gillan1220
Fleet admiral
I've been depressed recently. Slow replies coming in the next few days.
Posts: 12,609 
Likes: 11,326
|
Post by gillan1220 on Nov 22, 2020 6:24:06 GMT
This was one of the things I remember of the escalation of Cold War II. I was still a freshman college student as of August 2013 and was doing what ordinary college students would do: hang out with friends and party but at the same time I was also taking note of the news headlines that day. I remember anxiously watching as the U.S. positioned the naval vessels (USS Stout, USS Gravely, USS Mahan, USS Barry, USS Ramage, and USS San Antonio were in the Med) ready to strike at the regime. I thought NATO was gonna pull of another Operation Unified Protector over Syria. Keep in mind this was in the middle of a government shutdown. I also remember that the U.S. Secretary of Defense, Chuck Hagel, was in Manila at this period to reaffirm the U.S. commitments to the Asia-Pacific region.  Of course this fizzled out. The Russians were able to call the bluff. The House of Commons in the UK voted for no strike to occur and the U.S. agreed with Russia to have the chemical weapons be destroyed under the UN's supervision. However, what if the attack proceeded even though the strikes were limited (see maps below)? Would it have brought to wider conflict with Russia? Or would it butterfly the rise of ISIS?   Leave your thoughts below. Further reading: |
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 67,985
Likes: 49,390
|
Post by lordroel on Nov 22, 2020 7:28:53 GMT
This was one of the things I remember of the escalation of Cold War II. I was still a freshman college student as of August 2013 and was doing what ordinary college students would do: hang out with friends and party but at the same time I was also taking note of the news headlines that day. I remember anxiously watching as the U.S. positioned the naval vessels (USS Stout, USS Gravely, USS Mahan, USS Barry, USS Ramage, and USS San Antonio were in the Med) ready to strike at the regime. I thought NATO was gonna pull of another Operation Unified Protector over Syria. Keep in mind this was in the middle of a government shutdown. I also remember that the U.S. Secretary of Defense, Chuck Hagel, was in Manila at this period to reaffirm the U.S. commitments to the Asia-Pacific region. Of course this fizzled out. The Russians were able to call the bluff. The House of Commons in the UK voted for no strike to occur and the U.S. agreed with Russia to have the chemical weapons be destroyed under the UN's supervision. However, what if the attack proceeded even though the strikes were limited (see maps below)? Would it have brought to wider conflict with Russia? Or would it butterfly the rise of ISIS? Leave your thoughts below. Further reading: A yes the famous Red Line moment of then president Obama, when nothing happen, only 3 years latter under President Trump we saw the September 2016 Deir ez-Zor air raid and a year latter the 2017 Shayrat missile strike, both resulted in no major action from Syria against NATO ore the United States, so i do not think we will see it in this strike as well. |
|
gillan1220
Fleet admiral
I've been depressed recently. Slow replies coming in the next few days.
