Syria: the case for action

[jcustis]

I think IF the US attack is symbolic (24 tomahawks) then his response will be equally symbolic and limited.

I agree it would be limited, in part because his regime is already embattled and wobbling. He can't do anything like attack Israel because he knows full well Israel will go high order in a heartbeat and just start surging airstrikes.

I believe we can expect an immediate information operations offensive, with social media used as a vehicle to push pictures and video of the strikes as "errant" in nature, with even a few casualties (even if They are actually soldiers) paraded out as innocent victims.

Hezbollah in Lebabon or elsewhere could stir things up, but we don't have major assets there which are at risk. Hezbollah is not getting into a Sunni country, like Bahrain, to threaten US military assets, so any Hezbollah impact is minimalized. I don't believe they could plan and resource a terrorist attack for at least 30 days.

I worry about how the Iranian angle will play out though. It wouldn't surprise me if a limited attack spawns a limited assymetric attack (missile strike from Iran across the Gulf) that presumes the US won't go "all in". Something like that would make the Syrian situation exponentially more sticky. A kinetic situation in Syria, with Iran, and the enduring fight in AFG, will make it difficult for the US to orient on the problem set.

That buys Assad time, and allows him to progress one more day towards stalemate.

[ganulv]

Hezbollah in Lebabon or elsewhere could stir things up, but we don't have major assets there which are at risk. Hezbollah is not getting into a Sunni country, like Bahrain, to threaten US military assets, so any Hezbollah impact is minimalized. I don't believe they could plan and resource a terrorist attack for at least 30 days.

I worry about how the Iranian angle will play out though. It wouldn't surprise me if a limited attack spawns a limited assymetric attack (missile strike from Iran across the Gulf) that presumes the US won't go "all in". Something like that would make the Syrian situation exponentially more sticky. A kinetic situation in Syria, with Iran, and the enduring fight in AFG, will make it difficult for the US to orient on the problem set.

That buys Assad time, and allows him to progress one more day towards stalemate.

Just thinking out loud, and I don’t see how it would aid Assad directly, but would Iran facilitate something targeting U.S. interests in Afghanistan?