What implication US attack will have on Syria.will it be like Afghanistan ?????

Its not easy for USA to attack Syria and I don't think that it would be an easy win for USA. The implications of war would be disastrous for USA. The USA's army will have to fight on many front like Iran, Hizbullah, Syrian Army etc. Besides this on international level they have to counter the pressure of Russia and China which won't be that easy. Attacking Syria would be the worst choice Obama could ever made and Obama shouldn't forget USA and Israel's use of chemical weapons in the past. Both on moral and realist front its a lost war for Obama.

__________________
Sangdil Riwajoon ki ya Imart-e-Kohna Toot bhi Tou Skti hay
Yeh Aseer Sehzadi Choot bhi tou Skti hay

American invasion on Syria will have following effects:

1)It will promote sectarian conflicts in SYRIA.And such a conflict will intensify the proxy war between Iran and Saudi Arabia.And these proxy wars can engulf Jordan,Iraq and even Afghanistan.

2)Even if Assad's regime is toppled,it is highly likely that a group of extremists will take over the regime.And this will be the worst scenario when Al-Qaeda minded terrorists organisations will nourish and groom extremists and suicide bombers for their own militant strategies.

3)It will increase the rivalry among US,Russia and China.This will affect the Afghan peace process and will cause further instability in Afghanistan.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tazimchaudhary What implication US attack will have on Syria.will it be like Afghanistan ?????

It will destabilize the whole region for Moscow & Tehran will support Damascus. UNO should intervene & toil to kick out tyrant Bashar-ul-Asad through non-violent way. War is like a typhus disease & it must be avoided in this era at any cost.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Call for Change Its not easy for USA to attack Syria and I don't think that it would be an easy win for USA. The implications of war would be disastrous for USA. The USA's army will have to fight on many front like Iran, Hizbullah, Syrian Army etc. Besides this on international level they have to counter the pressure of Russia and China which won't be that easy. Attacking Syria would be the worst choice Obama could ever made and Obama shouldn't forget USA and Israel's use of chemical weapons in the past. Both on moral and realist front its a lost war for Obama.

Unfortunately, USA don't attack to win but to pulverize her target.

One should remember--War does not determine who is right - only who is left.

__________________
When you try, you risk failure. When you don’t try, you ensure it.

U.S will never go for a boot on ground military action it will carry out targeted attacks but even for that U.S will have to think twice to move forward....its implication on syria
if regime is toppled there will be a power vacum created and ultimately will benifit al-qaida .i.e al-nusra front which is struggling to establish an islamic caliphate.
moreover, this will further the already disturbed relation of U.S with iran,russia,china as they are supporting assad and are also having disputes over other issues with the U.S.
for the neighboring countries like lebanon have to bear the brunt of this conflict as it is evident from recent week attacks on hesbollah stronghold.

In my opinion US wont attack syria. Firstly, without backing of UN's Security Counsel. Secondly, domestic view of americans has been rising against poking nose in someone else's mess, therefore she can not afford to drag itself in another pointless adventure. Thirdly, If Assad is toppled, the list of candidates to fill the vaccum is not so pleasant. Fourthly, according the US intelligence reports, the evidence is not substantial enough to convict Assad. US has seen the consequences of luanching attack on the basis of questionable intelligence in Iraq so she would refrain from repeating the same mistake.

Against all odds, if US carries out the attack it will have far-reaching effects for the whole region. Putin has already ordered military action against Suadi Arabia, if west attacks Syria. http://iranian.com/posts/view/post/19821
God forbid, if this happens so, it will no doubt be a WW III.

__________________
Hasti-e-Haq k ma'eni jo mera dil samjha
Apni hasti ko ek andaisha-e-batil samjha

I think it is just a drama of western countries and their main target is Saudi Arabia and specially the Makah. Who is USA and who is Russia both are enemies of Muslims and Islam remember the history what they did with Muslims in Afghanistan? We should remember our past no one of them is our friend they are only traitors and when they achieve their targets they left those as like what USA did with Pakistan after the Soviet war in Afghanistan. When war was ended so they left Pakistan alone and now what Pakistan is facing it is due to USA. Muslim leadership should set together and solve their problems with mutual consent and don't allow any other one to interfere in their problems because USA and Russia both have their own interest and they are trying to achieve those.

__________________
“You only live once, but if you do it right, once is enough.”

SA itself is the most vehement supporter of US intervention in Syria.

__________________
Hasti-e-Haq k ma'eni jo mera dil samjha
Apni hasti ko ek andaisha-e-batil samjha

USA alone is not responsible for the current socio-political situation in Pakistan.Our political and conservative religious parties have used religion to achieve popular support.And the results of this manipulation of religion are extremism,terrorism,sectarianism and weak democracy.

Britain was almost ready to attack syria along with france and U.S.But after recent intense pressure on David Cameron it is not clear if Britain can take this decision immediately and further there is some talk of having a vote in parliament before going into war which has further weakened Cameron's position on syrian conflict.

The impression is that UK parliament want syrian attack to be authorised from U.N security counsil which is highly unlikely to happen as Russian will veto any such proposal.Not to forget that People in U.K have not forgotten about how they were falsely lead into Iraq war where they found no WMD's which was the main reason of going into the war.

After these developments from U.K,U.S.A is still determined to go for a fierce limited attack on Syria to break its backbone even if it has to do it all on its own.U.S.A is also not looking to get this war authenticated from U.N.

One thing to remember that it will be a limited attack and not a full fledge war.The motivation behind this attack,perhaps,would be to help the rebels by giving as much loss to syrian army as possible.Again not to forget that rebels facing defeats at the hands of Syrian army at several fronts.

One very noteworthy thing here is that the said nerve gas attack took place just one day before U.N inspectors were due to visit Syria for inspection.A question that arises here is that why Syrian govt. would go for such an attack when such inspection was due and they knew about it and also because at present they were in a better position than the rebels.

The whole decision of attacking a country is based on a phone call intercepted by a U.S intelligence agency.There is no hard proof other than this phone call.U.N inspectors are on the ground in Syria and they will be investigating the whole event for the next four days and then afterwards findings will be submitted.But then again surprising thing is that before any solid investigation U.S.A,U.K and france have declared that Assad's regime is responsible for the nerve gas attack.Same as Nawaz Sharif declared victory in haste LOL.

Russia says west is acting in muslim world like "monkey with a grenade" after recent escalation.

Both China and Russia are against a military strike in Syria.

According to a survey half of the U.K's population is against the military action in syria while only a quarter is in its favour.The voice from U.N.O is also to give "Peace a Chance."

__________________
Puppet,Slave,Lover