History, Politics And Current Affairs

Opinions expressed here are personal views of contributors and do not necessarily represent the companies, organizations or governments they work for. Nor do they necessarily represent those of the Board Administration
It is currently Wed Sep 08, 2010 7:02 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 27 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Syria and Iraq
PostPosted: Mon Nov 16, 2009 11:48 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 8:53 pm
Posts: 44
So the Point of Departure questions involving to Iraq and Syria has been nagging at me, like Iraq and Syria succession for instance.

In Syria did Basil or Bassar succeed his father? (Basil in real world died in the 1990s in a suspicious car accident, I was wondering if that changed.)

In Iraq, was Uday the heir apparent until the 1990s when he was almost assasinated (combined with his bizarre behavior), and Qussay was made heir apparent.

So who has heir apparent?

I would also love to see a Syrian Order of Battle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: World at War
PostPosted: Mon Nov 16, 2009 11:52 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 8:53 pm
Posts: 44
So far, I've come up with this list

Soviet Union and Warsaw Pact
Romania
Albania (Maybe)
Zimbabwe
Guinea-Bissau
Vietnam
Indonesia
Yemen
North Korea
Venezuela
Nicaragua
Cuba
Iraq


NATO
United States
Canada
Japan
South Korea
Australia
New Zealand
South Africa
Brazil
GCC
Kuwait
Iran (Possibly)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Syria and Iraq
PostPosted: Mon Nov 16, 2009 1:25 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2008 8:31 pm
Posts: 442
Location: Auberry, CA
The Cubans and Viets are sitting on the fence, waiting to see who's going to win before deciding what to do, though the Viets are turning a blind eye to SNAF activity out of Cam Ranh Bay.

As for Iraq, it'd be Qusay who would become heir apparent. He was much more "reasonable" by Iraqi standards, didn't display his sociopathic tendencies in public, and I remember one U.S. Government official saying "The difference between the brothers is that Uday kills for fun. When Qusay kills, it's business." Qusay's favorite was feeding political prisoners into a wood chipper-feet first. And though they despised each other, survival kicked in when they were on the run post-OIF, and died together in that house in Mosul.

Not sure about Syria, though. But whoever's in charge in Damascus is still going to be tied to the Russians, period.

_________________
Treat everyone you meet with kindness and respect. But always have a plan to kill them.

Old USMC Adage


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Syria and Iraq
PostPosted: Mon Nov 16, 2009 2:01 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 8:53 pm
Posts: 44
Is an Iranian invasion of Iraq still on the table for TLW? I know there was hinting of that in various other stories about the war. Wouldn't be a bad thing to have a greater Persian empire again, especially if it gets rid of Saddam and brings stability to Iraq and the region.

As for Syria, yes whomever succeeded Assad Sr, whether it be Basil or Bassar, Elvis or Bozo the clown they were certainly in Moscow's pocket and orbit.

Did you read the Weekly Standard story about the Syrian Goverment being like the Godfather?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Who is on what side?
PostPosted: Mon Nov 16, 2009 4:14 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 5:28 pm
Posts: 174
Here is a slightly more accurate list as far as who is who.

Soviet/Warsaw Pact co-belligerents:
* Libya
* Syria
* Iraq
* Venezuela
* North Korea
* Indonesia
* Guinea
* Zimbabwe
* Mozambique
* Angola (??)
* Zambia (??)

Soviet leaning, but not (yet) co-belligerents:
* Cuba
* Vietnam

NATO/US co-belligerents:
* Japan
* South Korea
* Australia
* New Zealand
* Kuwait
* Bahrain (basing)
* Qatar (basing)
* Saudi Arabia (basing, air force only)
* Egypt
* Israel
* South Africa
* Austria (petitioned for NATO membership)
* Finland
* Slovenia
* Croatia

NATO leaning, but not (yet) co-belligerents:
* Sweden (possibly changing very soon)
* Ireland
* Malaysia
* Singapore
* Thailand
* Philippines
* United Arab Emirates
* Oman
* India
* Iran


Last edited by James1978 on Tue Nov 17, 2009 7:30 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Syria and Iraq
PostPosted: Mon Nov 16, 2009 4:50 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 8:53 pm
Posts: 44
I wonder if Argentina wants to shake up the world order by invading the Falklands again.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Argentina
PostPosted: Mon Nov 16, 2009 5:27 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 5:28 pm
Posts: 174
Rafale_2000 wrote:
I wonder if Argentina wants to shake up the world order by invading the Falklands again.

