I'm all for letting the regional powers take care of regional problems. Leave the USA out of this mess.

I'm betting Iran will be nukeing Turkey in six months.

And now it begins. Let's see when Russia sends in their troops.

This will be a domino effect.

Out with the Dictator!!!!...in with the Islamic Militants...

Denver Bill, the only way Iran will be nuking anyone in 6 months is if they manage to steal one of Israels nuclear weapons.

I never realised that Iran celebrated Thanksgiving, But I do know that you can only nuke the turkey leftovers, not the whole turkey.......

Scenario:

More Syrian bullets cross the border into Turkey.

Turkey responds with cross border strikes.

Russia announces solidarity with Syria.

Syria fires on Turkey again.

Turkey declares war on Syria.

All NATO members are forced by treaty to declare war on Syria.

Russia...?

I'll put my money on the Turks, theys be crazy mad and will open up a family size can of Whip @ss...........

OMG TNRebel - I didn't see it till you pointed it out. The parallels are frightening.

If Turkey fails it will be a wonder. If Russia gets involved that might cause China to get involved. If China gets involved I foresee the US standing up with Russia. Now does anybody else have a score card they would like to present?

I predict that, if your predictions come true, Israel will make popcorn, sit back, and be entertained.......

I've missed the Ottoman Empire, welcome back!

Welcome back to the cold war. The United States will fight indirectly through Turkey. Russia will fight indirectly through Syria (Assad). It's been done in conflict after conflict.

What makes this situation different is Russia's only warm water port. If the current Syrian government falls, Russia will want to protect its interest. They will have to sue a new government for peace, which will be difficult as they are already on record as backing the Assad regime. Their only other option is to get directly involved and seize the port with its military. If the latter happens (which is quite possible), will NATO sit back and take it...???

Big decisions on the horizon... Bigger than Obama or Romney. The guy sitting in the Oval Office for the next presidential term will have their hands full with this one.

Russia will never go to war with NATO (read: the US & UK) because they cannot afford it. Of course, neither can NATO for that matter.

The difference? Russia can't endanger their oil & gas exports nor do they have the troops and infrastructure these days to fight anywhere or anyone that isn't a 3rd rate country like Georgia.

NATO cannot afford it because Europe needs Russian energy, the Euro is teetering on the brink of failure, and they don't have the infrastructure to SEND troops anywhere not actually in Europe.
Tag onto that the US & UK not exactly boasting full coffers for military adventures and a certain war-weariness (even with Iraq winding down... there's still after a decade of active deployments in Afghanistan & the never-ending-"sitskrieg" in Korea)... that leaves us with:

Turkey, with the help of some NATO units setting up humanitarian zones and perhaps aiding rebels ala Libya. Maybe.

On the other side, Iran (and possibly Russia) supplying the regime.

In the middle, about 25 million people. (Or, if you like, the population of Texas. Or, if you hate Texas... New York & Massachusetts combined).

Putin is an old school Communist, and as such understands that, if Russia goes to war with the US, it will not be a small, slowly escalating war.

Soviet plans for a war with the US involved a massive first strike with nuclear weapons, which is why the US anti missile system defends out missile sites, while the Soviet anti missile system defends Moscow.

The Soviets have no need to defend their missile silos, their missiles will have already been launched in the case of a war. The US, on the other hand, realizes the need to defend our missile silos, because our missiles will still be in their hardened silos when the Soviets launched.

It doesn't matter that these anti missile systems are obsolete, all that matters is that each understands the others thoughts.

A single airburst of a Russian ICBM over Kansas City, Missouri at an altitude above the International Space Station is sufficeient to generate an EMP burst that will overload all electrical systems in the continental United States. That includes the phone the President would use to authorize a counter launch.

So, don't expect to ever be able to hear the Emergency Broadcast System, as nothing you own that operates on electricity will work within 20 minutes of launch.

Just something to think about for those of you that enjoy sitting behind your keyboard and rattling your sabre.......

TNRebel-

An interesting concept, but I disagree with your assessment for these reasons:

1) The Pan-Slavism of the WW1 variant. This is Syrians against Syrians, not an uprising on one ethinc group against another in a polyglot dual-monarchy. So there's no real reason for Russia to back either side. If anything that helps Iran, which Russia is at best wary of.
2) The world hasn't been multi-polar in over 60 years. Bi-polar, sure. But who's going to fight? The only countries able to fight in Syria are NATO. Russia could get there, but in very low numbers and at a very slow pace. Iran can send it covert units but a large scale mobilization through Iraq or Turkey just isn't going to happen, and Iran isn't going to attack NATO in any event. Their leadership might be crazy, but they're not stupid. Jordan would side with NATO or at least stay neutral. Israel isn't going to suddenly march north unless they're attacked.
3) But that said, who gains from deploying in Syria? No one really gets to take territory in warfare anymore, and the country is really not desirable for anyone anyway except for perhaps enlarging a few local borders a few miles. Not worth the cost.
4) Shooting the Archduke (read: King of Syria) would HELP, not HURT the political stability.

Last war Syria fought they lost their entire air force without downing a single Israeli jet. My guess is their military, at least all the non Alewites defects at the first sign of hostilities. Russia won't get involved as long as they have assurances their port is safe and besides, does Russia really want to end their role on the world stage by p[roving their inability to project power abroad once and for all.

Hmmm, I'm having a hard time maintaining control of my country against a hand full of rebels and some troops that have switched sides to join them. Let me piss off the second largest army in Europe as well as the second largest army in NATO. Makes sense to me [sarcasm].

CPO Sharkey - The cold war ended 22 years ago. Russia is not the USSR, and they don't have even half of the military capabilites they had in 1980.

