Will there be American invasion in Syria?

[ema]

In this scenario can you guarantee that the Kurds won't see an opportunity to carve out a small country of their own? Or that Turkey will not see a chance to once and for all remove a long time thorn in its side?

Actually it kinda depends on USA. Because the funny fact is US is ally both with Turkey and Kurds.

Turkey won't dare to expend the territories for sure, and also knows cannot do anything about the Kurds outside of Turkey, because they are tens of millions. A real Turkish-Kurdish war is the last thing both sides want because the Middle East is full of Turkish and Kurdish people without certain territories. Only in Iran there are almost 20 M Azeri Turks for instance. Iraq is another story, lots of Kurds and Turkmens live there.

As long as US doesn't fully back up Kurdish people they will settle with Northern Iraq and some around-areas they are currently living in.

 

[Stoked]

Russia will take the loss of a satellite alliance over war with the U.S., yes.

Israel can defend itself.

China is patient. They haven't taken Taiwan yet, they aren't going to take it unless they can do it without creating a larger conflict. They need their partnership with the U.S., at least for now.

North Korea has nothing to gain unless WWIII actually breaks out. Anything less and all they can do is break South Koreas toys and kill people. They would quickly be smacked back into their place and all the worse for wear.

The India Pakistan thing, I'm not familiar with current events there if things have changed considerably, but I don't think they are going to take unnecessary chances.

For all this to happen the dominoes have to start falling. I think the U.S., Russia, China, and European powers are going to prop up those dominoes as much as possible. For the larger conflict to break out one of those majors powers needs to want it to break out. They have to see an opportunity for gain. Right now there is nothing but loss to be had.

I think if it were straight up than yes you would be right. I am not saying that what I offered up will happen just that it a a possible fallout from the moves already made.

Syria is not just a satellite. It is their only satellite in the area and the only one that proveds them naval access to the mediteranean. That is important to them.

 

[Stoked]

My question is, where are the arab nations in this? They're Syria's next door neighbors. Why aren't they stepping in? Why does it take western powers to jump in? Sheesh.

Actually they are very involved. Just covertly.

Turkey is pissed at Assad and has American, German and Dutch forces (couple hundred men total and a half dozen patriot missle batteries) along the Turkey/Syrian boarder.

Iran and Hezbollah are providing training, men and materiels to Syria. Saudia Arabia and Qatar are providing money and weapons to the rebels.

The Arab League denounced the chemical attack but does not back a military strike by the west. They fear full blown war int he middle east.

Syria is already a proxy war between Saudi Arabia (Sunni) and Iran (Shia).

 

[BTP]

I think if it were straight up than yes you would be right. I am not saying that what I offered up will happen just that it a a possible fallout from the moves already made.

Syria is not just a satellite. It is their only satellite in the area and the only one that proveds them naval access to the mediteranean. That is important to them.

Was thinking about joining this conversation, but finally decided that it's not worth the time invested.
I'll leave it at: I think most of you are way out of proportion about this topic and Russia has about 500 miles of coast at the Black Sea. So if they really need a fleet there I'm sure they'll find a way to pass the Bosporus
Just think about it: This is a NATO vs UN affair or about taking sides vs civil rights and Stalinism...

 

[ema]

My question is, where are the arab nations in this? They're Syria's next door neighbors. Why aren't they stepping in? Why does it take western powers to jump in? Sheesh.

Because Arabs are not united. They DO NOT trust each others in any way.

 

[ema]

Was thinking about joining this conversation, but finally decided that it's not worth the time invested.
I'll leave it at: I think most of you are way out of proportion about this topic and Russia has about 500 miles of coast at the Black Sea. So if they really need a fleet there I'm sure they'll find a way to pass the Bosporus
Just think about it: This is a NATO vs UN affair or about taking sides vs civil rights and Stalinism...

Are you serious?

 

[Stoked]

Was thinking about joining this conversation, but finally decided that it's not worth the time invested.
I'll leave it at: I think most of you are way out of proportion about this topic and Russia has about 500 miles of coast at the Black Sea. So if they really need a fleet there I'm sure they'll find a way to pass the Bosporus
Just think about it: This is a NATO vs UN affair or about taking sides vs civil rights and Stalinism...

This is a power play America, Britain and France v. Russia, China and Iran.

Please do get involved. No one is angry here. All of us want nothign to do with this mess.

