember what the 2012 leaked Stratfor memo said about the focal point of western airborne power? Here it is again: "Syrian air defenses are a lot more robust and are much denser, esp around Damascus and on the borders with Israel, Turkey. THey are most worried about mobile air defenses, particularly the SA-17s that they've been getting recently. It's still a doable mission, it's just not an easy one. The main base they would use is Cyprus, hands down. Brits and FRench would fly out of there. They kept stressing how much is stored at Cyprus and how much recce comes out of there. The group was split on whether Turkey would be involved, but said Turkey would be pretty critical to the mission to base stuff out of there. EVen if Turkey had a poltiical problem with Cyprus, they said there is no way the Brits and the FRench wouldn't use Cyprus as their main air force base." (sic) Well, it has begun. Guardian reports that "Warplanes and military transporters have begun arriving at Britain's Akrotiri airbase on Cyprus, less than 100 miles from the Syrian coast, in a sign of increasing preparations for a military strike against the Assad regime in Syria."


Western Warplanes Begin Arriving In Cyprus | Zero Hedge
Heya MC. :2wave: Here is what this professor is saying. ;)

Local Expert: Firing Cruise Missiles At Syria Would Be ‘Drive-By Shooting’

We’re merely gonna to what I would call a drive-by shooting and will do some damage to the Syrian forces but it won’t shift the balance of power on the ground at all,” said Mearsheimer.

So he’s suggesting retaliatory strikes by the U.S. be delayed, perhaps permanently.....snip~

Local Expert: Firing Cruise Missiles At Syria Would Be
 

Montecresto

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 9, 2013
Messages
24,561
Reaction score
5,507
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Heya MC. :2wave: Here is what this professor is saying. ;)

Local Expert: Firing Cruise Missiles At Syria Would Be ‘Drive-By Shooting’

We’re merely gonna to what I would call a drive-by shooting and will do some damage to the Syrian forces but it won’t shift the balance of power on the ground at all,” said Mearsheimer.

So he’s suggesting retaliatory strikes by the U.S. be delayed, perhaps permanently.....snip~

Local Expert: Firing Cruise Missiles At Syria Would Be
Well, especially if Putin has or will be placing SA-400 STA missiles there.
 

MMC

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 26, 2012
Messages
56,981
Reaction score
27,029
Location
Chicago Illinois
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Private
Well, especially if Putin has or will be placing SA-400 STA missiles there.
The French has responded first as usual.....always ready with the mouth. But unable to back up their own play. They are ready to punish someone. Not by themselves.....they ain't.

West vows action in Syria with no details

French President Francois Hollande says the country is ready to punish those who “took the despicable decision to gas the innocent,” while British Prime Minister David Cameron says that any military action against Syria must not entail being dragged into a wider Middle East conflict. Deborah Lutterbeck reports.....snip~

West vows action in Syria with no details - Watch List News
 

MMC

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 26, 2012
Messages
56,981
Reaction score
27,029
Location
Chicago Illinois
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Private
Well, we stepped back from meeting with Russia on Syria at the Hague......now Russia has responded today.

Russia warns of Mideast suffering if U.S. strikes Syria

As U.S. ships and British warplanes neared the shores of its last remaining ally in the Middle East, Russia warned again Tuesday that any military intervention in Syria would have "catastrophic consequences" for the region.

Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman Alexander Lukashevich said that launching a military strike without seeking approval from the United Nations Security Council would cause "new suffering and catastrophic consequences for other countries of the Middle East and North Africa," according to the Russian TV station RT.

Russia has vowed to veto any Security Council attempts to approve a military attack on Syria, and it is arming Syria as well, which is why the United States is considering a unilateral attack with the help of the United Kingdom and other nations.

"The Russians are extremely mad and there's sort of pre-war frenzy in Moscow," Cohen said. "I think in reality their options are limited but dangerous."

While the Russians are unlikely to oppose U.S. forces in the fields, Cohen listed other things they can do:

- The Russians could also send Assad their supersonic P800 long-range anti-ship missile, which is capable of sinking NATO ships with a single strike. U.S. officials reported that Israel attempted to destroy such missiles in Latakia during a July 5 air strike, though it was unclear if the strike was successful, according to the Guardian newspaper.

- The Russians could expand sales to Iran of weapons and nuclear technology that has both nuclear and civilian functions. Iran's nuclear program is considered a threat by Iran's rivals Israel and Gulf Arab states.

- Russian could pursue plans to deploy a large permanent naval task force and expand its number of bases in the Mediterranean.