Moreover, why on Earth would they lob nukes for no reason? Syria is not even like the Ukraine to them... its of minor importance at best.

I agree Mark, Russia has no reason now to go to war.

Doesn't mean that we can keep pushing them though.

The USSR was not Imperialist Russia either, but geo-politics bound the Soviets into following the same policies as the Romonovs.

Just as geo-politics binds Russia today into following the same policies as the Soviets.

The need of a warm water port to project military power into the Med, the Baltic, and into the Pacific. It's still about trade, and keeping the sealanes open. The Russians need that port in Syria, and will not suffer seeing it denied them without a struggle.

Nor do they like an ABM system in Eastern Europe.

The Russians don't need massive tank armies to take down the US, they only need one EMP burst that covers Washington DC to prevent the transmission of the launch order. That can be done from the continental shelf. If successful, one high altitude EMP burst over Kansas City takes out the electrical grid in the continental United States. That's all they need to make us helpless, not much really. And they still have that.

You don't think the Soviets were stupid when it came to planning a war with the US, do you?

And, you don't think that the Russians today have forgotten all they knew of warfare under the Soviets, now, do you?

Maybe we should consider talking with Putin rather than rattling sabres. It's not like he's backed down from using his military before.

Even with Turkey's remarks about their new stance and then the possibility of Syria deciding to declare war on Turkey causing NATO to enact title 5, I highly doubt Russia the will support Syria. No one wants to see Super Powers collide, no one wants a WWIII. If anything this will turn into a proxy war where Turkey and Syria will be the bodies, and NATO and Russia/anyone else who wants to hop on that train will be brains that quietly make decisions.

Also, anyone who has referenced the use of nuclear weapons by anyone is a jokester. I would be willing to bet my life that nuclear weapons will never be used as a weapon of combat ever again. Any one who disagrees, fine so be it, but I would recommend you research nuclear rhetoric of the past 20 years. Though if aliens were to attack.....

Russia is too smart to get involved. They know that would involve the US and the days of communist proxy wars are over.

Syria is simply not that valuable to them to go to war over.

To thatguyjustsayin....

You are aware that a 2005 blue ribbon Congressional panel concluded the vulnerability of the US to a nuclear attack. There was a discussion of the potential of a terrorist owned freighter carrying a North Korean Scud missile armed with a nuclear warhead into a position to deliver an EMP airbust over the continental United States.

I don't think putting our hands over our ears and saying, "La-la-la-la, I can't hear you" in this case is a good thing. Why ignore a vulnerability because it doesn't fit our worldview?

As to one never being a weapon of combat, why continue to build them if you never intend to use them?

Maybe we should just let Iran and North Korea build them?

maybe we should just continue to push, and push, and push the Russians. After all, it's not as if they're our equals, now, is it?

I am with none of them.

But I want them to fight each other as much as possible such that an infidel like I will get a breather!

Bigoted Sunni Saudis and their Sunni Arab League pals tried their seventh century dances just like in Bahrain.

They had the help of a Sudanese Gen, who was responsible for the genocides of 300000 Christians in Darfur!

Now Turkey's Islamic fundamentalists Erdogan and his party are joining the Sunni Saudi, al-Qaida, MB and others in their seventh century dances.

He is imagining that Syria's Assad and his men are Kurds and Cypriots!!!

Careful Jonathan your racism is showing!! Funny how 300000 African animist somehow just became Christians, but it always seems that the most bigoted are always the least informed. There were Christians among those killed no doubt, but to claim all were Christians, or even a majority is a joke.

OH S**T, THE END OF THE WORLD IN 2012!

Like the Mayans predicted!

Love the paranoid idiocy about the spiral into a World War. You know what? If it happens, you trying to predict it with a lottery ticket style bet is not going to a) help you stop it, or b) help you survive it. And if it doesn't happen, which is likely, you'll just be revealed for being a fool.

Maybe your time is better spent actually communicating with your politicians about your intentions and what you want to happen, instead of having a fit here on Newsvine.

CPO Sharkey - Yes, of course anyone pushed enough will begin to push back... but OTOH, there must be something worth fighting for. In my estimation, Syria isn't it for the Russians. If this was happening in the Baltic or Kazahstan? Sure.

Well yes, up to a point. Geography of course is directly tied to politics and international policies. But we don't see "Modern" Russia trying to gain more territory (ala both the Tsars & Soviets) nor setting up client states (ala the Soviets) nor getting involved in questionable alliances (both again). The times also effect politics, and the current incarnation of Russia is well aware of it's current second-tier-power status.

The warm water port thing is really moot these days, btw.
1) The Russian Navy can't project anything anywhere -- it's currently weaker than even the French Navy. Even with their current modernization efforts, they're still the red headed step child of the Russian Military. Submarines are considered capital ships!
2) The Russian Navy have had their lease on the Crimean base in the Ukraine extended to 2047. That's a warm water port.
3) Russia is building a new warm water port & naval base in Novorossiysk, on the Black Sea.
4) Saint Petersburg, Murmansk & Vladivostok are all quite serviceable in winter. Sure, they're not San Diego or Pearl Harbor, but they're sufficient.

EMP warfare is a no-win scenario. After a few months, the effects are gone. As for the launch order, there are several ways around a DC strike taking down the whole chain. And, take it a step further: if it would work, why wouldn't they have already done it? 1) There are secured communications that would allow for an immediate counterstrike, 2) knocking out US communications would ensure a total retalliation, 3) what are you going to do AFTERWARDS? Russia couldn't even take Alaska these days, let alone a piece of the continental US.

