Article

2007-06-19 Syria-Lebanon-Iran

Syrian official says war with Israel will not be conventional

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by anonymous5089 2007-06-19 06:23|| || Front Page|| [12 views ] Top
File under: Govt of Syria

#1 1. he thinks Syria is good at fighting such a war
2. he thinks Israel can't learn from mistakes and adapt appropriately

Posted by PlanetDan">PlanetDan 2007-06-19 06:34|| 2007-06-19 06:34|| Front Page Top

#2 The secret's in the headband, they're magik.

Posted by Shipman 2007-06-19 07:05|| 2007-06-19 07:05|| Front Page Top

#3 Um, Syria has a plenitude of "hard targets" that precludes the use of strictly guerrilla tactics.
You can sneak around in the bushes all you want, but when the Jews bomb the shit out of your power plants and oil infrastructure you are still hurting at the end of the day. This is so arab, I can't even conjure the words.

Posted by bigjim-ky 2007-06-19 08:42|| 2007-06-19 08:42|| Front Page Top

#4 Wars of "resistance" only work if the occupier wants to hold land and if the occupier cares what a fifth-column of press has to say about said occupation. Rubble does not make trouble. Kill everything. Withdraw to the heights.

Posted by Excalibur 2007-06-19 08:43|| 2007-06-19 08:43|| Front Page Top

#5 amen. When Damascus streets can't be travelled due to the rubble, and the highways are potholed and no power or water is available, that "unconventional" war isn't gonna be much comfort, Syrian Assholes

Posted by Frank G">Frank G 2007-06-19 08:53|| 2007-06-19 08:53|| Front Page Top

#6 The All New "Arab Warfare"! Now with Resistance!!

Posted by tu3031 2007-06-19 08:57|| 2007-06-19 08:57|| Front Page Top

#7 The only answer for such tactics is total destruction, say the first mile in from the border -- after bouncing the rubble pound it to dust, incidentally collapsing the bunkers in on the occupants. Israel doesn't need to conquer with boots on the ground like in 1967, they just need to erase the problem. Syria's problem is that they only see as far as the testosterone riddled romance of the terrorists, not the businesslike response of those who fight wars to win (God grant the new defence minister means to do exactly that!).

Posted by trailing wife 2007-06-19 08:59|| 2007-06-19 08:59|| Front Page Top

#8 Mahdi Dakhlallah is probably right about the war with Israel not being conventional. He is wrong about it being a "path to victory", or defeating Israel. The Syrians would do better to build a fake Damascus, instead of fake villages. The real one will probably be standing "for a limited time only" -

Isaiah 17:1 "The burden of Damascus. Behold, Damascus is taken away from being a city, and it shall be a ruinous heap."

Posted by Mullah Lodabullah 2007-06-19 09:22|| 2007-06-19 09:22|| Front Page Top

#9 5089 seems to be alluding to a different meaning of 'non-conventional' war, because if there is a sustained SW wind Israel could still likely 'win' that kind of fight quite quickly. Neither Dakhlallah nor Israel would be occupying Damascus for 10,000 years.

Posted by Glenmore">Glenmore 2007-06-19 09:30|| 2007-06-19 09:30|| Front Page Top

#10 Isaiah 17:1 "The burden of Damascus. Behold, Damascus is taken away from being a city, and it shall be a ruinous heap."

Methinks it's about time for this prophecy to come true.

Posted by Mike N. 2007-06-19 09:33|| 2007-06-19 09:33|| Front Page Top

#11 what number 3 said. Israel had lots of political complexities bombing Leb infrastructure, since Israel wants to influence Leb politics, since the Lebs are sympathetic in the West, etc, etc. No such constraints apply in Syria.

Posted by Liberalhawk 2007-06-19 09:37|| 2007-06-19 09:37|| Front Page Top

#12 Rubble does not make trouble.

Excalibur, I am soooo gonna have to steal that line.

The 'burg is right. Syria is too rich in hard targets to fight a "resistance" war properly. I think Assadie is counting on the fact that Israel will not bomb them because of the flak it would catch from the Western nations. Might work. Might not. Depends on if leaders are chosen that are willing to take off the gloves.

Posted by DarthVader">DarthVader 2007-06-19 10:04|| 2007-06-19 10:04|| Front Page Top

#13 Great minds, y'all. ;-) Although I don't know that Syria has much has much oil infrastructure, though. The Syrians were almost as blessed as the Jews in the mineral riches of their homeland.

