Disaster Possible multi-national airstrike on Syria expected in the next 72 hours - "I don't want to set the worrrld on firrreeee~"

  • Thread starter Thread starter RP 520
  • Start date Start date
Europe's air traffic control network has warned commercial aircraft to avoid Syrian airspace due to a possible strike being planned in the next 72 hours.
https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/9...-uk-france-chemical-attack-russia-eurocontrol

DEFCON has been lowered to 4 over reports of military amassing air forces and the potential risks of a Russia vs. U.S. conflict.
https://defconwarningsystem.com/2018/04/10/defcon-warning-system-update-4-10-18/

Supposedly the British RAF is on alert in Cyprus.

There's also unconfirmed reports of the U.S. moving missile cruisers around in the Mediterranean and aircraft in Eastern Iraq.
 
Because Syria is an ally of Russia and Iran. If they get attacked and Russian soldiers get killed then the whole world goes up in nuclear smoke. This is because of an alleged chemical attack by either Assad or ISIS.
That's kind of stupid. Can they wait for more evidence on both sides before putting each other on gunpoint?

Even though I don't believe WW3 would start from this, this is starting to scare me a bit from how everyone looks so trigger-happy now.
 
That's kind of stupid. Can they wait for more evidence on both sides before putting each other on gunpoint?

Even though I don't believe WW3 would start from this, this is starting to scare me a bit from how everyone looks so trigger-happy now.
Do you really think either side is going to start a nuclear war over a desert shithole like Syria? I doubt it.
 
That's kind of stupid. Can they wait for more evidence on both sides before putting each other on gunpoint?

Even though I don't believe WW3 would start from this, this is starting to scare me a bit from how everyone looks so trigger-happy now.
I've received two disagrees but what else could it be? Does anyone have a better explanation as to why we may not go into WW3 in 3 days? I agree that there should be more time to investigate what happened. But who knows? Hopefully Trump doesn't go ahead and start something he may regret and have the whole world be in nuclear flames.

Do you really think either side is going to start a nuclear war over a desert shithole like Syria? I doubt it.
With the way things are going looks like it. So much for "America First". >_>
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I've received two disagrees but what else could it be? Does anyone have a better explanation as to why we may not go into WW3 in 3 days? I agree that there should be more time to investigate what happened. But who knows? Hopefully Trump doesn't go ahead and start something he may regret and have the whole world be in nuclear flames.
Because Soviet and US jets were shooting each other down in the Vietnam war and no nukes got fired. No one's going into WW3 over a shithole. There may be a small war, but it's not worth losing everything over regardless of which party you are, Assad excepted.
 
Do you really think either side is going to start a nuclear war over a desert shithole like Syria? I doubt it.

I've received two disagrees but what else could it be? Does anyone have a better explanation as to why we may not go into WW3 in 3 days?

Most likely Russia would start it. Russia been acting... trigger-happy these days. Syria's been like acting a child throwing toys at other countries but if anyone dares speak up about it, Syria will sob and cry for big Mother Russia to nuke away, even though Russia been itching for a fight for a long time.

Because Soviet and US jets were shooting each other down in the Vietnam war and no nukes got fired.

That calmed me down a bit. Still a shame innocent people on both sides have to die regardless.
 
Where's Turkey in all of this? They've wanted Assad gone for ages and they're part of NATO. Why haven't they been loudly calling for a NATO intervention?
I don't know man, I've been reading a lot of shit since the war broke out, first it was clear, turkey didn't want Assad on power, but on a few peace talks they seem ambivalent about Assad staying in power or not.
 
Because Soviet and US jets were shooting each other down in the Vietnam war and no nukes got fired. No one's going into WW3 over a shithole. There may be a small war, but it's not worth losing everything over regardless of which party you are, Assad excepted.

We didn't start a nuclear war over Russia literally annexing part of Europe a few years ago. Probably ain't going to do so over Syria.
 
That's kind of stupid. Can they wait for more evidence on both sides before putting each other on gunpoint?

Even though I don't believe WW3 would start from this, this is starting to scare me a bit from how everyone looks so trigger-happy now.
This is basically the next cold war, right? Even if they start on the ground fighting, I doubt they're going to use nuclear weapons. They have no reason to.

Most likely Russia would start it. Russia been acting... trigger-happy these days. Syria's been like acting a child throwing toys at other countries but if anyone dares speak up about it, Syria will sob and cry for big Mother Russia to nuke away, even though Russia been itching for a fight for a long time.
Russia doesnt answer to Syria, if anything it would be the other way around. He's backing them, he just has to look tough and like he cares. It's fucking imperialism, Teddy Roosevelt basically started it, right? Posturing was the word I was looking for. It's more about telling the other guy youre watching him and youre going to "protect your borders and interests" if shit goes further. But none of their allies and onlookers want to get physically involved any more than they already are, which is basically just moral support, supplies, and the occasional "Youre doin a good job, champ, here's a pat on the back". Or a few shows of force every now and then if something is really getting out of hand or hitting too close to home. It's not their borders and only marginally their interests. They dont really care who runs it so long as he barks on command and asks how high when told to jump.

There's also more shit coming out about Trump and his ties with Russia, so, if any of it's true, I doubt their compliance with each other would fall apart that easily.
 
Last edited:
I lived in the Middle East for a bit and we have nothing to gain here. They hate us no matter what we do. I had colleagues telling me my country was terrible for intervening in Iraq and Libya etc. The next day they would ask me why we haven't done anything about Syria, why do we hate Syrians? They acted like it was the US and UK's responsibility to clean it up. They weren't being ironic, they were genuinely angry.

They hate us if we intervene, they hate us if we don't intervene. Nothing we ever do will satisfy them. So fuck em. Let them sort it out themselves.
 
Count me in with the group that doesn't believe this will start a nuclear war/WW3 right away. Maybe some small skirmishes or a conflict similar to Afghanistan in the 80s, or protests from our favorite people on Twitter. But then again this is the internet and people will spread fear right away quicker than a pastor thinking a single bombing spells the end of the world:


By the way are people losing their shit on European countries(or other countries not named US) that will bomb Syria?
 
This whole thing is starting to remind me a bit of farcry 5 or at least its backdrop

I'm going to be in the camp here that this won't bloom into an all-out war where the nukes go flyin'. But geopolitics, like war, is an unpredictable affair. It can really go either way. We just gotta keep an eye on this situation, all we could really do anyways.
 
Last edited:
We need to fuck off and out of Syria. Does anyone remember when it was declared we would intervene? Some kind of announcement, or justification declared? I certainly don't. It just sort of happened. Some vague stuff about fighting ISIS? Has nothing to do with this
 
The (((powers that be))) really want to see Assad bloodily dragged through the streets with a stick jammed up his anus

I wonder who could possibly be behind this...


Egypt gets free elections -> Oh shit, Islamists -> People elect strongman general who cracks down on civil liberties.

No escaping it.

The nastiest thing about the middle east - or at least that region of it - as it is today is the plain fact that the best way for it to be governed is by a brutal secular dictator. Any time it's governed otherwise it just all falls to shit because the people there just aren't the types to have a functioning democracy work out well. It's against western sensibilities and the way that we tend to view the relationship between a government and the governed, but it's the truth, and the people who are for trying to change that need to just accept it already.
 
Where's Turkey in all of this? They've wanted Assad gone for ages and they're part of NATO. Why haven't they been loudly calling for a NATO intervention?
Because then they would be a junior partner. Right now they and the Saudis are running shit.

I don't know man, I've been reading a lot of shit since the war broke out, first it was clear, turkey didn't want Assad on power, but on a few peace talks they seem ambivalent about Assad staying in power or not.
Yeah, but look at what they are doing on the ground. Look at where the rebels supply comes from. Look at their rear training areas. Look at their logistics trail. It's all Turkey. The only reason they are making nice is to try to arrange a Kurdish gangbang with Assad before the final showdown.
 
DEFCON has been lowered to 4 over reports of military amassing air forces and the potential risks of a Russia vs. U.S. conflict.
There's a difference between actual DEFCON, which is the US Military Defense Condition, and meme internet DEFCON, which is whatever preppers want it to be. I'm not sure which that website is, but iirc it's the later.
 
Back