Thread: Turkey strikes targets in Syria in retaliation for shelling deaths

Originally Posted by Crocodile

Well, as far as I know, Gaddafi did not have the weapons with the proper range to attack Israel and Assad does. In that case, Israel would retaliate, Iran would intervene as promised, China would intervene, etc.

Here's what I was thinking... There's a great chance Israel would be pressed not to retaliate the same way it was pressed not to reply to Hussen's missiles in 1991. So, this time Israel would say: "Oh, so Turkey could reply and we cannot?!" I'm thinking that was the reason for shelling Turkey. To make a close precedent.

Does that sound a bit more serious now?

You know what the Iranian dictator said of the Lybian one as the latter was shot? Something like "every dictator is going to end up like that". That's to mean, he may sound tough but he doesn't have really serious background to play a "hero" and mess with NATO and their allies, and his fear sometimes reaches a point when he even has to verbally back up. As for China, that sounds even crazier - why in the first place would a country join an armed conflict going on thousands of miles away, and having absolutely nothing to do with it? Just for fun? But fun isn't what drives politics stuff, is it?

Originally Posted by Eric C.

You know what the Iranian dictator said of the Lybian one as the latter was shot? Something like "every dictator is going to end up like that". That's to mean, he may sound tough but he doesn't have really serious background to play a "hero" and mess with NATO and their allies, and his fear sometimes reaches a point when he even has to verbally back up.

I see your point. The problem is Iran already military helping Assad's government: Iran confirms it has forces in Syria and will take military action if pushed | World news | The Guardian

"Iran has confirmed for the first time that forces from its revolutionary guards corps (IRGC) are in Syria helping Bashar al-Assad's government crush rebels, and warned that it would get involved militarily if its Arab ally came under attack."

Originally Posted by Eric C.

As for China, that sounds even crazier - why in the first place would a country join an armed conflict going on thousands of miles away, and having absolutely nothing to do with it? Just for fun? But fun isn't what drives politics stuff, is it?

Well, there are lots of precedents to that. The US came to be involved with a Civil War in Afghanistan! What had the US to do with who among the various tribes would control the other tribes?! Afghanistan is a very poor country. There's no oil in Afghanistan. Just for fun? Maybe, to catch Bin Laden? Have the US caught Bin Laden in Afghanistan, after all?

I'm not 100% sure what China has to do with Iran (the slightly cheaper oil or reliable oil supply, maybe?), but they have clearly stated their military support. If you know Chinese, they are not just talkative for fun..