Posted by trailing wife 2007-06-19 10:09|| 2007-06-19 10:09|| Front Page Top

#14 Pity the syrians are cursed in the field of cranial wealth extraction.

Posted by Bright Pebbles in Blairistan 2007-06-19 11:01|| 2007-06-19 11:01|| Front Page Top

#15 #7: My goodness,TW,is that really you ? Methinks the forum here is having an effect on your civilized sensibilities after all. Once everyone has modified their approach to the Death Cult, the solution is simple and direct. Wonderful !

Posted by Woozle Elmeter2970 2007-06-19 11:43|| 2007-06-19 11:43|| Front Page Top

#16 I dunno - if they're threatening "non-conventional" warfare, I read it to mean they will use chem/bio (since they have no nukes) against Israel.

The mere threat should be enough to get Damascus leveled.

Posted by mojo">mojo 2007-06-19 11:58|| 2007-06-19 11:58|| Front Page Top

#17 There's more petrol targets than you might think in Syria, they've become a minor player from a few finds recently.

Posted by Shipman 2007-06-19 14:19|| 2007-06-19 14:19|| Front Page Top

#18 What a stupid sod - whenever *I* hear the phrase 'not conventional' I equate it to chemical, biological and nuclear weapons. I imagine that the Israelis think something along those lines too. Now the mere fact that Israel is *known* to have at least one 'non-conventional' weapon would be enough to make me very careful about using the phrase 'not conventional' when talking about future wars with the Israelis.

So why is he saying this then?
#1 He's a bloody idiot, and is talking tough to get attention with all the keffiyeh wearing dolts
#2 He's a bloody idiot
#3 He's aware that Syria has it's own 'not conventional' weapons (was it a fiction, all those lorries leaving Iraq in early 2003, on their way to Syria?) and thinks he can go toe-to-toe with the Israelis

I'm presuming #1, (#2 goes without saying) but if it's #3, then things could get very nasty indeed, and it's got to be likely that the Syrians would lose control of the situation very quickly indeed...

Posted by Tony (UK) 2007-06-19 14:26|| 2007-06-19 14:26|| Front Page Top

#19 lets game this out.

lets say, the tribunal finds Syria guilty wrt to Hariri, and they try a war with Israel as a diversion. What do they do?

Well leaving aside the main front, they get Hamas to go to war, and they mess around in Leb. But Hamas is contained in Gaza. Some nasty hits to Sderot, but not as bad the hurt that Hamas takes. They have Hamas cells attack Fatah in the WB, but that means blowing Hamas' sleepers for Syrian purposes, and a one time gain at that. Fatah will be rocked, but may hold. At worst, Jordan will back them up.

Syria cant to much in Leb without provoking the euros. Not a good move, unless theyre completley desperate.

On the main front. they start shooting long range missiles at Israeli cities. Daring the Israelis to come in conventionally along the main front. Along which theyve a hezb style defense, well trained infantry (Assuming Syr inf is as trained and motivated as Hezb) in heavily fortified villages.

If your IDF CoS, what do you do? First you go after the rockets from the air. As in Leb, you dont have to kill them all, just keep them off balance, to reduce damage to Israel. You go after the villages with armor and infantry, but this time you mobilize from the start, and you try to use armor more creatively. You also pulverize villages from the air. Not good for your image, but these are Syrians, not Lebs, and you arent worried about the political impact in Syria. At the same time you hit back on Syrian infrastructure. This time without apology. Will the Israeli homefront be willing to take hits, knowing youre inflicting worse? Will the US be able to defer a UNSC ceasefire while you do what you need to do? Keeping in mind that Syrias not quite as popular at the UN as Leb is. And lastly, at what point is the Syrian govt to weakened to maintain control against the various oppositions.

Assads last trump, of course, is your fear that if hes gone the MB will come to power. But if Syria is attacking Israeli cities, and supporting a Hamas war in the WB, how much worse can the MB be?

Posted by Liberalhawk 2007-06-19 14:38|| 2007-06-19 14:38|| Front Page Top

#20 israel too syria: you will lose in an unconventional war too

Posted by sinse 2007-06-19 16:42|| 2007-06-19 16:42|| Front Page Top

#21 Wars of "resistance" only work if the occupier wants to hold land and if the occupier cares what a fifth-column of press has to say about said occupation. Rubble does not make trouble. Kill everything. Withdraw to the heights.