Posts: 12,609
Likes: 11,326
|
Post by gillan1220 on Nov 22, 2020 10:49:18 GMT
This was one of the things I remember of the escalation of Cold War II. I was still a freshman college student as of August 2013 and was doing what ordinary college students would do: hang out with friends and party but at the same time I was also taking note of the news headlines that day. I remember anxiously watching as the U.S. positioned the naval vessels (USS Stout, USS Gravely, USS Mahan, USS Barry, USS Ramage, and USS San Antonio were in the Med) ready to strike at the regime. I thought NATO was gonna pull of another Operation Unified Protector over Syria. Keep in mind this was in the middle of a government shutdown. I also remember that the U.S. Secretary of Defense, Chuck Hagel, was in Manila at this period to reaffirm the U.S. commitments to the Asia-Pacific region. Of course this fizzled out. The Russians were able to call the bluff. The House of Commons in the UK voted for no strike to occur and the U.S. agreed with Russia to have the chemical weapons be destroyed under the UN's supervision. However, what if the attack proceeded even though the strikes were limited (see maps below)? Would it have brought to wider conflict with Russia? Or would it butterfly the rise of ISIS? Leave your thoughts below. Further reading: A yes the famous Red Line moment of then president Obama, when nothing happen, only 3 years latter under President Trump we saw the September 2016 Deir ez-Zor air raid and a year latter the 2017 Shayrat missile strike, both resulted in no major action from Syria against NATO ore the United States, so i do not think we will see it in this strike as well. I remember that moment. I really thought the U.S. Navy would launch Tomahawks and F/A-18 Strikes on Syrian Arab Republic Forces. One of the moments I remember clearly of Cold War II which would be overshadowed by Crimea in February 2014. How do you think Putin would react? Contrary to what everyone believed, the Russians know that cannot defeat the United States head-on. EDIT: Just a correction, the September 2016 raid was still under Obama. Trump wasn't elected President yet. |
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 67,985
Likes: 49,390
|
Post by lordroel on Nov 22, 2020 11:24:03 GMT
A yes the famous Red Line moment of then president Obama, when nothing happen, only 3 years latter under President Trump we saw the September 2016 Deir ez-Zor air raid and a year latter the 2017 Shayrat missile strike, both resulted in no major action from Syria against NATO ore the United States, so i do not think we will see it in this strike as well. I remember that moment. I really thought the U.S. Navy would launch Tomahawks and F/A-18 Strikes on Syrian Arab Republic Forces. One of the moments I remember clearly of Cold War II which would be overshadowed by Crimea in February 2014. How do you think Putin would react? Contrary to what everyone believed, the Russians know that cannot defeat the United States head-on. EDIT: Just a correction, the September 2016 raid was still under Obama. Trump wasn't elected President yet. Seems you are right. I think Putin would react the same way as he did when the September 2016 Deir ez-Zor air raid and the 2017 Shayrat missile strike happened, these days strike by both Allied, Turkey and Russian against targets in Syria are regular. |
|
gillan1220
Fleet admiral
I've been depressed recently. Slow replies coming in the next few days.
Posts: 12,609
Likes: 11,326
|
Post by gillan1220 on Nov 22, 2020 11:26:50 GMT
I remember that moment. I really thought the U.S. Navy would launch Tomahawks and F/A-18 Strikes on Syrian Arab Republic Forces. One of the moments I remember clearly of Cold War II which would be overshadowed by Crimea in February 2014. How do you think Putin would react? Contrary to what everyone believed, the Russians know that cannot defeat the United States head-on. EDIT: Just a correction, the September 2016 raid was still under Obama. Trump wasn't elected President yet. Seems you are right. I think Putin would react the same way as he did when the September 2016 Deir ez-Zor air raid and the 2017 Shayrat missile strike happened, these days strike by both Allied, Turkey and Russian against targets in Syria are regular. Safe to say that a strike in August/September 2013 wouldn't change much? At best, it would cripple the SAA, thus giving the FSA and the opposition more ground until the rise of ISIS in mid-2014. |
|
James G
Squadron vice admiral
Posts: 7,608
Likes: 8,833
|
Post by James G on Nov 22, 2020 11:30:41 GMT
The possibility of an accidental US-Russian clash would be very real. However, there were fewer Russian forces inside Syria back in 2013 than in later years so maybe that lessens the chances somewhat. Still... I cannot see Obama willing to take the risk of war by accident.
|
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 67,985
Likes: 49,390
|
Post by lordroel on Nov 22, 2020 11:38:01 GMT
The possibility of an accidental US-Russian clash would be very real. However, there were fewer Russian forces inside Syria back in 2013 than in later years so maybe that lessens the chances somewhat. Still... I cannot see Obama willing to take the risk of war by accident. Looking at the maps gillan1220 has posted, the August/September 2013 appears to be bigger than the 2017 Shayrat missile strike in scale. |
|
gillan1220
Fleet admiral
I've been depressed recently. Slow replies coming in the next few days.
