Page 19 of 30 FirstFirst ... 9171819202129 ... LastLast
Results 181 to 190 of 295

Thread: Syria crisis: UK to put forward UN resolution

  1. #181
    Iconoclast
    DaveFagan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    wny
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:28 AM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    7,289

    Re: Syria crisis: UK to put forward UN resolution

    Quote Originally Posted by ecofarm View Post
    A NYT articles claims that, in addition to expecting the promise of supplying of S300s to be fulfilled, anti-ship missiles will be provided. Another article claims confirmation of S300 delivery. There is no confirmation of anti-ship missiles and if there was we would need to wonder about the effectiveness of them against a first-strike. The S300s mean nothing to the US. We are still the only country with invisible planes and we can certainly bring Assad to his knees virtually overnight.The real challenge will be the assembly of a transitional government, hopefully better than was managed in Iraq. Though, we couldn't really guess that excluding the Baath would leave nobody in the room, forcing us to go looking for common scoundrels to make up the transitional government.

    I don't think the stealth aircraft are invisible anymore. I remember in Kosovo/Croatia it was discovered that the Stealth aircraft interfered with cell phones, ergo competent individuals have most certainly devised cellular phone frequencies to detect the invisible stealth aircraft. It doesn't have to be radar. It could be field interruption. Sequential cell phone connections across a given area and as they are interrupted sequentially, it becomes the track/signature of the stealth aircraft. Monitor to track specific speed ranges consistent with the stealth capabilities expected. I think there biggest strength is the ability to cruise at treetop level with terrain guidance systems. Low and slow and perhaps below the radar.
    Last edited by DaveFagan; 08-30-13 at 03:42 PM.

  2. #182
    Sage
    Montecresto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Last Seen
    03-13-16 @ 11:59 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,561

    Re: Syria crisis: UK to put forward UN resolution

    Quote Originally Posted by donsutherland1 View Post
    You raise some complex issues that extend well beyond the scope of this thread. I'll provide my personal opinion, but keep it brief.

    1. There is a difference between deliberately targeting civilian objectives and accidentally hitting them. That's one distinction and it's vital. One should be careful to avoid drawing false equivalences e.g., as were drawn during the intifada of terrorism unleashed against Israel. At the same time, it should be noted that there have been elements of U.S. forces that have engaged in what properly can be termed war crimes. One such suspect responsible for a massacre in Afghanistan was recently convicted in the U.S. That he was tried and convicted indicates that the U.S. is making efforts to deal with these problems. One can't say the same about every country.

    2. When carrying out military strikes, one has to be careful to ensure that the expected harm to civilians is not excessive relative to the military advantage expected to be attained. Where there is doubt or where an reasonable assessment can't be made, there should be no strike. Like any forecasting exercise and any act of human judgment, expectations can prove off the mark. Accidents can also occur. Other unforeseen scenarios can unfold.

    What I would like to see is much greater review of operations to compare outcomes with expectations. Based on the empirical evidence, if harm to civilians is consistently excessive in cases or greater than expectations, adjustments to the decision making process should be made. Adjustments could include limiting certain kinds of targets, seeking greater information prior to targeting, using different approaches to implement military operations in certain cases, and building in more realistic assumptions to guide decision making. The reviews need to occur on a continual basis.

    It is not illegitimate for foreign nations, partners, even the U.S. government to continually ask whether the U.S. could do better. With a robust review process, it probably is not unreasonable to expect improvements. Such improvements could only reduce the incidence of the issues in question, foster fewer unfavorable perceptions, and increase the likelihood of the U.S. meeting its larger goals.

    3. In the larger foreign policy framework, the U.S., like any country, can't be expected not to articulate its ideals, including those related to human rights. However, it should be careful not to be overbearing, as that can only result in others' exploiting its own shortcomings when they invariably arise. It is also unrealistic for one to expect every country to embrace a liberal, democratic system as exists in the U.S., Western Europe, parts of Asia, etc. Homegrown factors be they sectarian rivalries, historic experience (especially recent experience), institutional/legal frameworks, etc., create different structural environments, some of which are quite hostile to sustainable democratic governance.