Word, Excal.

The only answer for such tactics is total destruction, say the first mile in from the border -- after bouncing the rubble pound it to dust, incidentally collapsing the bunkers in on the occupants. Israel doesn't need to conquer with boots on the ground like in 1967, they just need to erase the problem. Syria's problem is that they only see as far as the testosterone riddled romance of the terrorists, not the businesslike response of those who fight wars to win (God grant the new defence minister means to do exactly that!).

Had enough, have we, dear trailing wife? It is distinctly cockle-warming to see more and more people throw the old "boots-on-the-ground" strategy under the bus. Why risk any troops when all you really need to do is leave some smoking holes in your wake?

Posted by Zenster">Zenster 2007-06-19 17:56|| 2007-06-19 17:56|| Front Page Top

#22 RESISTANCE IS FUTILE ---
BEHOLD THE ARMY OF RESISTORS!!!!

Posted by Alaska Paul">Alaska Paul 2007-06-19 21:08|| 2007-06-19 21:08|| Front Page Top

#23 lets game this out.

Sure. Some call it 'work', but what the hey.

Lets say, the tribunal finds Syria guilty wrt to Hariri, and they try a war with Israel as a diversion. What do they do?

If the Syrians do anything, it'll be before the tribunal comes to a judgement.

Well leaving aside the main front, they get Hamas to go to war, and they mess around in Leb.

Quite likely.

But Hamas is contained in Gaza. Some nasty hits to Sderot, but not as bad the hurt that Hamas takes.

If Hamas attacks, it won't be with just missiles. Walls aren't impregnable. As fat as the 'hurt' I suspect that will already be factored in.

They have Hamas cells attack Fatah in the WB, but that means blowing Hamas' sleepers for Syrian purposes, and a one time gain at that. Fatah will be rocked, but may hold. At worst, Jordan will back them up.

Possibly. Likely what one would see is a repeat of what is going on in Lebanon.

Syria cant to much in Leb without provoking the euros. Not a good move, unless theyre completley desperate.

Ah, here's where we have a slight disagreement. It may not be Syria itself doing the heavy lifting. And you are counting on a better reaction from the Europeans than I am.

On the main front. they start shooting long range missiles at Israeli cities. Daring the Israelis to come in conventionally along the main front. Along which theyve a hezb style defense, well trained infantry (Assuming Syr inf is as trained and motivated as Hezb) in heavily fortified villages.

Again, it may not be Syria directly initiating, but counter-responding to the IDF.

If your IDF CoS, what do you do? First...

Again, it all depends on howw it starts. That's the 'fun' of playing defense.

Will the Israeli homefront be willing to take hits, knowing youre inflicting worse? Will the US be able to defer a UNSC ceasefire while you do what you need to do? Keeping in mind that Syrias not quite as popular at the UN as Leb is.

A lot of ifs-and-maybes. Syria may not be quite as popular, but it has some pretty powerful backers in the UN. North Korea is even less popular than Syria - what has the UN accomplished in that matter?

And lastly, at what point is the Syrian govt to weakened to maintain control against the various oppositions.

Ah, the linchpin. Same thing can be argued about Syria's partner, Iran (except that it's more a matter of control over its population). Judging by the two nations' reactions, I'd say they are quite concerned.

Assads last trump, of course, is your fear that if hes gone the MB will come to power. But if Syria is attacking Israeli cities, and supporting a Hamas war in the WB, how much worse can the MB be?

Not necessarily much of a trump. But I'd also wager that Iran is quite willing to let Assad hang if it advances their objectives.

Posted by Pappy 2007-06-19 22:20|| 2007-06-19 22:20|| Front Page Top

23:41 Gary and the Samoyeds
23:33 ed
23:31 Bright Pebbles
23:23 Bright Pebbles
23:18 Zenster
23:15 Super Hose
23:15 ed
23:09 ed
23:05 Super Hose
23:03 3dc
23:03 OldSpook
23:01 OldSpook
22:58 Super Hose
22:53 Super Hose
22:50 ed
22:34 Super Hose
22:26 Super Hose
22:20 Pappy
22:18 Zenster
22:10 Zenster
22:04 Zenster
21:54 Pappy
21:53 Shieldwolf
21:52 Poison Reverse