Syria: End Game

[leon grayboat]

I like how people like John McCain are offering support to lunatic sunni al qaeda fascists just so he can fulfill the goals that his aipac sponsors have set out for him. Fucking disgusting, I'm ashamed that these zionist puppets represent america.

The zionists need to be taught a sharp lesson. Maybe we will get to see that if the russians start sending those arms over asap and we will see if israel dares to attack it.

When in doubt, blame the Juice!

Why would Israel want to support "lunatic sunni al qaeda fascists"? So far Israel has been pretty neutral in this conflict. They aren't supporting either side.

[Horza]

Israel doesn't want shoulder-launched AA missiles in jihadi hands and it doesn't want the Assads to have a half decent chance of shooting down their planes for once, so it has worries on both sides of the fight. Damn, if only there was some spare goodwill going around for them in Arab world.

[Padraig]

It would be a disaster for us to get involved, at any level. The rest of the world needs to learn how to keep their own houses in order.

(actually, I think they do, they have simply become used to starting something and letting us clean it all up for them.

Not sure i'd say the US "cleans" things.

And its not as simple as leaving countries keep their own countries in order. By not been involved, that lets other countries interfere. So Russia and Iran are propping up Syria currently. That doesn't hurt the US right now but who can tell how that will play out as your rivals get more powerful? And even if Assad could be removed, the rebels are more and more beholden to countries like Saudi Arabia (technically a US ally but hardly a good example for the kind of policies that the US is supposed to represent).

As far as I know, Russia was always going to send advanced surface-to-air missiles to Syria (despite pleas from Israel and the US). The EU's action just allows it to spin the story better.

In other words (surprise surprise), its very complicated. The US are intervening already by applying sanctions against Syria. Its just a matter of where it should draw the line.

[Yoadm]

Israel doesn't want shoulder-launched AA missiles in jihadi hands and it doesn't want the Assads to have a half decent chance of shooting down their planes for once, so it has worries on both sides of the fight. Damn, if only there was some spare goodwill going around for them in Arab world.

Actually, our biggest fear is Chemical weapons stockpiles falling into either the Rebels or Hezbollah's hands. Assad may be an enemy but he is a rational player, with everything to lose if he fires them at us, thus there are certain game rules between us. With a non-state actor, no one knows.

[Horza]

Actually, our biggest fear is Chemical weapons stockpiles falling into either the Rebels or Hezbollah's hands. Assad may be an enemy but he is a rational player, with everything to lose if he fires them at us, thus there are certain game rules between us. With a non-state actor, no one knows.

That had escaped my mind. But you guys can't exactly start intervening on his side...

[Yoadm]

That had escaped my mind. But you guys can't exactly start intervening on his side...

Nope, but I'm willing to bet that if he tries to send another convoy with sensitive material to Hezbollah, or alternatively a chemical weapons storage warehouse was close to being overrun by rebels, it would probably be blown to bits beforehand by us.

[Every]

In related news, what do you think Jordan's up to? First they close the border to refugees, whilst denying that they have done so for legal reasons (nothing to do with us, we swear!) then they open it again, then they say 60,000 Syrians have gone home of their own accord, apparently because living in Jordan's refugee camps was worse than living in a war zone (but there have been rumours of deportations for some time, and it seems questionable whether all 60,000 did indeed go willingly). I've seen people suggesting that this is intended as a signal to the international community that they need a lot more money and resources to cope with the refugee influx - which they sure as hell do. I think that's a plausible explanation, but I'm willing to keep an open mind.

And then today, this: Russia is opening a plant in Jordan to produce RPG-32 portable rocket-propelled grenades. Russia is, obviously, pro-Assad, the Jordanian government seems to have been walking a fine line between the Assad regime and the rebels. It has also been abetting the US in aiding the rebels. Does this new weapons plant with Russia mean that the Jordanian government has chosen a side, or is at least leaning more towards Assad, or do you think they're just playing the game? Are these weapons destined for the regime, or are they going to the highest bidder?

[snake]

These weapons might be for the Syrian government forces or their allies. Government forces have been making gains lately and they seem to be getting more confident that they can win this civil war and Russia has thus far been a staunch ally of Assad. There were some mutterings for a little while about abandoning Assad when things were looking bleak but they have since strengthened their stance.

Also the rebels are having a difficult time presenting a united front. The battle for Qusayr is an important one and it looks like government forces will prevail. Hence the sudden desperate pleas for intervention from the rebels claiming there will be massacres and what not. Couple that with the constant bickering between rival factions and and things are not looking bright for the rebels right now.

In the end I think Jordan is trying to pull a Tywin Lannister. Be on the winning side.

