The Syrian Invasion

[Tyrannical]

Well, if we had to invade Syria, it would be a lot easier if we just dropped poison gas on them instead of blow every thing up Would it matter in the long run, plus less destroyed buildings Skin contact gas can be used, which makes only masks useless, and the US can deploy payloads extremely accurately these days. I bet we could hit a Syrian military base with chemical weapons with even less civilian casualties than using conventional weapons since we need fewer good shots.

[cronus]

Well, if we had to invade Syria, it would be a lot easier if we just dropped poison gas on them instead of blow every thing up Would it matter in the long run, plus less destroyed buildings Skin contact gas can be used, which makes only masks useless, and the US can deploy payloads extremely accurately these days. I bet we could hit a Syrian military base with chemical weapons with even less civilian casualties than using conventional weapons since we need fewer good shots.

A ethnological-targeted virus. Clear the entire Middle East and make it safe for the oil workers. It's a no brainier really?

[Tyrannical]

A ethnological-targeted virus. Clear the entire Middle East and make it safe for the oil workers. It's a no brainier really?

That wouldn't work for reasons you are probably too ignorant to understand. At least in Syria

[Cormac]

Doom predictors have been with humans right through our history. They are like the proverbial stopped clock - right twice a day, but not due to the efficacy of their prescience.

Sig worthy.

Thenkin' yew.

[Tero]

Rumsfeld has squeaked! He backs Boner.

[Ian]

Syria promising kamikaze attacks against US carriers. Can't see that going well.

Ah yes, a technique which sank a total of 0 Essex class carriers in WW2 is bound to work on the Nimitz and the Truman, lol.

The Syrians do have some supersonic Russian anti-ship missiles but I presume western vessels will stay well out of range.

It would be a remarkable feat if the Syrians sank a US carrier... especially since there are none in the Mediterranean at the moment.

[Svartalf]

What do you officially have in the Mediterranean or on their way there?

[Cormac]

Syria promising kamikaze attacks against US carriers. Can't see that going well.

Ah yes, a technique which sank a total of 0 Essex class carriers in WW2 is bound to work on the Nimitz and the Truman, lol.

The Syrians do have some supersonic Russian anti-ship missiles but I presume western vessels will stay well out of range.

It would be a remarkable feat if the Syrians sank a US carrier... especially since there are none in the Mediterranean at the moment.

Maybe they could use some quantum stuff, copper bracelets, or magnets?



Or, a homeopathic missile?

[Jason]

According to the news reports 4 destroyers with a 5th on its way. Russia recently moved a cruiser and a sub-destroyer there from their Black Sea fleet - they claim the deployment is unrelated to western deliberations on invasion.

5 destroyers vs. a cruiser and sub-destroyer gives the US an definite advantage, but Russia could deploy some heavy cruisers and destroyers of their own from their northern and Baltic fleets as well as a number of smaller vessels from the Caspian fleet.

[Svartalf]

I don't know if they have a Caspian fleet, the that's landlocked and immune to redployment. And they are trying to bring more stuff from the Arctic and Pacific where they were deployed till called to the Med.

[DaveDodo007]

Syria promising kamikaze attacks against US carriers. Can't see that going well.

Ah yes, a technique which sank a total of 0 Essex class carriers in WW2 is bound to work on the Nimitz and the Truman, lol.

The Syrians do have some supersonic Russian anti-ship missiles but I presume western vessels will stay well out of range.

It would be a remarkable feat if the Syrians sank a US carrier... especially since there are none in the Mediterranean at the moment.

I wouldn't be so smug if I were you as Allah(PBAH) is everywhere.

[Ian]

Not if they wanted them to survive.

[Jason]

I don't know if they have a Caspian fleet, the that's landlocked and immune to redployment. And they are trying to bring more stuff from the Arctic and Pacific where they were deployed till called to the Med.

Right, they never built the channel from the Caspian sea. There is a Caspian fleet though - but it's all small vessels.

[Jason]

Not if they wanted them to survive.

I'm assuming a Russian naval presence will present a significant deterrent to any invasion plans. Sure, you could sink them, but that'd mean a declaration of war on Russia which I'm pretty sure the U.S. doesn't want.

[Ian]

I was just kidding. And Russia isn't about to fight the US over Syria any more than they were going to risk it over Egypt in 1973 (incidentally, this was the last time the US went to DEFCON 3, not during the Cuban Missile Crisis). But my point is the US could more than match anything Russia put into the area. Hell, one or two Arleigh Burke-class DDGs could probably take out everything Russia has in the Med right now, depending on how loaded they are with Tomahawks as opposed to other munitions.