    4. The U.S. should remain willing to cooperate with other states in areas of common interest, even those with different political systems than the U.S. Avoiding excessive idealism can allow the U.S. to find more of the common ground that exists and to achieve more successful foreign policy outcomes. In turn, that can amplify its diplomatic capacities and reduce the need for it to resort to hard power. As is the case with any other state, the U.S. needs to respect the critical interests of other states to the extent possible in pursuing realistic foreign policy goals. Occasionally, interests will diverge, and the U.S. cannot be expected to abandon its critical interests nor its strategic allies. Its the defense of those allies and interests that can make the use of force necessary. The sectarian conflict in Syria and recent civil war in Libya do not rise to that threshold. I believe the use of force in the former would be an error inconsistent with American interests. I believe the latter was a mistake and it has led to unintended consequences without materially benefiting American interests or strategic allies. In contrast, a deliberate attack on Jordan or Israel, as two examples, would rise to that level where, if necessary, the use of force would be justified.

    Anyway, those are my thoughts on what are really some complex issues, both in substance and perception.

    Thanks Don, I thought you were going to keep it brief, lol.


    I will keep it brief. Considering the advantage of citizen support that Assad has, 55-70%, I think that speaks volumes to the fact he is taking precautions as much as possible to protect his people. Furthermore, you must know that he has HUGE pressure from Russia and China not to be targeting civilians, sense that would be necessary for them to maintain any credibility for supporting him and to enable both of them to continue advocacy on their part at the UN level. Above all both China and Russia have told Assad under no circumstances can he pull out the chemical warfare to use on the terrorists operating inside his borders, attempting to overthrow him because of potential collateral damage to his people. And finally, Assad has and desperately needs to maintain the support of his people to win. Intentionally targeting them has no basis in logic, helps the terrorists that want to overthrow him, helps the US that wants to overthrow him and cripples his help from his ally's, really, think about this.

  3. #183
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    New York
    Last Seen
    11-28-17 @ 04:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    11,690

    Re: Syria crisis: UK to put forward UN resolution

    Quote Originally Posted by AngryOldGuy View Post
    No Don we intentionally incinerated whole cities in Germany & Japan with the express purpose of wiping out civilians.
    Basically if you don't want to kill people, then you shouldn't be at war, but then gee there'd be no reason at all to continue
    spending trillions of dollars feeding the Military/industrial complex?

    I still say we are not getting nearly the bang for our bucks we deserve.
    I was referring to recent examples. I agree that, for example, the intense air raids on Dresden toward the close of WW II, would properly amount to a war crime. Those air raids were almost certainly more about retribution than gaining military advantage.

  4. #184
    Sage
    Montecresto's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Last Seen
    03-13-16 @ 11:59 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,561

    Re: Syria crisis: UK to put forward UN resolution

    Quote Originally Posted by AngryOldGuy View Post
    No Don we intentionally incinerated whole cities in Germany & Japan with the express purpose of wiping out civilians.
    Basically if you don't want to kill people, then you shouldn't be at war, but then gee there'd be no reason at all to continue
    spending trillions of dollars feeding the Military/industrial complex?

    I still say we are not getting nearly the bang for our bucks we deserve.
    Angry, dude! Do you always have to throw a wet blanket on people's well thought out posts, lol.

  5. #185
    global liberation

    ecofarm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Miami
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:12 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    66,313

    Re: Syria crisis: UK to put forward UN resolution

    Quote Originally Posted by DaveFagan View Post
    I don't think the stealth aircraft are invisible anymore. I remember in Kosovo/Croatia it was discovered that the Stealth aircraft interfered with cell phones, ergo competent individuals have most certainly devised cellular phone frequencies to detect the invisible stealth aircraft. It doesn't have to be radar. It could be field interruption. Sequential cell phone connections across a given area and as they are interrupted sequentially, it becomes the track/signature of the stealth aircraft. Monitor to track specific speed ranges consistent with the stealth capabilities expected. I think there biggest strength is the ability to cruise at treetop level with terrain guidance systems. Low and slow and perhaps below the radar.
    I suppose those cellphones can locate and track the plane

    It's going in that direction! haha

  6. #186
    double secret probation AngryOldGuy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Phx,Az
    Last Seen
    03-31-14 @ 10:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    2,917

    Re: Syria crisis: UK to put forward UN resolution

    It's not intentional (or is it?)

