Posted on 06/29/2012 5:52:35 AM PDT by Strategy
Let them fight. Long and hard.
Uh oh ...
It will be a Turkey Shoot.
Why all the flexing?
I hope the CNN camera dudes are right there on the front to record the dust-up.
Looks like another part of the desert is about to be littered with Russian metal. Would love to own the scrapper franchise in the Middle East! I mean seriously, is there ANY ME Country that is not littered with the destroyed hulks of Russian Armor?
I wish CNN, MSNBC, NBC, NPR, CBS would all move their whole news rooms to the Border between Syria and Turkey to cover this.
Muslims threatening muslims. Is there a downside?
Yeah, who do we want to win? Neither?
Not that I can see. They will blame Israel and America no matter what happens.
Assad spells his name wrong.
I might agree with that sentiment except that Turkey is a member of NATO, and Syria has a formal defensive pact with Russia. Things could get out of control very quickly especially with Barry Soetero at the controls.
Turkey needs a lot of that armor elsewhere — like on the border with Russia. In addition, much of the Turkish armor is out of date — M60’s & M48’s. They only have around 400 Leopard 2A4’s. Bet you know where they are stationed (not Syria).
We know Assad is an Iranian puppet, so it stands to reason he'd follow their orders/example.
Although as with the F-4 Phantoms Turkey uses these M-48s and 60s have been upgraded with Israeli help.
The big question will be: how many Syrian soldiers are going to want to fight Turkey in order to keep the Assad regime in power?
In the event of an invasion, I am sure Prime Minister Erdogan would have to contemplate calling up his police force.
Turkey has a large, modern, well-trained military (which also happens to be the second largest in NATO, after the United States).
This is like Guatemala threatening to invade the United States.
It always comes down to the quality of the tank crews in the end.
Does it really matter? Even if they all did, Syria's army poses absolutely no threat to Turkey in any kind of conventional sense. Syria's army is small, poorly trained and reliant on 1950s and 1960s era Soviet technology. Syria has thousands and thousands of obsolete Soviet tanks -- easy pickings for Turkey's modern air force (unless of course Turkey runs out of bombs -- which I think is pretty unlikely).
Get your popcorn ready!
Just great, we’re going to go to war to bail out frickin’ Turkey, especially after what they did to us during the Iraq War.
I would not put it past our quasi-Muslim president to “come to the aid” of Turkey. Actually I expect the CIC to prod Turkey into doing something as a way to get us involved in striking at the Assad regime. Too clever by half, but that’s our Barry Soetero!
Not that I can see. They will blame Israel and America no matter what happens
It's always reassuring to remember that national security policy isn't directed by morons on internet forums, although with this administration I'm not always sure.
In case you forgot, Turkey is a NATO ally, the world's 15th largest economy and a first world country. It's economy is growing at 9% a year and it is a major trade and security partner of the United States. Moreover, Turkey's strategic importance is growing very quickly in the region.
Let the Turks fight their own battles.
When we needed to fly over to get to Iraq, Turkey said no.
So they bought and paid for this.
It’s our turn to say NO!
“Muslims threatening muslims. Is there a downside?” - Except one side is part of NATO while the other side is being supplied by the Russians. This could easily balloon out of control, esp. with the Choom-in-Chief concentrating on destroying his own country.
Lets not forget Nancy Pelosi was a key part in stirring up those problems for the 4th ID.
If you recall, it was Pelosi who pissed of Turkey with that “Armenian Genocide Resolution” in the house prior to the invasion but shortly after she was in the region meeting with some unsavory characters. The woman is pure anti-American.
Of course.
Bottom line: Turkey said "NO" when we needed them.
We should say the same. Screw NATO.
Not that I can see. I love mes some hot muzzy on muzzy action. I say they should fight to the last man!
( : >)
When did they ask for any help?
See July, 1914.
Syria may have many tanks but most will remain parked just as Khadffi’s tanks did a year ago. Many, many T-72s simply remained in garrison. No trained crews to operate them. The Brothers Assad face a likewise dismal situation. Some crews have already sky-ed up for Turkey or Jordan. Those that remain are not likely to stay seated once Turkey/NATO begins top-down attacks.
