Topic Actions

Topic Search

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

Syria Strikes

The Management is not responsible for the contents of this forum. Enter at your own risk.
Syria Strikes
Post by dscott8   » Fri Apr 07, 2017 12:07 pm

dscott8
Commodore

Posts: 791
Joined: Thu Jul 15, 2010 6:17 am

The Tomahawk missile strikes on Syria raise plenty of questions. Let's discuss:

1. Are they a proper response to the deployment of biochemical weapons?

2. What will they really accomplish?

3. What comes next?

4. What is implied by the Administration informing Russia before launching the missiles?

5. Should Congress have been involved in the decision?

6. Is it significant that the National Security Council was reorganized between news of the biochemical attack and the response?

7. What will be the effect on financial markets, and who benefits?

The floor is open.
Top
Re: Syria Strikes
Post by gcomeau   » Fri Apr 07, 2017 1:05 pm

gcomeau
Admiral

Posts: 2747
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2014 5:24 pm

dscott8 wrote:The Tomahawk missile strikes on Syria raise plenty of questions. Let's discuss:

1. Are they a proper response to the deployment of biochemical weapons?

2. What will they really accomplish?


Remote bombardment alone rarely accomplishes anything...

3. What comes next?


If absolutely everything we know about Trump is any guide? Stumbling from one response to the next with no apparent rationale or strategy beyond "looking tough".

4. What is implied by the Administration informing Russia before launching the missiles?


On the one hand, a desire not to get into a shooting incident with the Russians.

On the other, huge questions about the fact that it was claimed this was the base that launched the attack... and the Russians were operating out of it and thus needed to be warned.... so....?


5. Should Congress have been involved in the decision?


Well, if you believe this guy:

https://ssl.cdn.turner.com/cnnnext/dam/ ... er-169.jpg

But the odds are usually against you if you do believe anything he says, so...
Top
Re: Syria Strikes
Post by aairfccha   » Fri Apr 07, 2017 2:08 pm

aairfccha
Commander

Posts: 207
Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2014 4:03 pm

0. Who was responsible for the chemical weapons in the first place.
Top
Re: Syria Strikes
Post by Annachie   » Fri Apr 07, 2017 5:47 pm

Annachie
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 3099
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2011 7:36 pm

Meh. Presidents have been ignoring or dodging the asking congress thing for over 50 years.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
You are so going to die. :p ~~~~ runsforcelery
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
still not dead. :)
Top
Re: Syria Strikes
Post by biochem   » Fri Apr 07, 2017 9:58 pm

biochem
Rear Admiral

Posts: 1372
Joined: Thu Aug 19, 2010 8:06 pm
Location: USA

So did Trump order it or did Mad Dog just hand him the order and say sign here?
Top
Re: Syria Strikes
Post by gcomeau   » Sun Apr 09, 2017 9:36 pm

gcomeau
Admiral

Posts: 2747
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2014 5:24 pm

And in the final demonstration this was just theater... they didn't even take the one airbase they targeted out of commission. How do you fire 60 tomohawks at an airbase and leave it so operationally unimpaired that they're flying missions out of it a couple hours later?

There's 60 million dollars worth of ordinance put to good use. :roll:
Top
Re: Syria Strikes
Post by Annachie   » Mon Apr 10, 2017 4:05 am

Annachie
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 3099
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2011 7:36 pm

Because he didn't want the airbase damaged.
Don't want to piss off the Russians too much.



Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
You are so going to die. :p ~~~~ runsforcelery
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
still not dead. :)
Top
Re: Syria Strikes
Post by dscott8   » Mon Apr 10, 2017 8:18 am

dscott8
Commodore

Posts: 791
Joined: Thu Jul 15, 2010 6:17 am

gcomeau wrote:And in the final demonstration this was just theater... they didn't even take the one airbase they targeted out of commission. How do you fire 60 tomohawks at an airbase and leave it so operationally unimpaired that they're flying missions out of it a couple hours later?

There's 60 million dollars worth of ordinance put to good use. :roll:


This factor really got my goat. In purely military terms, the op was ineffective. Tomahawk-D variants could have potholed the runways with CBUs, preventing flight ops. Instead of direct downward hits on plane shelters, targeting the openings would have disabled aircraft. Instead, we scratched the paint & called it a day.

This may make sense politically as a "shot across the bows", but that only helps if the target heeds the warning. They didn't. Now, if we don't escalate, we show lack of resolve. If we do, we risk the next Viet Nam.
Top
Re: Syria Strikes
Post by Annachie   » Mon Apr 10, 2017 10:18 am

Annachie
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 3099
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2011 7:36 pm

It's worse than you think.

Aparently President Trump owns stock in the company that makes Tomahawk missiles.



Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
You are so going to die. :p ~~~~ runsforcelery
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
still not dead. :)
Top
Re: Syria Strikes
Post by noblehunter   » Mon Apr 10, 2017 11:49 am

noblehunter
Captain (Junior Grade)

Posts: 385
Joined: Tue Aug 04, 2015 8:49 pm

On the other hand, wouldn't it be difficult to leave the airbase operational by accident? That the attack blew up precisely what it intended to and nothing more? The message being the precision of the attack rather than the damage inflicted?

Regardless, I don't think this attack was a useful response to the use of chemical weapons. I don't think minor damage to infrastructure is really going to give Assad pause, even if it did show just how good the US's aim is. The received message could be that as long as Assad keeps the Russians close, he can do what he wants because the US is unwilling to risk a confrontation with Russia. Which Assad probably already knew but there was no need to underline with millions of dollars in munitions.
Top

Return to Politics