Since they confirmed the USAF presence in the Falklands, I'd guess not. This is WW III and the US is not likely to take a kind view of anyone who appears to stab them in the back. And make no mistake, invading a base area critical to ASAT operations would be a stab in the back. War with the UK would mean war with the United States.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Who is on what side?
PostPosted: Mon Nov 16, 2009 5:51 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 6:25 pm
Posts: 214
James1978 wrote:
NATO/US co-belligerents:
* Japan
* South Korea
* Australia
* New Zealand
* Kuwait
* Bahrain (basing)
* Qatar (basing)
* Saudi Arabia (basing, air force only)
* Egypt
* Israel
* South Africa
* Austria (petitioned for NATO membership)
* Slovenia
* Croatia

NATO leaning, but not (yet) co-belligerents:
* Sweden (possibly changing very soon)
* Malaysia
* Singapore
* Thailand
* Philippines
* United Arab Emirates
* Oman
* India
* Iran
Shouldn't Finland be in here somewhere, too?

_________________
Best regards
Pengolodh
------------------------
Discovery Channel's rocket scientist:
"A rocket has to be versatile and cost-effective: it must be designed specifically for the task at hand."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Who is on what side?
PostPosted: Mon Nov 16, 2009 5:53 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 5:28 pm
Posts: 174
pengolodh_sc wrote:
Shouldn't Finland be in here somewhere, too?

Quite right. I went back and added it. Thanks.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Syria and Iraq
PostPosted: Mon Nov 16, 2009 6:31 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 14, 2009 1:49 pm
Posts: 121
Location: Porto - Portugal
What's WW3 in Africa like? Settling old grievances or simple take and hold of some strategic spots?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Syria and Iraq
PostPosted: Mon Nov 16, 2009 9:47 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2008 8:31 pm
Posts: 442
Location: Auberry, CA
A little of both: settling old and new scores with Libya (by NATO and by the Egyptians), and trying to grab strategic areas (Libyan oil and South Africa's mineral resources).

_________________
Treat everyone you meet with kindness and respect. But always have a plan to kill them.

Old USMC Adage


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Syria and Iraq
PostPosted: Tue Nov 17, 2009 7:13 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2008 7:00 am
Posts: 2591
Location: My house.
The Republic of Ireland is missing from the NATO leaning, but not (yet) co-belligerents list. They're allowing NATO aircraft to transit Irish airspace and land and refuel at Shannon Airport.

Cuba is staying neutral because Fidel and his cronies don't have a death wish. They are only 22 miles away from a carrier air wing which can put an Alpha Strike over Cuba before they have time to react, not to mention all the tactical and strategic air power that the USAF can deploy. Furthermore with the build-up of the US Army the Americans will soon also have spare ground forces that could be used against Cuba.

The Viets are in the middle of a political struggle between the older members of the Politburo, who want to aid their socialist brothers, and the younger members who want to preserve Vietnam's new found prosperity and trade with the rest of the world by staying out. To make things more interesting for them the USS John C. Stennis and her battle group are about to start bombing Soviet bases in the country.
Syria may well be in the war whether it likes it, or not. The USS Ronald Regan battle group will soon be attacking the Syrian ports where the Soviet Fifth Eskadra is based. Plus the IDF and the Syrian armed forces are shooting at each other on the Golan Heights.

The Argentineans would be insane to go after the Falklands right now. There is a sizable USAF contingent based at MPA, and the USN might soon base P-3s there if the Soviets send subs to the South Atlantic. In any invasion of the islands it would be inevitable that Americans and Argentineans would end up shooting at each other, which would be very bad news for Argentina.

