I’m reading that Assad is planning on a retaliation if Obama strikes and it could be from different directions. What’s everyone’s opinion on this retaliation that could happen? Does this mean they will strike us in the US or just go to war in Syria?
It could be almost anything. Probably the most likely form of retaliation would be terrorist attacks (against US embassies, prominent American companies, and other US-affiliated targets).
Still, who’s to say they couldn’t come up with something more…ambitious? Imagine if they managed to smuggle a few nerve gas shells into the US. It would be simple to fabricate a mortar out of some old sewer piping, and after that the possibilities are only limited by the imagination. They could lob them into the Macy’s Thanksgiving Day parade, the Superbowl, or even the White House itself.
How could they?
…at which point I think it would be safe to say that any anti-war sentiment regarding Syria, both here and internationally, would evaporate in an instant.
Real question is how could they not, we don’t know what these other countries have hiding… And with Russia backing them? And probably plenty other countries and groups.
What could they possibly be hiding that is a threat? And no, Russia is not backing anybody in a serious strike against the United States.
The best Syria could do is give a green light to terrorist groups over which they have very limited influence ( Hezbollah being a notable example ) to go ahead and plan terrorist strikes against the United States. But that threat has existed for decades, it’s nothing new. And Hezbollah et al don’t take their marching orders from Syria - whatever alliance they have is purely one of convenience. Folks forget that Syria spent some time in fairly high-intensity combat with Hezbollah in Lebanon before reaching a modus vivendi.
Putin is nothing if not shrewd, and you can be sure that he has a very clear and sharp understanding of what is at stake and what is not.
Using Syria as a proxy to exert influence in the zone and piss off the West? Absolutely. Risking its country for the sake of a tin-pot dictator? No way.
A similar argument goes for China – with the extra incentive of its economy depending in a non-negligible way from being able to sell stuff to the US.
Iran will have a screaming fit but, to be honest, they have not the wherewithal to actually be a serious threat in a grand scale.
Now – would Israel find itself attacked by either the Syrians and/or the Iranians? Possibly, although Syria and Iran would most likely try to keep plausible deniability and act through proxy (Hezbollah and Hamas come to mind).
Would there be a recrudescence of terrorist attacks around the globe (especially targeting things like US embassies and US interests in other countries)? Very likely.
If the thing goes to a debate in the UN, very likely Russia and China would veto any resolution against Syria that might give legitimacy to any kind of US attack. Not so much to “protect Syria” but to trip up the US and generally fuck with the West. They both know that the US is perfectly able and very likely willing to launch an attack against Syria without UN approval – but that suits them fine.
If the US goes and attacks, they can keep the “moral high ground” and can criticize and piss off the US to their hearts’ content. They won’t move a finger to help Assad, though (although Russia may go forward with sales of its anti-aircraft missiles to Syria. Free testing against the US material!).
If the US doesn’t, the US will have lost face and will be presented as a “paper tiger”, a has-been that is all bluster but can’t actually do anything. Also good for Russia and China from their point if view.
But actually take arms and defend a little piece of shit dictator, with potentially catastrophic consequences for their countries? Nope. Both the Russian and the Chinese leaderships are much shrewder than that. They are happy with the situation because, no matter what, the US ends with egg in its face. And that suits them perfectly.