Makes me really wish Turkey was still secular and friendly to Israel. A Neo-Ottoman land grab would actually might put a cork in at least part of that hell hole.
Russian doesn’t give weapons away like they used to, and I doubt syria can’t buy much.
FR Reply of the Year Award.
Yeah, who do we want to win? Neither?
***Both countries mistreat the Kurds, who helped us in both gulf wars.
___________________________________________________________________
Here’s what I wrote on the subject of Iran, Iraq & Afghanistan a while back.
To: NormsRevenge
We SHOULD withdraw from Iraq — via Tehran.
Here’s how I think we should “pull out of Iraq.” Add one more front to the scenario below, which would be a classic amphibious beach landing from the south in Iran, and it becomes a “strategic withdrawal” from Iraq. And I think the guy who would pull it off is Duncan Hunter.
How to Stand Up to Iran
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1...osts?page=36#36
Posted by Kevmo to TomasUSMC
On News/Activism 03/28/2007 7:11:08 PM PDT • 36 of 36
Split Iraq up and get out
***The bold military move would be to mobilize FROM Iraq into Iran through Kurdistan and then sweep downward, meeting up with the forces that we pull FROM Afghanistan in a 2-pronged offensive. We would be destroying nuke facilities and building concrete fences along geo-political lines, separating warring tribes physically. At the end, we take our boys into Kurdistan, set up a couple of big military bases and stay awhile. We could invite the French, Swiss, Italians, Mozambiqans, Argentinians, Koreans, whoever is willing to be the police forces for the regions that we move through, and if the area gets too hot for these peacekeeper weenies we send in military units. Basically, it would be learning the lesson of Iraq and applying it.
15 rules for understanding the Middle East
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1774248/posts
Rule 8: Civil wars in the Arab world are rarely about ideas — like liberalism vs. communism. They are about which tribe gets to rule. So, yes, Iraq is having a civil war as we once did. But there is no Abe Lincoln in this war. It’s the South vs. the South.
Rule 10: Mideast civil wars end in one of three ways: a) like the U.S. civil war, with one side vanquishing the other; like the Cyprus civil war, with a hard partition and a wall dividing the parties; or c) like the Lebanon civil war, with a soft partition under an iron fist (Syria) that keeps everyone in line. Saddam used to be the iron fist in Iraq. Now it is us. If we don’t want to play that role, Iraq’s civil war will end with A or B.
Let’s say my scenario above is what happens. Would that military mobilization qualify as a “withdrawal” from Iraq as well as Afghanistan? Then, when we’re all done and we set up bases in Kurdistan, it wouldn’t really be Iraq, would it? It would be Kurdistan.
.
.
I have posted in the past that I think the key to the strategy in the middle east is to start with an independent Kurdistan. If we engaged Iran in such a manner we might earn back the support of these windvane politicians and wussie voters who don’t mind seeing a quick & victorious fight but hate seeing endless police action battles that don’t secure a country.
I thought it would be cool for us to set up security for the Kurds on their southern border with Iraq, rewarding them for their bravery in defying Saddam Hussein. We put in some military bases there for, say, 20 years as part of the occupation of Iraq in their transition to democracy. We guarantee the autonomy of Iraqi Kurdistan as long as they don’t engage with Turkey. But that doesn’t say anything about engaging with Iranian Kurdistan. Within those 20 years the Kurds could have a secure and independent nation with expanding borders into Iran. After we close down the US bases, Kurdistan is on her own. But at least Kurdistan would be an independent nation with about half its territory carved out of Persia. If Turkey doesn’t relinquish her claim on Turkish Kurdistan after that, it isn’t our problem, it’s 2 of our allies fighting each other, one for independence and the other for regional primacy. I support democratic independence over a bullying arrogant minority.
The kurds are the closest thing we have to friends in that area. They fought against Saddam (got nerve-gassed), they’re fighting against Iran, they squabble with our so-called ally Turkey (who didn’t allow Americans to operate in the north of Iraq this time around).