_________________
Every man thinks meanly of himself for never having been to sea nor having been a soldier.

- Dr. Samuel Johnson, 10th April, 1778.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Syria and Iraq
PostPosted: Wed Nov 18, 2009 6:49 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 9:27 am
Posts: 12
Location: Gone Sailin'
and unless i'm blind i think Norway is missing from the NATO/US side as well.

_________________
"Common sense is sadly a commodity rapidly becomming more uncommon"

also know as the "to many people disagree with me" syndrom


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Syria and Iraq
PostPosted: Wed Nov 18, 2009 10:28 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 5:28 pm
Posts: 174
hog wrote:
and unless i'm blind i think Norway is missing from the NATO/US side as well.

Norway is in NATO, thus counts under "NATO".


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Syria and Iraq
PostPosted: Wed Nov 18, 2009 6:20 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Oct 23, 2009 9:27 am
Posts: 12
Location: Gone Sailin'
James1978 wrote:
hog wrote:
and unless i'm blind i think Norway is missing from the NATO/US side as well.

Norway is in NATO, thus counts under "NATO".


DUHHH,..........runs off to dig glasses out of closet.

_________________
"Common sense is sadly a commodity rapidly becomming more uncommon"

also know as the "to many people disagree with me" syndrom


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Syria and Iraq
PostPosted: Thu Nov 19, 2009 3:03 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 01, 2009 6:30 pm
Posts: 160
Wouldn't the Serbs be listed as a Soviet co belligerent? (unless they're in the Pact already).

What about Bosnia?

I have the feeling that the Soviets might have gotten rid of the Assads somehow, given that Saddam Hussein's Iraq was right next to Israel on Assad Sr's list of most hated countries.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Syria and Iraq
PostPosted: Thu Nov 19, 2009 4:47 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2008 7:00 am
Posts: 2591
Location: My house.
Yes, the Serbs (officially Yugoslavia) should be classed as Soviet allies. Bosnia doesn't exist as an independent country in TLW, its still a part of Yugoslavia, even though there was a NATO led peacekeeping force in residence.
Yugoslavia did not start to break-up until Soviet forces moved into the country to get at the NATO forces there and to eventually move on Italy; the Serbian dominated federal government chose to support the Soviets, while most of the republics did not and broke away.

_________________
Every man thinks meanly of himself for never having been to sea nor having been a soldier.

- Dr. Samuel Johnson, 10th April, 1778.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Syria and Iraq
PostPosted: Fri Nov 20, 2009 3:47 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 01, 2009 6:30 pm
Posts: 160
What are the Albanians doing?

They were pretty much the only Communist country besides Cambodia to side with China during the split, and then they decided to split from the Chinese latter on when Deng opened up the PRC. Or did they democratize?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Syria and Iraq
PostPosted: Fri Nov 20, 2009 5:20 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2008 7:00 am
Posts: 2591
Location: My house.
I think they'll be doing nothing, hoping that the war doesn't come anywhere near their borders.

_________________
Every man thinks meanly of himself for never having been to sea nor having been a soldier.

- Dr. Samuel Johnson, 10th April, 1778.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Syria and Iraq
PostPosted: Wed Nov 25, 2009 11:52 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2008 8:31 pm
Posts: 442
Location: Auberry, CA
I'd wonder if Basil Assad did meet with his "unfortunate accident", as he was being groomed to succeed his father, and Bashir apparently had no such aspiriations. His resume is a bit unusual for an autocrat: under "Previous Experience" he'd list "Eye Surgeon." (he was in his residency if I'm not mistaken when his brother died). Unlike Iraq, where the two bastard sons of Saddam were rivals and both wished the other dead, Basil was going to succeed his dad if he hadn't been killed in a car crash (whether or not it was a genuine accident is still debated). At least the Syrians would see the oil and other support from Iran dry up once the new Iranian government cut Hezbollah's (and Damascus') purse strings.

_________________
Treat everyone you meet with kindness and respect. But always have a plan to kill them.

Old USMC Adage


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 27 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group