How do you read the evolving situation? There are so many different twists that it really is interesting.

Such as the tension and war of words between Hamas and Hezbollah. Hezbollah (Shia) has men in Syria fighting and Hamas (Sunni) supports, vocally, the rebels. A couple car bombs went off in Lebanon that targeted Hezbollah. Hezbollah pointed the finger at Hamas. They used to be friends.

Turkey and Israel likely being on the same side in any major conflict but being in a war of words themselves. Tension over the killing of Turkish citizens over the Israel raid of a boat trying to break their palastine naval blockade.

The route from the Black Sea to the Meditteranean Sea is directly thru NATO controlled territory. Russia wants direct access. That is why there are up to 12 Russian warships floating just off Syria.

 

[Deleted member 365]

My question is, where are the arab nations in this? They're Syria's next door neighbors. Why aren't they stepping in? Why does it take western powers to jump in? Sheesh.

Would you get involved if you were an Arab leader knowing that unkie Sammy was going to take care of everything and pay the bulk of the cost? Why risk the lives and treasury of your own nation when Americans can die and pay for it?

 

[fishonjazz]

Would you get involved if you were an Arab leader knowing that unkie Sammy was going to take care of everything and pay the bulk of the cost? Why risk the lives and treasury of your own nation when Americans can die and pay for it?

This :-(

 

[BTP]

I would approach this from a lawyer's perspective:
There's a precedent where an war of aggression against a former CSSR country by the NATO was unresponded by Russia. Kosovo anyone? Ye...
I look at this in a similar fashion. As long as the UN has those oligarchic, Stalinist influence named Putin, it'll be a farce. Same counts for Chinese interests.
So NATO should make it their duty to intervene infraction of civil rights in a land at the border to a member(Turkey) thus threatening Turkey's border regions safety. Also there were already missiles landing in Turkey which can be counted as an attack on that country and are a valid reason to defend that country in the limits of the NATO statutes.
It's of course a gamble, but
1) Israel is no member of the NATO, thus it's not responsible for this attack.(This won't mean it won't experience the backlash of Terrorist organisations. But such actions seldom find support with the sane population)
2) Under NATO statutes there's valid reason to intervene.
3) Negotiations have all failed in former cases when discussed at the UN security board(Iraq?).
4) This is a good example to remind other countries how things should run when civil rights are infracted, potentially lowering the willingness for others to act the same.

 

[Stoked]

I would approach this from a lawyer's perspective:
There's a precedent where an war of aggression against a former CSSR country by the NATO was unresponded by Russia. Kosovo anyone? Ye...
I look at this in a similar fashion. As long as the UN has those oligarchic, Stalinist influence named Putin, it'll be a farce. Same counts for Chinese interests.
So NATO should make it their duty to intervene infraction of civil rights in a land at the border to a member(Turkey) thus threatening Turkey's border regions safety. Also there were already missiles landing in Turkey which can be counted as an attack on that country and are a valid reason to defend that country in the limits of the NATO statutes.
It's of course a gamble, but
1) Israel is no member of the NATO, thus it's not responsible for this attack.(This won't mean it won't experience the backlash of Terrorist organisations. But such actions seldom find support with the sane population)
2) Under NATO statutes there's valid reason to intervene.
3) Negotiations have all failed in former cases when discussed at the UN security board(Iraq?).
4) This is a good example to remind other countries how things should run when civil rights are infracted, potentially lowering the willingness for others to act the same.

Interesting and some good points to think about. As for retaliation I do not look to russia for that. I look to Hamas and Hezbollah. To a lesser extent Syria and Iran directly. Any American/Russian conflict would be the result of multiple things happening till one side no longer felt they have any other viable choice. They are not at that place now. Thank goodness.

 

[Deleted member 365]

The possession of WMDs has made world powers be a lot more cautious in going to war. In many ways, it is the best deterrent we have. They all know, even wackos like N Korea, that pushing the red button essentially means the end of the world for them. You don't gain anything by using it. The Soviet Union and the USA probably would have gone to war against each other a long time ago had the atomic bomb never been invented. I'm more fearful of our own lack of accountability in managing and maintaining our own WMDs than of Russia or N Korea using WMDs against us. It might startle many Americans how few people our maintaining our supply of nukes and how quickly these weapons are decaying. I say the chances of these detonating accidently or being stolen by a domestic terrorist are much higher than us going to war with a former super power.