No, I don't. That's why they never DID try an EMP attack. :-)

No, of course not. Which is why Russia and the US haven't fought.

Who's rattling a sabre? Certainly not me. I don't want to see ANY escallation on ANY side!

stewgotts--don't let published facts get in the way of your pet theories.

While, I agree that there were animists among those killed in the genocide in Sudan, the overwhelming majority is definitely Christian, as referenced by international aid workers, the UN, etc. Why don't you ask George Clooney about it? Just because you have a bone to pick with Christians, don't dismiss hundreds of thousands of their deaths as "among those killed." I suppose you think that the 10% of Egypt's population that are Coptic Christians are an acceptable sacrifice, too? In Egypt's case, you are talking about 8million souls.

Actually Derek, the threat of an EMP burst through an act of terrorism is much more real than you believe.

One third of the US population lives along the east coast, and one third of the US population lives along the west coast. One Scud missile launched from a freighter. There's a reason the North Koreans are configuring for height, not range.

The radius of an EMP burst is determined not as much by the warhead size (the effect on the radius only increases at the square ROOT of the warhead size), but rather on the distance the burst takes place above the surface of the earth. The earth's magnetic field also acts to direct more of the EMP burst toward the equator, rather than the poles. So it is an eliptical effect.

So, an EMP burst delivered by a nuclear warhead high enough over NYC would take out the electronic systems in New England, and down the East coast, affecting a substantial number of Americans. Care to hazard a guess how easy it would be to slip just another freighter into the area of NYC/New Jersey? What if we fail just once?

Think no electrical, no food storage (refrigerators/freezers), until electrical subsystems can be replaced.

Think of the amount of population needing food and fresh water after several days. It's not just about being unable to watch Dancing With the Stars.

Of course, I'm just a paranoid lunatic CPO in the Navy, what do I know about nukes and defense vulnerabilities.

Carry on.

What do you know? STILL not enough information. Sorry, there, sir.

You read my statement again, and you'll note that there's nothing you said at all that invalidates what I said. Now, go do something about it.

You are like the astronomer who comes on here and tells me there could be an asteroid that flattens the earth, that we don't see coming.

I am sure that Iran is thinking of some way to threaten Turkey. But I am also sure that Iran doesn't want to hear that Turkey is going to dismantle their step country. I think Russia will ask for more dialogue to give the Assad regime more time to commit more atrocities. And Iran more time to set up more armed forces to help Syria. But Syria will be dismantled quickly and Assad, the coward he is, will flee to Iran.

What ever happens the US just needs to stay out of it, same with the other big players like Russia. Only if this gets way out of hand should we even consider doing anything, even then probably limited. We have our plate full enough as it is, and if times were different then MAYBE we could be a little more involved (not that I want us to be an isolationist country like we were before WWII just need to mind our business all little more often). Glad Turkey is dealing with this, this actually means something to them unlike it does to the US. Whatever the case with where the plane was flying, sounds like it was understood between the two they don't shoot each other down or cross that far over the borders, Syria by accident or on purpose shot down the Turks plane and will now face the consequences. I agree we don't need to push the Russians or pour more fuel on the fire but I doubt they will go to crazy as long as we don't. Their main interest is the port, they don't give two $hits about anything else. Far as I'm concerned they can keep the port, by force, and broker a deal with whomever takes over to use it. But with anything I just hope this isn't the beginning to something more dramatic that basically means nothing to most of us and for those that it does, outside of the region, another excuse to get more $$$ in way or another.

It is time

Concur with Mr. Bridgeport -

Russian logistics and global power projection capabilities are very limited and not up to a Syrian incursion of any significant size or sustainability.

The lost of the electrical grid for any substantial time would be the biggest disaster to the American population ever. There have been studies done on population levels that show that as a population grows, it need certain technology level to be made or there will become a mass extinction even to bring the population back into balanced. It is believed that the population level of America has reach that level with regards to the electrical grid.

For example, the following things would be greatly affected by long term loss of electricity:

* No food storage..Most Americans do not have food storage for more than 1 week or so. They do not have the knowledge level for hunting or farming. If they are not able to replace their food within that week due to stores, no longer having food storage, large starvation will occur.

* Economic systems are based on electronic funds for trade...Americans rely on either a small amount of US currency on hand or credit cards. With no electric grids, ATM and credit cards systems will not work. As such, to even replace that food storage by trading with the few (farmers mostly) who may still have the storage will require something other then paper money or plastic. It would required something to trade, or force to take the stuff.

* Movement will stop...Another problem with an EMP burst is that most vehicles have some form of electrical component that will not work afterwards. Most Americans no longer have animal means of movement (ie. horses). They will not be able to move easily to replace the food storage issues they will now have.

Some of you may not believe these statements. You may call it a doom-gloom prediction that is all fantasy. I would suggest we already seem such situations on a much smaller scale. Look at the numbers of dead and chaos that occurred around New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina. How many were reported to have died without assistance after the floods because they starved or could not get medical help. Now picture the scale of that from New York City to Miami to the Mississippi river. Could people even get out of Manhattan if the grid went down? Would would Detroit or Miami be like if the stores no longer had food?

but OTOH, there must be something worth fighting for. In my estimation, Syria isn't it for the Russians.

I would not agree with this. The United States changed the leader of Panama after he become less reliable to us. Part of the reason is that Panama Canal is one of the biggest strategic concerns to the US. Many historians actually say that the United States could never have won WW2 or at least the Pacific Theater without the existence of the Panama Canal.