The Egyptian military has offered Russia a military base in recent months, and is seeking expanded relations with Russia for weapons and wheat sales, Cohen said.....snip~

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2013/08/27/russia-warns-against-us-strike-on-syria/2706861/
 

Montecresto

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 9, 2013
Messages
24,561
Reaction score
5,507
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Well, we stepped back from meeting with Russia on Syria at the Hague......now Russia has responded today.

Russia warns of Mideast suffering if U.S. strikes Syria

As U.S. ships and British warplanes neared the shores of its last remaining ally in the Middle East, Russia warned again Tuesday that any military intervention in Syria would have "catastrophic consequences" for the region.

Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman Alexander Lukashevich said that launching a military strike without seeking approval from the United Nations Security Council would cause "new suffering and catastrophic consequences for other countries of the Middle East and North Africa," according to the Russian TV station RT.

Russia has vowed to veto any Security Council attempts to approve a military attack on Syria, and it is arming Syria as well, which is why the United States is considering a unilateral attack with the help of the United Kingdom and other nations.

"The Russians are extremely mad and there's sort of pre-war frenzy in Moscow," Cohen said. "I think in reality their options are limited but dangerous."

While the Russians are unlikely to oppose U.S. forces in the fields, Cohen listed other things they can do:

- The Russians could also send Assad their supersonic P800 long-range anti-ship missile, which is capable of sinking NATO ships with a single strike. U.S. officials reported that Israel attempted to destroy such missiles in Latakia during a July 5 air strike, though it was unclear if the strike was successful, according to the Guardian newspaper.

- The Russians could expand sales to Iran of weapons and nuclear technology that has both nuclear and civilian functions. Iran's nuclear program is considered a threat by Iran's rivals Israel and Gulf Arab states.

- Russian could pursue plans to deploy a large permanent naval task force and expand its number of bases in the Mediterranean.

The Egyptian military has offered Russia a military base in recent months, and is seeking expanded relations with Russia for weapons and wheat sales, Cohen said.....snip~

Russia warns of Mideast suffering if U.S. strikes Syria
Well there you have it, and we have morons controlling US foreign policy for years now.
 

MMC

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 26, 2012
Messages
56,981
Reaction score
27,029
Location
Chicago Illinois
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Private
Well there you have it, and we have morons controlling US foreign policy for years now.
Trouble.....the US says it will go for the Drive by as early as Thursday.


US military strikes on Syria 'as early as Thursday'



American missile strikes against Syria could come "as early as Thursday," said senior US official, reported nbcnews.

The "three days" of strikes would be limited in scope, and aimed at sending a message to the regime of Syria President Bashar Assad, US officials said.
Read more: US military strikes on Syria 'as early as Thursday' - News - World - The Voice of Russia: News, Breaking news, Politics, Economics, Business, Russia, International current events, Expert opinion, podcasts, Video

US military strikes on Syria 'as early as Thursday' - News - World - The Voice of Russia: News, Breaking news, Politics, Economics, Business, Russia, International current events, Expert opinion, podcasts, Video
 

MMC

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 26, 2012
Messages
56,981
Reaction score
27,029
Location
Chicago Illinois
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Private
Well there you have it, and we have morons controlling US foreign policy for years now.
Incoming.
More on it.....Now China has spoken stating we Must Refrain from our Hasty Intervention.

But Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., an influential voice on military matters, pressed the administration to go further, calling for the U.S. and its allies to provide weapons to "the resistance on the ground."

"The important part of this whole situation is, is this just going to be just a retaliatory strike that has no lasting impact or something that changes the momentum on the ground in Syria?" McCain told reporters in Mesa, Ariz., after an event on immigration reform.

Tuesday, a fifth guided-missile destroyer, the USS Stout, also entered the Mediterranean, through the Straights of Gibraltar, but officials said it wouldn't take part in any cruise missile attack.

"The four destroyers now in place have more than enough cruise missiles," one official said.

Some U.S. allies, notably Britain, have signaled that a limited strike could take place without Security Council approval. But Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said it would be a "very grave violation of international law," and China said through its government-run news service that the U.S. must refrain from "hasty armed intervention.".....snip~

Military strikes on Syria 'as early as Thursday,' US officials say - World News
 

Montecresto

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 9, 2013
Messages
24,561
Reaction score
5,507
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
So Britain says a "limited attack" could take place with out UN approval. Really, and does China and Russia agree with that. And just what is limited?
 

MMC

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 26, 2012
Messages
56,981
Reaction score
27,029
Location
Chicago Illinois
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Private
So Britain says a "limited attack" could take place with out UN approval. Really, and does China and Russia agree with that. And just what is limited?
Nope.....you see what I have up. Here is another piece. The UN doesn't want Military Action.


