Cyprus-Forum.com

[utu]

Let us see how often Hizbollah tries to attack Israel, then you will have yours.

They just got attacked so I suspect quite soon, rockets will be flying. The question is will israel invade Lebanon some time soon. Judging by how many tanks and soldiers they lost, I think not.

Depends upon the aims of such a conflict. If the goal is to conquer - not pacify - then Israel will win. Even if it is to leave a scorched earth. General Sherman in the American Civil War is a good example of such a precedent: "We can not make these people love us, but we can make them so sick of war, that they will think twice before pursuing it".
Sherman went by the doctrine that Civilians support the military, and thus civilian infrastructure is a ligitimate target. Lebanon can very easilly be left in a stone-age state if Israel wishes it.

[Get Real!]

A much more worthwhile opponent does not mean a worthwhile opponent GR. Turkey wouldn't have a prayer.

Ok, so would that be WITH or WITHOUT their Flak jackets?

[Simon]

Israel just recently got attacked by Hizbollah?

Where is your link? Last thing I heard, Hizbollah denied the attack when Israel invaded Gaza and said it was from some rebels. It was a few very isolated incidents.

[Simon]

The US doesn't like getting hurt GR, I agree. But if another nation without provocation attacked its fleet, that other nation wouldn't have an armed forces left after the US finished. The USA's dominance when it comes to conventional warfare cannot be matched by any nation on earth, let alone Turkey which relies on US military aid. Like I said, the Turkish Navy wouldn't even be able to leave its port when faced with a US carrier group, and its airforce would be neutralised very quickly.

[CopperLine]

CopperLine I am sorry to say this, but what you imply is garbage. If the US fought a conventional war with any of the countries you listed, there wouldn't be a contest. Where is Saddam today? America's problems come when it occupies countries for long periods of time or engages in wars of attrition, AND EVEN THEN it is ONLY because the US will not accept a large number of casualties. Its population does not have the heart for long wars and large casualties.

Moreover, I was not talking about the US occupying Turkey; in which case Turkey could cause losses to the US, by using guerilla warfare tactics etc, similar to the current Afghanistan or Iraq situation. I was referring to a conventional war type of situation which would occur if Turkey attempted to sink the sixth fleet. The US could successfully invade or at least cause huge damage (i.e. destruction of infrastructure etc) to any country in the world, especially a country like Turkey that gets most of its weapons from the US anyway. Even if by some miracle Turkey was successful in sinking the fleet, it would incur the response of a superpower, that possesses the world's finest technology and weapons systems. The US could bring Turkey to its knees purely from the air! It wouldn't even need any of its troops to step foot on Turkish soil to devastate the country!

I never contradicted myself about numbers at all. Where did I say that the US has the advantage over Turkey because of numbers? You write utter rubbish!

Simon
I merely pointed out the historical facts - an example from each of the decades 1960s through to the present - that third world militaries have defeated the US. I made no comment about conventional or unconventional wars, Turkey's intentions or capacity to attack the US.

The US could bring Turkey to its knees purely from the air! It wouldn't even need any of its troops to step foot on Turkish soil to devastate the country!

What like Afghanistan you mean ?

When it comes to military matters there is so much wanking of boys with their toys - I leave that to you and your kind who seem to get off on stroking your hardware, steaming missile envy and your soft underbellies ready for pre-dawn frontal insertion. It doesn't take a psychoanalyst to recognise this pornography of death to which the big boys here are addicted.

[Simon]

CopperLine, I was referring to the US ensuring that its fleet or interests could not be attacked by the Turkish Armed Forces, when one of your Turkish friends stated that Turkey was close to sinking the Sixth Fleet. You responded to me so I assumed you were talking about the same thing. The US has not been militarily defeated by any of the countries you name, but because of political pressures back home, they withdrew, there is a difference.

Afghanistan is an entirely different situation. The US is trying to build a country there, and so are taking casualties. What does this have to do with the scenario I was referring to with Turkey?

When it comes to military matters, there are so many clueless comments from the likes of you which turns the debate into a pissing contest.

[CopperLine]

CopperLine, I was referring to the US ensuring that its fleet or interests could not be attacked by the Turkish Armed Forces, when one of your Turkish friends stated that Turkey was close to sinking the Sixth Fleet. You responded to me so I assumed you were talking about the same thing. The US has not been militarily defeated by any of the countries you name, but because of political pressures back home, they withdrew, there is a difference.

Afghanistan is an entirely different situation. The US is trying to build a country there, and so are taking casualties. What does this have to do with the scenario I was referring to with Turkey?

When it comes to military matters, there are so many clueless comments from the likes of you which turns the debate into a pissing contest.

If the comments are clueless then .....errrr ... it's not much of a contest then, pissing or otherwise. (You might want to think through your analogies before you post them).

[Simon]

Just because the comments are clueless, it does not mean it can't become a contest, because the clueless person often is not aware of his cluelessness until his argument is defeated.

If Manchester United play Bromsgrove Rovers in a game of football it is not much of a contest, but technically, it is still a contest all the same.

A clueless person has to play with words when he runs out of arguments about the actual issue.

[YFred]

I am confused, was the USS Cole an American invincible ship that could not be attacked and 17 sailors could not be killed. Are we talking about the same country? Somebody please help with some links. I think GR should be good for this; he can bust a myth and find all the credible sources to everything.
I think I'll google it to find out a bit more.

[boomerang]

CopperLine I am sorry to say this, but what you imply is garbage. If the US fought a conventional war with any of the countries you listed, there wouldn't be a contest. Where is Saddam today? America's problems come when it occupies countries for long periods of time or engages in wars of attrition, AND EVEN THEN it is ONLY because the US will not accept a large number of casualties. Its population does not have the heart for long wars and large casualties.

Moreover, I was not talking about the US occupying Turkey; in which case Turkey could cause losses to the US, by using guerilla warfare tactics etc, similar to the current Afghanistan or Iraq situation. I was referring to a conventional war type of situation which would occur if Turkey attempted to sink the sixth fleet. The US could successfully invade or at least cause huge damage (i.e. destruction of infrastructure etc) to any country in the world, especially a country like Turkey that gets most of its weapons from the US anyway. Even if by some miracle Turkey was successful in sinking the fleet, it would incur the response of a superpower, that possesses the world's finest technology and weapons systems. The US could bring Turkey to its knees purely from the air! It wouldn't even need any of its troops to step foot on Turkish soil to devastate the country!

I never contradicted myself about numbers at all. Where did I say that the US has the advantage over Turkey because of numbers? You write utter rubbish!

Simon
I merely pointed out the historical facts - an example from each of the decades 1960s through to the present - that third world militaries have defeated the US. I made no comment about conventional or unconventional wars, Turkey's intentions or capacity to attack the US.

The US could bring Turkey to its knees purely from the air! It wouldn't even need any of its troops to step foot on Turkish soil to devastate the country!

What like Afghanistan you mean ?

When it comes to military matters there is so much wanking of boys with their toys - I leave that to you and your kind who seem to get off on stroking your hardware, steaming missile envy and your soft underbellies ready for pre-dawn frontal insertion. It doesn't take a psychoanalyst to recognise this pornography of death to which the big boys here are addicted.

No Copperline...like Serbia....different scenario calls fpr different objectives...