The port that Russia has in Syria is part of its version of the Panama canal. That along with the Sueze Canal. US has many naval bases around the world, yet we would never like a threat to any single of those. Now think of a situation where the ONLY ONE warm water port the US had was threaten. You do not think it would be worth major concern to us?

I love the EMP argument. Almost all electrical equipment has had EMP shielding for decades because EM fields are all over the place all of the time.

If you don't use shielded wiring and equipment you get massive degradation or even failure.

EMP is the new "dirty bomb" which was proven by our enemies to be a total lost cause. Yeah that's right Saddam tried to make one back in the 90s because making a real nuke was too hard. Using low grade radioactive material in a conventional explosive device is a lot easier. Problem is that in every test almost all of the material was destroyed by the explosion.

The dirty bomb is a myth, just like the EMP fear and pretty much every sensationalist bit of fear mongering journalism out there.

You'd swear people get their facts from youtube or video games. A little bit of reading into the actual science goes a long way.

@sboon398

I bet you miss all the massacre and genocide of Armenians, Greeks, Kurds, and Arabs as well.

The following excerpt from the book, "War Footing: 10 Steps America Must Take to Prevail in the War for the Free World", by Frank J. Gaffney and Colleagues, is reprinted with permission from the publisher, Naval Institute Press, Annapolis, Maryland.

Concerned members of congress received help from an unlikely quarter in May
1999, when Russia explicitly invoked the specter of an EMP attack on the United
States.

Vladimir Lukin (the chairman of the Duma International Affairs Committee)
assured a delegation of American legislators that Russia was not helpless in the
face of U.S. led interventions:

Hypothetically, if Russia really wanted to hurt the United States in
retaliation for NATO's bombing of Yugoslavia, Russia could fire a submarine launched ballistic missile and detonate a single nuclear warhead at high altitude over the United States. The resulting electromagnetic pulse would massively disrupt U.S. communications and computer systems, shutting down everything.

This blunt statement succeeded in getting the attention of both parties in
Congress. A second opinion was clearly needed. And on October 30, 2000, the EMP Threat Commission was established by law.

The EMP Threat Today

The EMP Threat Commission conducted a worldwide survey of foreign scientific
and military literature to assess the knowledge and intentions of foreign states
regarding an EMP attack. The survey confirmed that both the physics and the
military potential of EMP are indeed widely understood in the international
community.

The commission survey found that the following nations were knowledgeable
about EMP: China, Cuba, Egypt, India, Iran, Saddam Hussein's Iraq, North Korea, Pakistan, and Russia.

The commission also learned that some foreign military experts regard EMP
attack as a form of electronic or information warfare, not primarily as a form
of nuclear war. One of China's leading military theorists has written:

Information war and traditional war have one thing in common, namely that the country which possesses the critical weapons such as atomic bombs will have "first strike" and "second strike retaliation" capabilities . . . .

As soon as its computer networks come under attack and are destroyed, the country will slip into a state of paralysis and the lives of its people will
grind to a halt. (Su Tzu Yun, World War: The Third World War — Total Information Warfare, 2001.)

In Iran — the most unabashed state sponsor of international terrorism today —
some theorists have argued that the key to defeating the United States lies in
attacking its electronics. This is from an Iranian political military policy
journal:

Once you confuse the enemy communication network, you can also disrupt the work of the enemy command and decision making center.

Even worse, today when you disable a country's military high command through disruption of communications you will, in effect, disrupt all the affairs of that country. . . . If the world's industrial countries fail to devise effective ways to defend themselves against dangerous electronic assaults, then they will disintegrate within a few years. . . . American soldiers would not be able to find food to eat nor would they be able to fire a single shot. ("Electronics to Determine Fate of Future Wars," Nashriyeh e Siasi Nezami, 1999.)

And this implied threat may not be empty words. In addition to their
successful ship launched Scud missile test, the Iranian military has reportedly
performed tests of its Shahab 3 medium range ballistic missile in a manner
consistent with an EMP attack scenario.

Interesting that in the remake of the film The Day the Earth Stood Still, mankind is subjected to a loss of all electricity, but we never know how the aliens were able to accomplish that feat. Could have been by EMP!

Does Mitt like Turkey or is he more of a chicken kind of guy?

Enemy has detonated EMP! Our Electronics Are Down!

Usually in a minute or so, electronics come back on line. Until then, I usually lay low.

Modern Warfare 3. Awesome game.

Well, maybe it's just me, but since we've known about this potential threat for about 10-12 years, I thought maybe our politicians should have done something about it by now.

Instead, we took the opportunity to borrow a whole bunch of money from China to pay unemployment and welfare benefits, rather than create construction jobs hardening at least some of our electrical infrastructure as a benefit against a future (Chinese?) EMP attack.

Silly me, I kinda think of it as today's version of the Golden Gate Bridge, Hoover Dam, or Tennessee Valley Authority, creating a long term national asset to provide jobs during a time of national economic uncertainty.

But I'm certain that there are others that believe the money was better spent not creating jobs, but rather allowing unemployed Americans to stay at home and watch Dancing With the Stars on their sofa.

After all, it's just money, it's not like we should expect something in exchange for it?

@CPO Sharkey

Personally I have known of the EMP threat from an Martin rocket engineer since 1982. The city I live in was a target for a cold war nuclear strike from the U.S.S.R. The scenario of which you speak is a HIGHLY probable one that has gone ignored for decades due to policy.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/survival-matters_645911.html

Please remember though, not EVERY electronic device will be worthless after a massive EMP. There are ancient devices that have some of the same capabilities as their modern counterparts that WILL survive a burst. Also, for an EMP to affect most modern electronics it needs to be charged with power. A CPU in the box on the shelf SHOULD survive several million Gauss @ 10-20V <20ms versus a CPU in a working computer.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/report/1996/apjemp.htm

Power after the event would not be a problem as any 12 year old who paid attention in science can make enough renewable energy to power a few big draw items, 12 to 20A @ several hundred watts.