US, allies going beyond UN to justify Syria action

The United States and its allies are looking beyond the painfully divided U.N. Security Council to legitimize military action against Syria, trying to build a cohesive rationale for a strike and win broad international backing.

A U.S.-led coalition is likely to invoke an international doctrine known as the Responsibility to Protect, which states that the international community has an obligation to act to prevent crimes against humanity no matter where they occur, said Stephen Biddle, an expert on U.S. military and foreign policy at George Washington University. Biddle noted that the doctrine is increasingly perceived as superceding the need to respect a country's sovereignty.

"The two natural avenues are NATO and the doctrine of responsibility to protect," he said.

With little appetite among Americans for plunging into another Mideast conflict, the Obama administration cast its rationale for striking Syria in narrow terms. The goal would not be regime change — as was the case in Iraq — but punishing Syria for its violations of international treaties on chemical weapons, White House spokesman Jay Carney said.

U.N. spokesman Farhan Haq said Tuesday that U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's stance remains unchanged: "Our focus is away from any military solution and toward a diplomatic solution."

But the United States, France and Britain all argued this week that waiting for U.N. action can no longer be justified.

French President Francois Hollande suggested that the Security Council's failure to act so far is justifying a terrible international crime.

"International law must evolve with the times. It cannot be a pretext to allow mass massacres to be perpetrated," French President Francois Holland said Tuesday. He then went on to invoke France's recognition of "the responsibility to protect civilian populations" that the U.N. General Assembly approved in 2005.....snip~

US, allies going beyond UN to justify Syria action
Associated Press – 42 mins ago <<<<< More here

Wonder how the rest of us will feel when France or anyone else. Thinks they have the Right to come and Protect people in one of our States. All based on What the French are saying. Just look what the French is telling the Entire World with that NWO BS.
 

Montecresto

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 9, 2013
Messages
24,561
Reaction score
5,507
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Nope.....you see what I have up. Here is another piece. The UN doesn't want Military Action.


US, allies going beyond UN to justify Syria action

The United States and its allies are looking beyond the painfully divided U.N. Security Council to legitimize military action against Syria, trying to build a cohesive rationale for a strike and win broad international backing.

A U.S.-led coalition is likely to invoke an international doctrine known as the Responsibility to Protect, which states that the international community has an obligation to act to prevent crimes against humanity no matter where they occur, said Stephen Biddle, an expert on U.S. military and foreign policy at George Washington University. Biddle noted that the doctrine is increasingly perceived as superceding the need to respect a country's sovereignty.

"The two natural avenues are NATO and the doctrine of responsibility to protect," he said.

With little appetite among Americans for plunging into another Mideast conflict, the Obama administration cast its rationale for striking Syria in narrow terms. The goal would not be regime change — as was the case in Iraq — but punishing Syria for its violations of international treaties on chemical weapons, White House spokesman Jay Carney said.

U.N. spokesman Farhan Haq said Tuesday that U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's stance remains unchanged: "Our focus is away from any military solution and toward a diplomatic solution."

But the United States, France and Britain all argued this week that waiting for U.N. action can no longer be justified.

French President Francois Hollande suggested that the Security Council's failure to act so far is justifying a terrible international crime.

"International law must evolve with the times. It cannot be a pretext to allow mass massacres to be perpetrated," French President Francois Holland said Tuesday. He then went on to invoke France's recognition of "the responsibility to protect civilian populations" that the U.N. General Assembly approved in 2005.....snip~

US, allies going beyond UN to justify Syria action
Associated Press – 42 mins ago <<<<< More here

Wonder how the rest of us will feel when France or anyone else. Thinks they have the Right to come and Protect people in one of our States. All based on What the French are saying. Just look what the French is telling the Entire World with that NWO BS.
So, how hypocritical of France. Do you recall the French president at the time (early 2003) saying that if the United States attacks Iraq without a consensus from the security council, that that would be a victory for he who has the biggest muscle rules. But now we need to evolve past that.
 

MMC

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 26, 2012
Messages
56,981
Reaction score
27,029
Location
Chicago Illinois
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Private
So, how hypocritical of France. Do you recall the French president at the time (early 2003) saying that if the United States attacks Iraq without a consensus from the security council, that that would be a victory for he who has the biggest muscle rules. But now we need to evolve past that.
Mornin Monte. :2wave: Yes.....and wasn't that under Sarkosy? I am surprised none have anything to say with what the French are saying here.
 
Last edited:

Montecresto

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 9, 2013
Messages
24,561
Reaction score
5,507
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Good morning MMC, I think it was actually Chirac, but yes I agree.
 
Top Bottom