Posts: 12,609
Likes: 11,326
|
Post by gillan1220 on Nov 22, 2020 11:47:49 GMT
The possibility of an accidental US-Russian clash would be very real. However, there were fewer Russian forces inside Syria back in 2013 than in later years so maybe that lessens the chances somewhat. Still... I cannot see Obama willing to take the risk of war by accident. What Russian forces were in Syria besides Special Forces, naval infantry at Tartus, and mercenaries? In a clash with the USN and the USAF, I could see the Russians not offer much of significant retaliation unless they have their SA-7s, S-300s, or any shore-based defenses. Yes, the U.S. and Russians have seen each other in Syria in recent times. I remember back then earlier this year there was a photo of U.S. soldiers with an MRAP meeting with a Russian armored convoy of BTRs. Also, not to mention the there have been incidents of vehicle collisions and blockades in the area as of 2020. However, no actual shooting has been done between Americans and Russians, though clashes with Russian Mercenaries have occurred. From January: US Troops Block Russian Convoy in SyriaFrom February: US forces block another Russian convoy in Syria as tensions rise From June: U.S. Forces reportedly block Russian military convoy in Syria |
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,836
Likes: 13,225
|
Post by stevep on Nov 22, 2020 15:57:43 GMT
I would suspect that if such a larger set of missile strikes had occurred Putin wouldn't have risked war directly but would probably have increased aid to Assad to seek to prevent the regime from falling - which looked very likely until substantial aid came from Russia and Iran especially. Plus of course deploying western 'aggression' and 'intervention'. If there is no further western intervention then I suspect the regime survives although it might collapse in which case you would probably have chaos like in Iraq but perhaps with the Russians rather than western forces being the ones to seek to maintain some sort of order.
I fear that given the current cultural situation something like IS would be pretty much inevitable. There is too much hatred and bigotry in the region and a desire to blame outsiders - especially but not solely the west - for all the Islamic world's problems and unscrupulous elements who would use such feelings to gain political and military power for themselves.
Steve
|
|
gillan1220
Fleet admiral
I've been depressed recently. Slow replies coming in the next few days.
Posts: 12,609
Likes: 11,326
|
Post by gillan1220 on Nov 22, 2020 16:14:32 GMT
I would suspect that if such a larger set of missile strikes had occurred Putin wouldn't have risked war directly but would probably have increased aid to Assad to seek to prevent the regime from falling - which looked very likely until substantial aid came from Russia and Iran especially. Plus of course deploying western 'aggression' and 'intervention'. If there is no further western intervention then I suspect the regime survives although it might collapse in which case you would probably have chaos like in Iraq but perhaps with the Russians rather than western forces being the ones to seek to maintain some sort of order.
I fear that given the current cultural situation something like IS would be pretty much inevitable. There is too much hatred and bigotry in the region and a desire to blame outsiders - especially but not solely the west - for all the Islamic world's problems and unscrupulous elements who would use such feelings to gain political and military power for themselves.
Steve
In short, Syria would still be chaotic by the 2014-17 levels as per OTL in the days of the Obama administration. EDIT: Since the FSA was already losing at this period, countless members turned to Al Nursa and other Islamic groups. So ISIS would still come. No butterflying its existence. |
|
lordroel
Administrator
Posts: 67,985
Likes: 49,390
|
Post by lordroel on Nov 22, 2020 16:16:34 GMT
I would suspect that if such a larger set of missile strikes had occurred Putin wouldn't have risked war directly but would probably have increased aid to Assad to seek to prevent the regime from falling - which looked very likely until substantial aid came from Russia and Iran especially. Plus of course deploying western 'aggression' and 'intervention'. If there is no further western intervention then I suspect the regime survives although it might collapse in which case you would probably have chaos like in Iraq but perhaps with the Russians rather than western forces being the ones to seek to maintain some sort of order.
I fear that given the current cultural situation something like IS would be pretty much inevitable. There is too much hatred and bigotry in the region and a desire to blame outsiders - especially but not solely the west - for all the Islamic world's problems and unscrupulous elements who would use such feelings to gain political and military power for themselves. Steve
In short, Syria would still be chaotic by the 2014-17 levels as per OTL in the days of the Obama administration. Yep, i think events will move a year ahead of OTL with Russia beginning to start operating out of Syria in 2014 instead of OTL 2015. |
|
gillan1220
Fleet admiral
I've been depressed recently. Slow replies coming in the next few days.