@CPO sharkey

EMP is a non-issue. If they used an ICBM it would be on our radar long before it was detonated, and we would have launched countermeasures.

You said our anti-missile systems were obsolete? I dont think so, they are more sophisticated than ever, in fact they just made a new and more effective counter-missile for the system.

Russia is no more a threat to us than any other country with nukes.

The American war machine is still by far the strongest and most high-tech military to date.

TN - just one major flaw in your assessment: France gets involved. Yeah, right.

The end is near.

I see a No Fly Zone developing.

How high did US defence industry stock go today?

@CPO Sharkey

I think your response to me in a way backed up what I was saying. A nuclear TERRORIST attack.....maybe a possibility. There have been several reports done that the United States is indeed vulnerable by a nuclear terrorist attack, but all major and credible scholars place that possibility as a very low one. Used as a weapon in combat by a legitimate government, basically zero chance.

Now in response two your other two comments, the United States ceased production of nuclear weapons under Bill Clinton and have we reduced our arsenal from our Cold War peak of 31,225 warheads to just above 5,100 warheads. Why even keep that many? Because as long as there are other countries holding on to nuclear weapons, the United States must maintain a survivable arsenal, with a second strike capability.

Lastly, if you think it a good idea for Iran to develop nuclear weapons, you need to take a second and think about regional politics and security perception. Think of it as....the domino theory, with nuclear weapons. And I am just not making this stuff up, if you are actually interested in this topic take some time to read Deadly Arsenals and Going Nuclear.

I am not putting my hands over my ears, I am actually studying political science with a focus on international conflict. Just took a class over the politics of nuclear weapons. So....la-la-la....

Sorry also I forgot to add, the idea of Iran developing a nuclear weapon is laughable. They have been trying for over 30 years. The only type of "nuclear weapon" they are capable of producing is a radiological or "dirty" bomb. Now those are something to worry about...

"I'm betting Iran will be nukeing Turkey in six months."

Shows how little you know of Eastern culture. They don't even celebrate Thanksgiving.

Never a fastball on the first pitch.

Let us see how much Islamic fundamentalist Erdogan, his Sunni Saudis and co, and their al-Qaida, MB and other puppets will do their seventh century Islamic tribal dances!

After all they are guardians of their Allah!

They should not take infidels like the US, UK and European nations' help!

stewgotts: If I write against the major threat to the world peace: Islamic radicalism and terrorism, especially Sunnis ones, how do I become a racist?

This is a new accusation!

I am anti of each and everything extreme!

Something tells me that we'll end up in the middle of this, as we always do.

Just wait and see!

We will be drawn right into the middle of it just like Iraqi wars!

Saudis, Turkeys, al-Qaida, MB and co will not be able to achieve much except inventing stories, weeping, wailings, chest beatings and some brave dancings!

Saudis, oil companies, lobbyists will do the background jobs for interventions in Syria.

Hillarys, McCains, Libermanns and others screaming means lobbyists are at it again like in Syria, Iran and other places.

Russia and China will play their games too at right times!

Uh, we weren't "drawn into" the Iraq war, we STARTED the Iraq war. The second one, I mean.

Also, it's equal parts naive and cynical to think that geopolitical interests of major countries are controlled by lobbyists, who tend to focus on domestic affairs and trade. These are military affairs, and generals are their own "lobbyists".

Uh, Jonathan, Turkey has the 7th largest standing army in the world. They are also one of the most modern armies in the world. I don't they would be relegated to 'inventing stories, weeping, wailings, chest beatings and some brave dancing" if they so choose. And, since they control access to the Black Sea, it could help Russia reconsider their level of support for Syria. Not suggesting that would force Russia to withdraw their support, just saying it might make them considerably less vocal.

The Turkish government is getting inovolved in this for two reasons.

1) They actually have an islamist government currently. However, the Military which is secular has been holding that government in check for almost the last decade. It's a losing battle for the Military and unless the Turkish people wake up they will find themselves ruled by Sharia Law. Sad thing for a country that was ultimate reconstituted under a brilliant man named Ataturk, which the current government would piss on in an instant if they didn't think the military would throw them out due to outright disrespect. Their islamist leanings make a muslim brotherhood lead government in Syria much more to their liking then the current Secular Dictatorship.

2) Turks HATE Kurds, also Armenians, Greeks, Georgians. They will utilize the war as a cover to kill off any rebellions or agressive instances of violence by these minorities while invading Syria. This will upset and possibly draw the Kurdish Autonimous region of Iraq into this conflict. Their militias are highly trained, and they are the most peaceful and secular group in Iraq. Of course Turkey also wants their militias obliterated because they outright FEAR the founding of a Kurdistan should Iraq completely desolve after we totally leave. It could lead to the kurds in the Eastern Region of Turkey attempting to break away and join said new country.

Turkey may be part of NATO but we should remind Turkey that NATO is a defensive alliance. We don't go on the offensive. They try to do that then we cut their ass off.

Double post fail.

Just goes to show what kind of a mess a weak and foolish apologist US president can wreak on the world.

