Partisan
Active member
OK, so a friend sent this to me and I thought that I'd share it and open it up for discussion, it fits under many categories, but seems to fit in this spot.
http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/2010...readmore&elq=35df3fa641234dee8bbf8c2e522c1f6c
I seriously hope that these guys have considered more than just the aspects covered in this article. Whilst I agree with some of their assumptions, I'm a bit suspect about how serious Syria is about its shiny relationship with S Arabia, I don't think it'll stand up.
Also whilst it does draw and mention Israels options, it has also left out, Egypt, Jordan, Turkey, as well as what thespill over of conventional strikes in Iran would mean to Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq and even Europe, not to mention that the Russians might manage to get some fall out!
I understand the necessity for brevity, but seeing these options as stand alone actions with insulated results scares me - these are big stones that they consider chucking into a very small pond - the waves will ensure everyone gets damp. I still cannot understand how we can consider a military campaign as a surgical campaign, do we really beieve that a precision guided weapon is able to hit a penny from miles away - every time?
I'm also concerned about the blithe way they gloss over the Serbians camouflaging and masking vehicles - despite our vaunted intel capabilities, are the Iranians any less capable?
I think that some of the article has merit, but is a dangerous case of overstating capabilities and understating opposition - and we know where that leads - your thoughts?
http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/2010...readmore&elq=35df3fa641234dee8bbf8c2e522c1f6c
I seriously hope that these guys have considered more than just the aspects covered in this article. Whilst I agree with some of their assumptions, I'm a bit suspect about how serious Syria is about its shiny relationship with S Arabia, I don't think it'll stand up.
Also whilst it does draw and mention Israels options, it has also left out, Egypt, Jordan, Turkey, as well as what thespill over of conventional strikes in Iran would mean to Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq and even Europe, not to mention that the Russians might manage to get some fall out!
I understand the necessity for brevity, but seeing these options as stand alone actions with insulated results scares me - these are big stones that they consider chucking into a very small pond - the waves will ensure everyone gets damp. I still cannot understand how we can consider a military campaign as a surgical campaign, do we really beieve that a precision guided weapon is able to hit a penny from miles away - every time?
I'm also concerned about the blithe way they gloss over the Serbians camouflaging and masking vehicles - despite our vaunted intel capabilities, are the Iranians any less capable?
I think that some of the article has merit, but is a dangerous case of overstating capabilities and understating opposition - and we know where that leads - your thoughts?