Syria: air attacks loom as Britain and US pledge to use force within two weeks

reply to post by Senduko


Nothing that I've heard. I don't know if the bomber(s) that launched the other night ever came home or not though. I'm betting on about the middle of the week if anything is going to happen. It's the new moon, which is when the US likes to hit places.

Full moons are actually bad for military operations. You tend to stand out a lot more during them.

Two U-2s (one out of RAF Fairford) landed on Cyprus today, as well as a Voyager tanker, and 6 Typhoons believed to be from XI Sqdn.

British Deputy Prime Minister Clegg is being kebbabed in the Commons right now, Labor MP's demanding that UK bases overseas (e.g. RAF Akrotiri in Cyprus, Gibraltar) are denied to USA forces unless explicit Parliamentary approval is given.

The thing I'm getting from this Parliamentary debate is that almost everyone now ... on both sides ... now think the Iraq war in 2003 was absolutely wrong.

Originally posted by LeBombDiggity
British Deputy Prime Minister Clegg is being kebbabed in the Commons right now, Labor MP's demanding that UK bases overseas (e.g. RAF Akrotiri in Cyprus, Gibraltar) are denied to USA forces unless explicit Parliamentary approval is given.

The thing I'm getting from this Parliamentary debate is that almost everyone now ... on both sides ... now think the Iraq war in 2003 was absolutely wrong.

That question about "will you rule out indirect action" had him like a fish on a hook.

Camerons face said it all "damn it, been rumbled there as well"

reply to post by LeBombDiggity


Agreed, that's something that scares me though, it seems that the majority of nations feel there is an alternative motive for invading Syria.

That's why the story is hard to sell. However the attack will happen, so this is the part where it itches... What will they do to give them that extra piece of story to persuade the masses.

reply to post by Senduko


Cyprus is a good base for tankers, and U-2s to fly out of, because it's close to Syria (I think it's like 500 km from Syria when I looked yesterday). There is also Incirlik in Turkey that could be used, as well as other bases, that are farther away but in the area.

Interesting. So Cyprus would be the main front if an attack would happen? Turkey is a bit to close to the borders of Syria? To keep the people safe I mean.

reply to post by Senduko


Cyprus would be where the tankers, U-2s, and possibly an E-3 and or E-8 launch out of. Close enough for them to operate and have a long loiter time, but far enough away that Syria only has one type of missile that can range there. Most likely any aircraft attacks will come from other bases, possibly Turkey, and the other bases that shall remain nameless in the area, as well as Whiteman on the US Mainland, possibly Anderson on Guam, and Diego Garcia.

You want to be close enough for your C3I aircraft to operate, and not have to land, but far enough away that it's easy to defend them. Strike packages come from farther away, so they have more time to hide from electronic and optical scanning systems.

reply to post by Zaphod58


I'm not entirely sure Diego Garcia ... UK sovereign territory ... will now be available ?

reply to post by LeBombDiggity


I'm sure it will, along with the USAF bases on the mainland as well... We wouldn't go that far in trying to piss the Yanks off, surely?

reply to post by LeBombDiggity


The base on Diego is a US lease, even though the island is UK territory, the base technically is US territory as long as the lease is in effect. It's like Guantanamo in Cuba. It would fall into a really unusual area where technically we could be at war with Cuba, and launching attacks from Cuban territory.

But regardless even if they don't fly out of Diego, they can come from Anderson, or three other bases in the region.

reply to post by stumason


Well, I don't know. Labor MP's were insisting that UK overseas bases be denied to US forces.

Zaphod,
There's seemingly a 1966 agreement which allows the US to use Diego Garcia for defense purposes. I don't know the terms of that agreement but I'd doubt the US would wish to rock the boat too much while the British Parliament is so heated up on the subject. USA might exercise discretion and use somewhere else instead.

French forums are absolutely riotous about this vote ... "if the Brits don't go in, we shouldn't either"

News line from Chronicle Houston seems to indicate the UK will not participate in this mess.

reply to post by LeBombDiggity


Yeah, the odds are that they'll use Anderson, and the other regional bases instead of Diego.

