News Foreign Office strongly urges Britons to leave Syria

[Notebook]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13180091

Suppose we'll be bombing them next week?

N.

 

[tl8]

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/04/24/3199409.htm?section=justin

Same here. Looks bad

 

[SiberianTiger]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13180091
Suppose we'll be bombing them next week?

N.

I suggest using Tridents, they provide the best effect to cost ratio.

 

[deltawing777]

I suggest using Tridents, they provide the best effect to cost ratio.

lol Tridents . As far as america bring all our troops home. Regroup. Invest in Nasa. And american defenses.

 

[Notebook]

Trident, sort of narows our option down a bit:
[ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vanguard_class_submarine"]Vanguard class submarine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]

Still, if we lob a few of those at Syria, it'll certainly bring the Middle East situation to a quick end. We might not like it though...

N.

 

[deltawing777]

well yeah I guess there can't be any conflict if theres no people to conflict with! :lol:

 

[Wishbone]

A "quick end" is an understatement. With Iraq and Libya as examples any Arab (and non-Arab) nation understands that only possessing nukes would stop the European and American political dumbheads from attacking them.

 

[Urwumpe]

A "quick end" is an understatement. With Iraq and Libya as examples any Arab (and non-Arab) nation understands that only possessing nukes would stop the European and American political dumbheads from attacking them.

But that doesn't stop Israel from hunting your nukes.

 

[deltawing777]

we all know as soon as that one country does it..other countries will say "well if they can do it,then we can do it!" We all know what that will lead to. Just EMP them. In the middle of the night on a holiday. Minimal Causualties. City's are left intact for the most part. Then they can throw rocks at each other

 

[Urwumpe]

LOL. I bet, a well placed EMP down there would have less impact than a badly placed EMP over Europe or the USA. There is simply little that can fall apart. Even the mobile phone networks aren't really as sophisticated as they are here.

 

[deltawing777]

What I was meaning was use it on populated cities where there is infrastructure. But you are right it won't stop a bullet or grenade or rpg. But it can make it difficult to manufacture such things and get them transported without vehicles. On another note looks like Gov't forces are opening fire on civilians. Wonder how 'ol Obama and the UN is going to handle this one? I don't see the situation in Syria being any different then libya.

 

[Ghostrider]

Let's put it this way: Rwanda was thousands times worse, and everybody looked the other way and waited until it went away by itself. There's massacre and massacre, if it doesn't fit our economic/politic interests it can be safely ignored.

 

[Urwumpe]

But it can make it difficult to manufacture such things and get them transported without vehicles.

What makes you think that

a) they use cars there, that are based on solid-state electronics and are thus in danger of getting fried by EMP?

b) Their long-distance cargo haul technology is not mostly based on donkeys?

 

[deltawing777]

What I was meaning was use it on populated cities where there is infrastructure.

IE [ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Damascus"]Damascus[/ame]

 

[Urwumpe]

IE Damascus

Damascus isn't really comparable to US cities with the same population density and population though, you can cause of course damage - but the damage of a EMP wouldn't be fatal.

Down there, people are used to having to rebuild stuff quickly, because they are surrounded by enemies. Including their own gov.

 

[deltawing777]

True slowing em down was the idea..A alternative to what Notebook and tridents would do. lol :thumbup: He is right it would save alot of time and money. But the backlash is the problem

 

[Urwumpe]

True slowing em down was the idea..A alternative to what Notebook and tridents would do. lol :thumbup: He is right it would save alot of time and money. But the backlash is the problem

A war does never solve political problems. It just makes political solutions possible sometimes. A few Tridents can at least mean a good clean sheet restart...literally.

The big problem today is just, that too few people have really read their "Bing Fa"... in peace, prepare for war; in war, prepare for peace.

Politicians just send soldiers into battles, without doing their part of the job and think about what should be the goal of the wars and what should be done after the war is over.

 

[jedidia]

Politicians just send soldiers into battles, without doing their part of the job and think about what should be the goal of the wars and what should be done after the war is over.

I couldn't agree more. 90% of what you're doing in the humanitarian business in post-war countries is frantically trying to fix stuff that wouldn't have been broken if someone actually thought about the same problems five to ten years earlier (when they were just as evident, but lower on the priority list).

So yeah... I challenge politicians to thouroughly destroy the basis of my job. I like what I'm doing, but it would be better if there was no need to do it. Most of the time we're not really able to fix stuff anymore anyways.

 

[deltawing777]

A war does never solve political problems. It just makes political solutions possible sometimes. A few Tridents can at least mean a good clean sheet restart...literally.

The big problem today is just, that too few people have really read their "Bing Fa"... in peace, prepare for war; in war, prepare for peace.

Politicians just send soldiers into battles, without doing their part of the job and think about what should be the goal of the wars and what should be done after the war is over.

Amen brother!