  7. #187
    Iconoclast
    DaveFagan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    wny
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:28 AM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    7,289

    Re: Syria crisis: UK to put forward UN resolution

    Quote Originally Posted by ecofarm View Post
    I suppose those cellphones can locate and track the plane

    It's going in that direction! haha
    Read it until it makes sense. The interruptions would be between the cell phone links and the planes movement would pass through i.e. a connection from Palestine to Western Greece, then Northern Palestine to Eastern Greece, then Lebanon to slightly offshore Syria. Then Damascus to Alleppo. The track would move from West to East between the given locations. End of story.

  8. #188
    global liberation

    ecofarm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Miami
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:12 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    66,313

    Re: Syria crisis: UK to put forward UN resolution

    Quote Originally Posted by DaveFagan View Post
    Read it until it makes sense. The interruptions would be between the cell phone links and the planes movement would pass through i.e. a connection from Palestine to Western Greece, then Northern Palestine to Eastern Greece, then Lebanon to slightly offshore Syria. Then Damascus to Alleppo. The track would move from West to East between the given locations. End of story.
    One must actually locate and individually track the plane to fire on it. "It's going that way!" is insufficient. I can't believe you think cellphones will defeat stealth aircraft.

  9. #189
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Chicago Illinois
    Last Seen
    10-14-15 @ 09:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    56,981

    Re: Syria crisis: UK to put forward UN resolution

    Quote Originally Posted by ecofarm View Post
    A NYT articles claims that, in addition to expecting the promise of supplying of S300s to be fulfilled, anti-ship missiles will be provided. Another article claims confirmation of S300 delivery. There is no confirmation of anti-ship missiles and if there was we would need to wonder about the effectiveness of them against a first-strike. The S300s mean nothing to the US. We are still the only country with invisible planes and we can certainly bring Assad to his knees virtually overnight.

    The real challenge will be the assembly of a transitional government, hopefully better than was managed in Iraq. Though, we couldn't really guess that excluding the Baath would leave nobody in the room, forcing us to go looking for common scoundrels to make up the transitional government.


    What a crock of ****.....the Israelis even went and to try and take them out. But the Brits stated there was no Confirmation that they were taken out. So you can save all that BS about whether we know if they have them or not. Seems you have no clue as to what your talking about on the delivery.

    Furthermore he already had the S200's.

    Btw this is what the S300 is about.....before you start popping off about our tech. Also note all those who are anyone worth the knowing, have all been harping about what they can do. Plus how Assads Anti Air would be full circle. Long Med and Short. With Added protections for them.....other than Civilians.

    Five Things You Should Know About Syria And Russia’s S-300 Missile System



    What are the capabilities of the S-300 system?

    The S-300 missile system is designed to shoot down aircraft and missiles at a range of 5-to-150 kilometers. That gives it the ability to destroy not only attackers in Syrian airspace but also any attackers inside Israel.

    It can track and strike multiple targets simultaneously at altitudes ranging from 10 meters to 27,000 meters.

    "The S-300 is Russia's top-of-the-range air-defense system," says Robert Hewson, the London-based editor of "IHS Jane's Air-Launched Weapons." "It is a surface-to-air missile system that's capable of shooting down any modern combat aircraft or missiles, including cruise missiles. In a way, it is the Russian equivalent to the U.S. Patriot system. And what it does for Syria is it adds a whole new level of capability on top of the existing Syrian air defenses. Syria already has a lot of Russian [surface-to-air] missiles, but the S-300 would be the most advanced."

    How much would a deployed S-300 system complicate a decision by the international community to create no-fly zones in Syria?

    The deployment of the S-300 system would greatly complicate any such measures in Syria.....snip~

    Five Things You Should Know About Syria And Russia

  10. #190
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Chicago Illinois
    Last Seen
    10-14-15 @ 09:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    56,981

    Re: Syria crisis: UK to put forward UN resolution



    5 min set up and take down. The Russian Advisors that deal with these have been in Syria since last year. Equivalnet to the US Patriot System.

Page 19 of 30 FirstFirst ... 9171819202129 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •