U.S Admits supplying terrorists in Syria with Lethal weapons

[That Guy]

The US cannot steamroll Russia, China, heck, not even the UK, France, Germany, Italy, Sweden. 98-99%?

There are 190 nations in the world. subtract: Russia, China, heck, not even the UK, France, Germany, Italy, Sweden, or 7 from 190, and you get 183. Now to put that into percentage, take 183/190 and you get 0.9631; now times that by 100 and you get 96.31%.

So, to be exact, 96.31.

Having said that, outside of Russia and China, it actually could steamroll France, Italy and Sweden, maybe not Germany, or the UK; which means that the percent would be 97.89%, round that up (because countries count as wholes), and you get 98%, so it's within my margin of error.

You just got Math'd

 

[500]

Even 1 million is enough. Due to weakening economy, the US can only deploy about 100,000 troops these days, rather than the millions it were able to deploy in WW2, Korea, Vietnam. That gives a 10 to 1 ratio in favor of Syria. Iraq and Iran and Lebanon etc. can deploy another million or so to reinforce Syria.

1 AC is enough to destroy the entire Syrian air force.

They may not like Assad, but Assad is first and foremost a Syrian, an Arab, a Muslim. Americans are none of these. They would be seen as invaders and heathens.

He is Alawite not Muslim.

 

[That Guy]

we have Israel next door.... , you think the if the west attacks Syria it wont suffer any damage or death? you are mistaken, they have bases in the ME, Iran and Syria have Mutual defence agreement...

Yeah, I doubt that would make much of a difference, because the Syrian military would still cease to exist. It's not about taking damage.

 

[Superboy]

1 AC is enough to destroy the entire Syrian air force.

He is Alawite not Muslim.

The Syrian air force would be just about the last thing American occupiers have to worry about.

Alawites are Muslims just as Mormons are Christians. Well, fringe, but nonetheless

 

[That Guy]

Even 1 million is enough. Due to weakening economy, the US can only deploy about 100,000 troops these days, rather than the millions it were able to deploy in WW2, Korea, Vietnam. That gives a 10 to 1 ratio in favor of Syria. Iraq and Iran and Lebanon etc. can deploy another million or so to reinforce Syria.

Some Syrians may not like Assad, but Assad is first and foremost a Syrian, an Arab, a Muslim. Americans are none of these. Americans would be seen as invaders and heathens. Even Kurds would take up arms against Americans.

Russia and Iran and Iraq and would form a supply line to deliver Kornets and Iglas which would make mincemeat out of M1A2 tanks and AH-64D attack helicopters.

Yeah, it wouldn't be a million, I can guarantee you. Besides the US has nearly perfected warfare, one US soldier would be able to take out 20 undertrained Syrians, before getting hit.

Also, your comment is filled with assumptions.

 

[Superboy]

Yeah, it wouldn't be a million, I can guarantee you. Besides the US has nearly perfected warfare, one US soldier would be able to take out 20 undertrained Syrians, before getting hit.

Also, your comment is filled with assumptions.

Doubt it. These days the great majority of US soldiers are Hispanics and African Americans, who are from poor families, joining the army to make some money. The government frankly wants to get rid of them. They are not provided with sufficient armor. A single shot from an Iraqi supplied M16 or an Iranian supplied G3 would easily shoot dead an American soldier.

 

[That Guy]

Doubt it. These days the great majority of US soldiers are Hispanics and African Americans, who are from poor families, joining the army to make some money. The government frankly wants to get rid of them. They are not provided with sufficient armor. A single shot from an Iraqi supplied M16 or an Iranian supplied G3 would easily shoot dead an American soldier.

More anecdotes and assumptions.

Look, you know nothing about warfare, or these nation's capabilities, and if you do, you're doing a piss poor job of showing it. Just stop.

 

[BigDaddyWatch]

 

[Superboy]

The degradation of the US economy severely limiting the # of soldiers the US can deploy to Syria coupled with the fact that the majority of US soldiers are not white = disaster for the US military if the US is to ever invade Syria. Which is why, it is safe to assume, the US would not mess with Syria, for otherwise that million men army, trained and armed by Russia, Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, which are allies of Syria, would seriously hurt the US

 

[Syrian Lion]

Yeah, I doubt that would make much of a difference, because the Syrian military would still cease to exist. It's not about taking damage.

yeah that explains why the west keep saying Alasad days are numbered and Alasad have to go, why don't they attack Syria? Turkey has asked the NATO many times to attack Syria but the refused, they know Syria is not Libya or Iraq, you're underestimating Syria...

@500 are you going to keep saying the terrorsits have no supports from the west and blah blah blah.... US it self admitted it supported them with lethal weapons... so stop trying to justify the terrorists losses in Syria every time saying they have no weapons or support from the west, while in reality the west sent spent millions and gcc puppets spent billions arming them and training them...

 

[Superboy]

yeah that explains why the west keep saying Alasad days are numbered and Alasad have to go, why don't they attack Syria? Turkey has asked the NATO many times to attack Syria but the refused, they know Syria is not Libya or Iraq, you're underestimating Syria...

@500 are you going to keep saying the terrorsits have no supports from the west and blah blah blah.... US it self admitted it supported them with lethal weapons... so stop trying to justify the terrorists losses in Syria every time saying they have no weapons or support from the west, while in reality the west sent spent millions and gcc puppets spent billions arming them and training them...

Of course, this is not only about Syria. The entire middle east is all interconnected. An attack on Syria would immediately trigger war with Syria's ME allies Iran, Iraq, Lebanon.

 

[That Guy]

yeah that explains why the west keep saying Alasad days are numbered and Alasad have to go, why don't they attack Syria? Turkey has asked the NATO many times to attack Syria but the refused, they know Syria is not Libya or Iraq, you're underestimating Syria...
Don't confuse capability with popularity. The only reason why the US isn't in Syria is because no one in the US wants to get involved, and Obama being a populist leader is going to oblige.

Just because you have a hammer (military), doesn't mean you should slam (invade) the nail (Syria) in, even though your boss (the people) told you not to.

 

[Syrian Lion]

Of course, this is not only about Syria. The entire middle east is all interconnected. An attack on Syria would immediately trigger war with its ME allies Iran, Iraq, Lebanon.

That Guy doesn't understand the ME at all...

 

[That Guy]

Of course, this is not only about Syria. The entire middle east is all interconnected. An attack on Syria would immediately trigger war with its ME allies Iran, Iraq, Lebanon.

Yeah, no it wouldn't. Iraq proved that much, even though everyone in the ME (even KSA) was against it.

The middle east is hardly interconnected, geopolitics of the entire region show just how disconnected the region is.

That Guy doesn't understand the ME at all...

Actually, I seem to understand it more than you or @Superboy

 

[Superboy]

Yeah, no it wouldn't. Iraq proved that much, even though everyone in the ME (even KSA) was against it.

The middle east is hardly interconnected, geopolitics of the entire region show just how disconnected the region is.


Actually, I seem to understand it more than you or @Superboy

The entire ME (sans Turkey and Iran) is overwhelming Arab majority. If a neighbor's house is on fire, you don't not care about it. Americans are not Arabs. If Americans invade Syria, for whatever reason, Arabs and even Turks and Iranians would flood into Syria to kill American occupiers.