Hey, Syria and all of it's populace ----- The shoot down of the Turkish RF-4 Phantom by Syria was a classic case of overreach by Assad and his ilk. This will prove to be the tipping point in the internal struggle for power and it means bye bye for Bashir. He and his family will soon be heading for the friendly confines of Tehran. Russia will (reluctantly, perhaps) recognize the new regime in order to maintain their warm water port in Syria. Israel will have to keep an eye on it's border with Syria, but there should be no threats from that direction for sometime, if at all. Who knows, democracy may even break out in Syria. The REAL LOSER in this scenario is Iran; it loses a proxy warrior in it's battle with Israel. Iraq will also have to keep a low profile. Now, the West (primarily Europe and the U.S.) needs to stay far clear of the area. Let the Middle Eastern countries sort the scene out amongst themselves. Bad turn for the Persian mullahs, though. Ouch.

zoroaster: Under Saddam, Iraq had the fourth largest army. Just recall the 1991 Iraqi war!

We were pushed/drawn into Iraqi wars (1991 and 2003) through Saudis, oil companies and their lobbyists.

Saudis and co operate through their agents in the US, UK and many European nations.

US Jewish lobby is well known. It is the Jewish lobby which does the work for Israel!

Why did the chicken cross the road?

BARACK OBAMA: The chicken crossed the road because it was time for change!

The chicken wanted change!

JOHN MCCAIN: My friends, that chicken crossed the road because he recognized the need to engage in cooperation and dialogue with all the chickens on the other side of the road.

SARAH PALIN: The chicken had to cross the road because he was not able to find a bridge. Alaskans do not build bridges to nowhere. If he wanted a bridge, he'd have to build it himself.

HILLARY CLINTON: When I was First Lady, I personally helped that little chicken to cross the road. This experience makes me uniquely qualified to ensure right from Day One that every chicken in this country gets the chance it deserves to cross the road. But then, this really isn't about me.

GEORGE W. BUSH: We don't really care why the chicken crossed the road. We just want to know if the chicken is on our side of the road, or not. The chicken is either against us, or for us. There is no middle ground here.

DICK CHENEY: Where's my gun?

COLIN POWELL: Now to the left of the screen, you can clearly see the satellite image of the chicken crossing the road.

BILL CLINTON: I did not cross the road with that chicken. What is your definition of chicken?

AL GORE: I invented the chicken.

JOHN KERRY: Although I voted to let the chicken cross the road, I am now against it! It was the wrong road to cross, and I was misled about the chicken's intentions. I am not for it now, and will remain against
it.

AL SHARPTON: Why are all the chickens white? We need some black chickens.

DR. PHIL: The problem we have here is that this chicken won't realize that he must first deal with the problem on this side of the road before it goes after the problem on the other side of the road. What we need to do is help him realize how stupid he's acting by not taking on his current problems before adding new problems.

OPRAH: Well, I understand that the chicken is having problems, which is why he wants to cross this road so bad. So instead of having the chicken learn from his mistakes and take falls, which is a part of life,
I'm going to give this chicken a car so that he can just drive across the road and not live his life like the rest of the chickens.

ANDERSON COOPER, CNN: We have reason to believe there is a chicken, but we have not yet been allowed to have access to the other side of the road.

NANCY GRACE: That chicken crossed the road because he's guilty ! You can see it in his eyes and the way he walks.

PAT BUCHANAN: To steal the job of a decent, hardworking American.

MARTHA STEWART: No one called me to warn me which way that chicken was going. I had a standing order at the Farmer's Market to sell my eggs when the price dropped to a certain level. No little bird gave me any insider information.

DR SEUSS: Did the chicken cross the road? Did he cross it with a toad? Yes, the chicken crossed the road, but why it crossed I've not been told.

ERNEST HEMINGWAY: To die in the rain, alone.

GRANDPA: In my day we didn't ask why the chicken crossed the road. Somebody told us the chicken crossed the road, and that was good enough.

BARBARA WALTERS: Isn't that interesting? In a few moments, we will be listening to the chicken tell, for the first time, the heart warming story of how it experienced a serious case of molting, and went on to accomplish its lifelong dream of crossing the road.

ARISTOTLE: It is the nature of chickens to cross the road.

JOHN LENNON: Imagine all the chickens in the world crossing roads together, in peace.

BILL GATES: I have just released eChicken2008, which will not only cross roads, but will lay eggs, file your important documents, and balance your checkbook. Internet Explorer is an integral part of eChicken2008.
This new platform is much more stable and will never reboot.

ALBERT EINSTEIN: Did the chicken really cross the road, or did the road move beneath the chicken?

COLONEL SANDERS: Did I miss one?

SPOCK: Fascinating, Captain, it appears that a 20th century earth fowl is attempting to traverse a long ribbon of bituminous asphalt.

CAPTAIN KIRK: We come in peace: shoot the chicken

GANDALF: It is not for us to decide whether or not the chicken should cross the road, but what the chicken does with the road he is crossing.

HAMLET: To cross or not to cross, that is the question.

HOMER SIMPSON: mmmmmrrmmmmm! chicken.

NATO supports Turkey on this issue read the article.

The Turkish F-4 was over International waters. International law protects all aircraft in International waters.

This is not the first incident. Two people were killed by gunfire from the Syrian side of the border.

If Turkey goes to was with Syria, like it or not, all NATO members are involved.

An act of war on one NATO member is considered to be an attack on all members.

As usual, sound logic from JS.

But just suppose some disgruntled faction within the Syrian military downed that bird with the very intention of provoking NATO intervention.

What then?

WHAT Chemical weapons? Syria has none. They may not have a nucular bomb but there is nucular rounds for Artillary. Even if you have a bomb you have to have a plane to deliver it. That planes survivorbility would be slim to none.

All this talk was a LIE perpetrated by the Bush Administration.