[Every]

Couple that with the constant bickering between rival factions and and things are not looking bright for the rebels right now.

I did think it was pretty funny that after days and days of them trying to get their shit together and have some kind of cohesive group to send to Geneva, they finally gave up and said that they don't want to go to the stupid party anyway.

[snake]

I did think it was pretty funny that after days and days of them trying to get their shit together and have some kind of cohesive group to send to Geneva, they finally gave up and said that they don't want to go to the stupid party anyway.

True. Not only are there competing groups within the rebel movement but competing groups who are trying to pressure them to do things their way. It's rather chaotic right now. They all need to get their act together if they ever hope of defeating the government forces.

[Ramsay Gimp]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/may/30/syria-assad-missiles-russia-claim

Assad is warning Israel (and by extension the U.S.) that he is receiving a batch of anti-aircraft from the Russians. He could be bluffing (with the Russian's consent), but this is a clear attempt to prevent any attempts at a Western "no-fly-zone" which everyone knows would really be an offensive bombing campaign.

[Horza]

He's bluffing in that whenever they arrive it'll be months before the operators are trained to use the things, tactics devised, integration with the rest of the air defence network, etc etc.

As for any air campaign, S-300s complicate what was already a difficult task, but they're not going to prevent Nato from tearing Syria's air defence network apart if they so choose.

More inconvenienced by this will be the Israelis, who will have more homework to do when and if they feel the need to repeat last month's interdiction.

[Yoadm]

Our defence minister claimed Assad is bluffing in that the S-300's havent been delivered yet. If they will, he claimed we will react. No idea how. I wonder if the Russians will be pissed off if we destroy them.

[Horza]

Our defence minister claimed Assad is bluffing in that the S-300's havent been delivered yet. If they will, he claimed we will react. No idea how. I wonder if the Russians will be pissed off if we destroy them.

In one swoop? That would be rubbing it in. I guess it really depends on where and when Russian technical support hangs around them.

[Ramsay Gimp]

Our defence minister claimed Assad is bluffing in that the S-300's havent been delivered yet. If they will, he claimed we will react. No idea how. I wonder if the Russians will be pissed off if we destroy them.

I don't see how they wouldn't be. So I take it you're an Israeli? I wonder if you could tell us your impression of the Israeli government's position on the conflict? Do they support the rebellion? It seems to me they've taken a wait-and-see approach, despite Assad being an enemy

[Yoadm]

In one swoop? That would be rubbing it in. I guess it really depends on where and when Russian technical support hangs around them.

No idea how it would be done, if it will be, but there will be response i believe.

[Yoadm]

I don't see how they wouldn't be. So I take it you're an Israeli? I wonder if you could tell us your impression of the Israeli government's position on the conflict? Do they support the rebellion? It seems to me they've taken a wait-and-see approach, despite Assad being an enemy

If they sold the system for full market price, they might not care. Or they might issue a diplomatic complaint that, for obvious reasons, no one in the west will support. Our response is a wait and see because both sides are as bad as the other. Only difference is that Assad, as a state actor, is more rational in his approach to us. He wont fire chemical weapons or move them to Hezbollah if his regime is stable because his main concern is his regimes survival. Once non state actors take control of these weapons, then we have replaced an enemy we know, and have mutually learned the rules of the game, to one we don't.

[Every]

Our defence minister claimed Assad is bluffing in that the S-300's havent been delivered yet. If they will, he claimed we will react. No idea how. I wonder if the Russians will be pissed off if we destroy them.

He's not bluffing, he was misquoted. I can't remember where I read the article, but basically he said something in an interview for tonight's Russian television about having partially implemented Russian support programs, those comments leaked and were misconstrued. Reporters who were there when he gave the interview have denied he ever said the S-300s had arrived.

[Every]

No idea how it would be done, if it will be, but there will be response i believe.

I thought this was an interesting article: http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/05/30/us-syria-crisis-israel-s300-analysis-idUSBRE94T0IZ20130530?feedType=RSS&feedName=worldNews

[Ramsay Gimp]

If they sold the system for full market price, they might not care. Or they might issue a diplomatic complaint that, for obvious reasons, no one in the west will support. Our response is a wait and see because both sides are as bad as the other. Only difference is that Assad, as a state actor, is more rational in his approach to us. He wont fire chemical weapons or move them to Hezbollah if his regime is stable because his main concern is his regimes survival. Once non state actors take control of these weapons, then we have replaced an enemy we know, and have mutually learned the rules of the game, to one we don't.

That's what I figured. Unsurprisingly, American politicians aren't nearly as rational - they think helping Sunni Jihadists to victory will somehow work out in the end