I never claimed that you were an advocate for a U.S. military intervention, but that you believed that such intervention would have gone unchallenged. You
claimed that beyond the relatively small air defense bubbles…
As I have asserted to both you and Outlaw, I doubt that the U.S. could have effected a blockade of Syria in 2013 or now, which incidentally would be an act of war. See here:
I believe that the Russians would merely ignore a blockade and dare the U.S. to fire upon them, and that the Iranians would disguise their air-bridge as civilian air traffic and again dare the U.S. to fire. Neither Turkey, Iraq nor Lebanon can control their borders in the first place it seems, to say nothing of the lack of political will in Iraq and Lebanon to do so in opposition to Iran. What of Syria’s extensive coastline, the Russian base at Tartus and Russia’s cozy relations with nearby Cyprus?
Come now, CrowBat; don’t be disingenuous.
You know perfectly well that the TLAM strike on Shayrat was a wise skirmish for Russia to avoid, and that it did not materially threaten Russia’s interests in Syria, despite the sting of public humiliation.
You are also aware of the different intentions in Moscow and Teheran, despite their alliance of convenience. No serious Kremlinologist has suggested that Putin is supportive of Assad using chemical weapons or Hezbollah rearming to threaten northern Israel. On the contrary, I believe that Putin welcomes the slaps on the wrist delivered from the air.
On February 26, 2014, a Russian analyst that I have great respect for replied to my questions about whether Russia would invade Ukraine and whether a “limited action” in the Donets Basin (before I began referring to it as Donbas) and Crimea were possible. He replied:
The rest, of course, is history. I have withheld his name and he ceased correspondence, but my respect remains.
My point, which seems to be misunderstood, is not that Putin would militarily confront the U.S., but that he would dare it to confront him. I can assure you that European NATO members would be aghast at the sight of the U.S. firing on Russian aircraft, and that the U.S. would find itself disliked and isolated.
See here:
https://orbi.ulg.ac.be/bitstream/226...20-%202015.pdf
Artillery or “ground-based fires” has been the “king of war” since 1914.
Few victims of shelling hear the “Dear ___” with their name on it arcing through the air, let alone survive to tell the tale. Aircraft engines are of course terrifying to civilians who survive war. My grandmother remains terrified of trains and of airliners passing overhead, despite the fact that what threatened her and killed her loved ones were bullets, overwork and starvation.
Originally Posted by OUTLAW 09
Bookmarks