JS in SD - I heard the same comment as Vegains above, that the plane was over water. It wasn't like it flew over downtown Damascus. Additionally, it was only 1/2 mile into a disputed area. Granted, we know within a meter where we are at any time, but if my math is close, a half mile for a jet is about 7 seconds of flight when moving at 500 MPH.

Turkey has seen a mass migration of refugees from Syria over the last year. Entire families fleeing from war. Turkey knows these people personally, and know their stories. At some point, being the neighbor these people are fleeing to, Turkey almost HAS to do something...

Turkey was in error for flying over waters that may have been seen as a provocation. I will give you that. But Syria also acted stupidly by shooting down a plane over water that was a mere 1/2 mile across a line. And the "intrusion" was in an F4. We stopped manufacturing the F4 33 years ago, and completely retired the aircraft in 1996. It was only kept around that long because of a lack of aircraft in que in the event of crap hitting the fan.

I'd question the capabilities of the aircraft's positioning systems over open water. I also wonder about the length of time the F4 was skirting the line. I wonder if the jet was skirting the line, or was the intrusion deeper & the plane was shot down as it tried to get back to international airspace... Finally, I wonder if a warning was given - I haven't seen where a warning was given, only that a plane was shot down... Questions only the involved parties have the answers to.

NO SYRIA and IRAN. Let Turks, Saudis and co go to hell!

WE HAD ENOUGH WITH IRAQI WARS.

If atrocities and barbarism on girls, children and women are the criteria, then the most despotic, autocratic and bigoted Sunni Saudi ruler with his 5000 princes and princesses, Kuwaiti, UAE and other Arab League Sunni rulers and their rich sheiks are the biggest culprits in the history.

Through the Muslim immoral trafficking gangs, these barbarians have assembled all varieties of poor and helpless girls and women from all over the world in their harems and brothels.

In killing of opponents again, these people have established world records.

If the US, Britain and others support such Sunni barbarians and beasts who treat girls and women as cheap sex slaves, then one can only conclude that Saudis, oil companies and their lobbyists determine what to see, how to lecture and where and when to act.

Rest like “human rights”, “killing of children and women”, “militants”, “terrorists”, “WMDs”, “chemical weapons” and so on are a pure hoax.

Similar hoaxes were played each time before Iraqi wars on directions of Saudi, oil companies and their lobbyists.

Now none of them are looking into Iraq

If atrocities and barbarism on girls, children and women are the criteria, then the most despotic, autocratic and bigoted Sunni Saudi ruler with his 5000 princes and princesses, Kuwaiti, UAE and other Arab League Sunni rulers and their rich sheiks are the biggest culprits in the history.

Through the Muslim immoral trafficking gangs, these barbarians have assembled all varieties of poor and helpless girls and women from all over the world in their harems and brothels.

In killing of opponents again, these people have established world records.

If the US, Britain and others support such Sunni barbarians and beasts who treat girls and women as cheap sex slaves, then one can only conclude that Saudis, oil companies and their lobbyists determine what to see, how to lecture and where and when to act.

Rest like “human rights”, “killing of children and women”, “militants”, “terrorists”, “WMDs”, “chemical weapons” and so on are a pure hoax.

Similar hoaxes were played each time before Iraqi wars on directions of Saudi, oil companies and their lobbyists.

Now none of them are looking into Iraq!

@George- Why the hell should Israel invade Turkey? Honestly I would love to see that happen. I mean you are obviously not smart enough to understand that they are a member of NATO and if they were attacked by Israel would invoke Charter 5 of the NATO treaty and it would be seen as an attack by Israel on all NATO countires. You Israel firsters really need to get a grip on reality.

Just goes to show what kind of a mess a weak and foolish apologist US president can wreak on the world.

Whoooa 6dogs......you might want to do at least a little bit of research before you make some statements. You actually have it completely backwards:

1. Syria is one of the seven nations that is not apart of the international chemical weapons convention. Also several reports done by non-governmental organizations have concluded that Syria still has an active chemical weapons programs, and maintains one of the largest chemical weapon stockpiles in the world. Top Syrian officials have even said that with the countries lack of ability to produce nuclear weapons, chemical weapons are necessary to offset/defend against a nuclear Israel.

2. Yes, Syria had a "nuclear weapons program", but it never became a progressing program; they couldn't even get their centrifuges for uranium enrichment set up. Now it is a member of the NPT. So, I don't really know exactly what you meant by nuclear artillery, but just...no.

Turkey belongs to NATO. What do you think is going to happen when Iran starts dropping shells across the border?

Hopefully nothing. There are several other NATO members that usually sit on the sidelines and wait for the US to handle things. It's our turn to sit one out. Maybe the French will step up? Hell, maybe the Germans can get involved militarily.

Unfortunatly Germany and Japan only have defensive forces as dictated by the treaties after WWII. They still honer these treaties today.

The Germans? Forget it. They've been happy to let the US, Britain and France defend them ever since WWII. This way they can focus on their economic conquest of Europe.

Actually, it's moot: the US provides ~ 94% of NATO troop transport capability. The rest is the UK. Unless the Germans are going to walk/swim, they're not deploying anywhere.

@ 6Dogs: That's actually not true any more for Germany, the article from the 1949 Constitution prohibiting non-defensive operations was recinded in 1994 or 1995 (I forget). Japan still maintains that restriction on its military, but has made exceptions for humanitarian purposes.

you are wrong, it is only if a country is attacked not if it is a war of aggression --- the plane that was shot down was violating Syrian air space - Syria did not attack. This is all SO easy to see --- what is happening is that people are looking for an excuse to get Turkey in the war, I would not be surprised if it wasn't the CIA that shot down that plan in order for all of this to happen. People are idiots and respond like sheep--- it is as plain as the Prophet Mohammed being a homosexual, or a "Queen" as they say.