It’s time for them to have their own country. They deserve it. They carve Kurdistan out of northern Iraq, northern Iran, and try to achieve some kind of autonomy in eastern Turkey. If Turkey gets angry, we let them know that there are consequences to turning your back on your “friend” when they need you. If the Turks want trouble, they can invade the Iraqi or Persian state of Kurdistan and kill americans to make their point. It wouldn’t be a wise move for them, they’d get their backsides handed to them and have eastern Turkey carved out of their country as a result.
If such an act of betrayal to an ally means they get a thorn in their side, I would be happy with it. It’s time for people who call themselves our allies to put up or shut up. The Kurds have been putting up and deserve to be rewarded with an autonomous and sovereign Kurdistan, borne out of the blood of their own patriots.
Should Turkey decide to make trouble with their Kurdish population, we would stay out of it, other than to guarantee sovereignty in the formerly Iranian and Iraqi portions of Kurdistan. When one of our allies wants to fight another of our allies, it’s a messy situation. If Turkey goes “into the war on Iran’s side” then they ain’t really our allies and that’s the end of that.
I agree that it’s hard on troops and their families. We won the war 4 years ago. This aftermath is the nation builders and peacekeeper weenies realizing that they need to understand things like the “15 rules for understanding the Middle East”
This was the strategic error that GWB committed. It was another brilliant military campaign but the followup should have been 4X as big. All those countries that don’t agree with sending troups to fight a war should have been willing to send in policemen and nurses to set up infrastructure and repair the country.
What do you think we should do with Iraq?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1752311/posts
Posted by Kevmo to Blue Scourge
On News/Activism 12/12/2006 9:17:33 AM PST • 23 of 105
My original contention was that we should have approached the reluctant “allies” like the French to send in Police forces for the occupation after battle, since they were so unwilling to engage in the fighting. It was easy to see that we’d need as many folks in police and nurse’s uniforms as we would in US Army unitorms in order to establish a democracy in the middle east. But, since we didn’t follow that line of approach, we now have a civil war on our hands. If we were to set our sights again on the police/nurse approach, we might still be able to pull this one off. I think we won the war in Iraq; we just haven’t won the peace.
I also think we should simply divide the country. The Kurds deserve their own country, they’ve proven to be good allies. We could work with them to carve out a section of Iraq, set their sights on carving some territory out of Iran, and then when they’re done with that, we can help “negotiate” with our other “allies”, the Turks, to secure Kurdish autonomy in what presently eastern Turkey.
That leaves the Sunnis and Shiites to divide up what’s left. We would occupy the areas between the two warring factions. Also, the UN/US should occupy the oil-producing regions and parcel out the revenue according to whatever plan they come up with. That gives all the sides something to argue about rather than shooting at us.
38 posted on Thursday, July 12, 2007 3:55:19 PM by Kevmo (We need to get away from the Kennedy Wing of the Republican Party ~Duncan Hunter)
___________________________________________________________________
Syria could rightfully blame USA , and more precisely Obhamass , who supported , with the liberal dhimmy media the so-called “arab springs” to please the islamists , Saudi Arabia , Qatar....
Obama is completly responsible for that big mess which is only beginning. With that krypto-muslim in the WH, USA are no more a friend of Israel....
So how long till Assad falls and the MB takes over and then how long after that till Israel nukes Damascus into oblivion??
Drag things out in Syrria. Try to draw Iran in. Send in the drones.
Turkey can’t expect NATO help. It’s not as if Syria were the aggressor here.
Of course who knows what Bambi will do just to get a boost in the polls.
I stand by my observation: Israel and America will be blamed, regardless. Further, almost any “idiot on the internet” could do a better job of directing American defense policy than the incumbents in the current White House.
That whole NATO thing didn’t seem to bother Erdogan when he was taking cheap shots at the Iraqi Kurds-—inside Iraq. He’s been shooting his mouth off a lot lately about how big a problem the Israelis are. Let’s see how good he is at handling an actual problem. And he had damm well better protect those refugees from Syria who are on his side of the border. If he doesn’t I can see the Kurds lighting it up also. Just once I expect Putin would like to get paid for some of that Russian scrap iron that papers the ME——but it looks like there’s gonna be another pile of it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.