Posts: 12,609
Likes: 11,326
|
Post by gillan1220 on Nov 22, 2020 16:23:42 GMT
In short, Syria would still be chaotic by the 2014-17 levels as per OTL in the days of the Obama administration. Yep, i think events will move a year ahead of OTL with Russia beginning to start operating out of Syria in 2014 instead of OTL 2015. Then during the rise of ISIS, the U.S. and NATO would be dragged along. So if everything occurs one year earlier, Turkey would also move in to the regions bordering Syria. They have been wanting to intervene since the SAA shot down an F-4 in 2012. How do you think Saudi Arabia and Qatar intervenes in this scenario? In OTL, they still back most of the opposition forces. Neither have military forces capable enough of projecting to Syria. Plus, we know how bad the Saudi Armed Forces performed in Yemen against the Houthis, which will still occur in this timeline. |
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,836
Likes: 13,225
|
Post by stevep on Nov 22, 2020 16:38:28 GMT
Yep, i think events will move a year ahead of OTL with Russia beginning to start operating out of Syria in 2014 instead of OTL 2015. Then during the rise of ISIS, the U.S. and NATO would be dragged along. So if everything occurs one year earlier, Turkey would also move in to the regions bordering Syria. They have been wanting to intervene since the SAA shot down an F-4 in 2012. How do you think Saudi Arabia and Qatar intervenes in this scenario? In OTL, they still back most of the opposition forces. Neither have military forces capable enough of projecting to Syria. Plus, we know how bad the Saudi Armed Forces performed in Yemen against the Houthis, which will still occur in this timeline.
On the last point I doubt the Gulf states would intervene militarily, as their too weak and also it might attract attention from Assad's allies, both Moscow and more importantly Iran. In terms of money and indirect support that would be a different issue. They would be worried about something as extreme as IS but would have relatively little ability directly to do much about them, while their more fanatical hard-liners might be attracted to some of their ideas as well.
|
|
gillan1220
Fleet admiral
I've been depressed recently. Slow replies coming in the next few days.
Posts: 12,609
Likes: 11,326
|
Post by gillan1220 on Nov 22, 2020 16:44:18 GMT
Then during the rise of ISIS, the U.S. and NATO would be dragged along. So if everything occurs one year earlier, Turkey would also move in to the regions bordering Syria. They have been wanting to intervene since the SAA shot down an F-4 in 2012. How do you think Saudi Arabia and Qatar intervenes in this scenario? In OTL, they still back most of the opposition forces. Neither have military forces capable enough of projecting to Syria. Plus, we know how bad the Saudi Armed Forces performed in Yemen against the Houthis, which will still occur in this timeline.
On the last point I doubt the Gulf states would intervene militarily, as their too weak and also it might attract attention from Assad's allies, both Moscow and more importantly Iran. In terms of money and indirect support that would be a different issue. They would be worried about something as extreme as IS but would have relatively little ability directly to do much about them, while their more fanatical hard-liners might be attracted to some of their ideas as well.
Nonetheless, Saudi Arabia and Qatar would still support extremist elements in the Syrian opposition just like OTL. Israel would probably put more of its forces in the Golan Heights region. Israel has also conductive limited strikes in that area and has shot down SAA aircraft. Syria will still be an entangled mess in OTL just as portrayed as this political cartoon:  |
|
gillan1220
Fleet admiral
I've been depressed recently. Slow replies coming in the next few days.
Posts: 12,609
Likes: 11,326
|
Post by gillan1220 on Nov 23, 2020 3:45:27 GMT
This is another question. What if Turkey intervened in the Syrian Civil War in June 2012 following the shootdown of the Turkish F-4 Phantom? How would the U.S. - one that has bases in Turkey - and Russia react to this? |
|