Syria already attacked. 2 were killed by cross border gunfire before this latest incident.

If it happened to America, they would have been bombedby now. Turkey's approach is mure measured.

Turkey didn't assist us or even let us use their bases in the Iraq war so theres no way they ask for NATO help and run the risk of getting turned down because they violated the pact previously.

ED, that doesn't really constitute a declaration of war. Killing a couple people in cross-border firefighting and shooting down a plane far from its owning nation is bad, but not warfare. If Turkey wanted to invoke Article 5 (which it doesn't seem to want), they'd have a hard time making a case.

Jeff - Iraq did not attack the US, so Turkey was not obligated to participate in that war.

Jeff-1570172, Turkey did not help in Iraq war because it was NOT a NATO operation. Turkey asked US to use UN or NATO so that Turkey's alliance could kick in. There is no alliance agreement between US and Turkey other than NATO. But Bush made it a coalition of the willing. They left NATO out because there was no justification to convince NATO. So Turkish lawmakers refused to help US with a thin margin when they voted. They still tried.

The United States is close allies with Turkey. We used to fly missions over the U.S.S.R. to spy on our rival. If not for Turkey we wouldn't have had a base of operations to monitor the Soviet Union. They are a valued N.A.T.O. member and should be remembered for their efforts when no other Muslim country would allow American forces to establish Air Bases in their country.

George:

Youor rant sounds like racism to me.

George, Turkey is doing what America tells them to do. They don't do this because they get money or anything. US does not pay Turkey anything. They do it because they share the same idealogy. That is to rape and plunder the world through free trade. They are the little America in middle east representing capitalist interests in the region, more than Israel. I would like to remind you that they can sell their alliance anytime to the Russians or the Chinese if they wished. They sit literally in the center of the world where much of the trade and energy must pass through their land between Asia, Africa and Europe. We own mediterrenean thanks to the Turks. The moment they switch sides, Russia will own it. That will change the balance of power in Europe, Middle East and Africa. Thus it is the Turks who decides who rules the place.

Sure, folks, let's blame Turkey rather than the dictatorship killing thousands of its OWN PEOPLE.

Obama better not use this as an excuse to get involved in Syria.

The USA should not get involved in Syria.

Than it boils down to this question. What is considered a vioaltion of a countries Sovereignty that would be considered an act of war?

Vegains,

If I recall correctly, the Turkish plane did cross into Syrian territory for a brief time. It managed to get back into international waters by the time it was shot down, but the Syrians probably needed a couple minutes to set up their targeting computers.

So while I agree that the plane shouldn't have been shot down at all (especially without warning and especially after it made it into international space), I wouldn't say it wasn't without any provocation.

It's being orchestrated by the CIA in order to justify an attack on Asaad's regime. you know like the Gulf of Tonkin..weapons of Mass destruction??

Yeah, right shayward. It's a vast right wing conspiracy and we need to make sure we don't fail to blame Bush too. BTW my dad was at the Gulf of Tonkin incident and you are FOS

The recon jet crashed slightly inside Syria's territorial waters. There is no accurate way to tell exactly where it was when targeted or intercepted. At high subsonic speed, the F-4 will cover .87 of a mile in about 5.2 seconds

A lot of America thinks that way as well.

Good point.

Not to support Assad or anything, but even Turkey admitted that it strayed into their airspace, or was at least pretty close. It's an ambiguous case.

Not that it excuses anything.

@ TED C.

They'll still argue here against any news that doesn't fit their version of the "truth" being "propaganda" from left-wing or right-wing sources of information. Don't let the contradictions and the arguments over which is right get your bloodpressure up. I need to heed my own advice.

This is not our problem.

This is not our problem.

This is our problem and we are asking Turkey to fight it for us.

@paganponderer--FOTFLMAO! Needed that after reading these posts.

Talk about PC!!! Doesn't get any better than that!! LMFAO!!

Yeah, right shayward. It's a vast right wing conspiracy and we need to make sure we don't fail to blame Bush too. BTW my dad was at the Gulf of Tonkin incident and you are FOS

The beginnings of WWIII started with the bombings of the USS Cole and the World Trade Centers, etc.... It has been on a low to medium boil ever since.. Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Libya, Israel, Yemen, Iran and now Syria. Not to mention the internal wars going on in Mexico that has the potential, in more ways than one, to spread into the US, 5the conflict in Egypt and the behind the scenes escalating cyber warfare. While at the same time we are seeing failing economic health in Europe and the US spurred on by liberal big government nanny state class warfare politics. And as history teaches us, there is nothing like a major war to try and get it all ironed out.

If anybody thinks Assad and the Iranian dictators are going to go quietly than they are foolish.And NK will be quick to jump in on their side should the opportunity arise. But it is a job that needs to be done, because the world can not afford to have these dictators with expanding military (and nuclear weapons) power and their continued crushing of human potential.

Three questions remain. How do we take them out with the least amount of treasure and blood shed? What role will China and Russia take? And, what happens afterwards?

The third question is of particular importance because, as we may see in Egypt, what you wind up with may be no better in terms of the ability of nations to peacefully coexist after the dust settles.

Why would Iran and Russia go to war over Syria?

Neither has the force to manage it... nor is Syria really worth their time and the inevitable condemnation of the international community. Russia wants its port, sure, but not at the cost of riling all of Europe. Iran isn't going to do anything that might get it carpet-bombed before they've sorted out this nuclear weapon thing.

WWIII couldn't happen with the current balance of power.