No. Cruise missile attacks will happne from the sea not from planes flying in from Cyprus.

Originally posted by Senduko
Interesting. So Cyprus would be the main front if an attack would happen? Turkey is a bit to close to the borders of Syria? To keep the people safe I mean.

reply to post by princeofpeace


No, they'll come in from the sea, with JASSM support from the US mainland.

So what do you think the game plan is here, how can this still be in this phase? I mean tensions on the boats alone must be insane and i doubt the Syrians or the "Rebels" are doing a lot of sitting around smiling.

Everyone has said no, Uk says its out and France wants out too, America never wanted to be in it and everyone has yet to just back off but instead are wanting to push through a "coalition".

So why? Most of these leaders are risking their legacies, they have been in power long enough to know when to game it for the voters and when the situation's legit at this point. They might push through wild crap to suit their own needs but how often do you see this many leader's pushing this hard just to invade a country like Syria with almost no support from within their own governments?


Surprised? I am still working on it.
Reuters

He added that trailer trucks loaded with military equipment were also seen on the Damascus ring road to the south: "Either the hardware is being transported to be stored elsewhere or it will remain constantly on the move to avoid being hit," he said.

Captain Firas Bitar of the Tahriri al-Sham rebel force, who is from the Qalamoun area but is based in a Damascus suburb, said two other missile units based near the 155th in the districts of Qutaifa and Nasiriya were also moving rockets out.

He said they could be move northwest to loyalist strongholds near Homs or further into the coastal mountain heartland of Assad's minority Alawite sect.

Opposition sources also suspected the evacuation of another missile unit based in Sahya, just south of Damascus.

So i imagine the military knows, so any targets they fire at now are just for show. Question becomes, why fire at all unless the targets change?

Just to add the US are forgetting that they are bypassing the UN SC therefore no matter what evidence they claim to have through intelligence they should address and claim that evidence in front of the UN SC and in my eyes any strike on a sovereign country is classed as an act of war.

Wars without international legality (e.g. not out of self-defense nor sanctioned by the United Nations Security Council) can be considered wars of aggression; however, this alone usually does not constitute the definition of a war of aggression; certain wars may be unlawful but not aggressive (a war to settle a boundary dispute where the initiator has a reasonable claim, and limited aims, is one example).

A country may protect it's sovereignty when it's being attacked by outside threat. Therefore Syria has the the right to protect it's sovereignty and has a sovereign right to call for alliances and for those alliances have to right to either be involved or stay out of an escalating war.

The US has not put foward a UN resolution even though the UN has evidence that the sarin agent was found in blood/skin and hair samples the evidence does not show who used the chemical agent.

Have a read up on the UN charter before pressing a strike on Syria.

www.un.org...

I think a negotiation or truce should be agreed with Syria and the International community to stop the violence and bloodshed.

UN Peacekeepers would be an idea when a deal has been made between the Syrian Government and the international community.

And investigators would go in to Syria to investigate the weapons used and take them away in exchange for better things for Syria.

Border Syria and throw out non Syrians who are not supposed to be there.

reply to post by Thorneblood


France wants out? Really? Then why did they just move two ELINT aircraft, and at least one E-3D to Cyprus, and have more equipment on the move? They've said that they'll up aid to the rebels if we don't hit Syria, and that they'll wait for the US vote. If we don't, then they will, but if we vote to hit them, then France will help us.

LeBombDiggity
reply to post by stumason

 

Zaphod,
There's seemingly a 1966 agreement which allows the US to use Diego Garcia for defense purposes. I don't know the terms of that agreement but I'd doubt the US would wish to rock the boat too much while the British Parliament is so heated up on the subject. USA might exercise discretion and use somewhere else instead.

hmm...Diego Flightline, KC-135's, B-1's and hangers in the backround for what aircraft???????

Defensive! HAHA