I'm not advocating use of cruise missiles or discounting use of other weapons.

@spindoc

Re your assumption "I think the last time US cruise missiles were used in anger was the gulf war in 1991 and they have come a long way since then."

Probably good idea to do some research first.

The main US cruise missile used in 1991, the Tomahawk, has been steadily developed for decades and last used in Libya 2011.

SINCE 1991 US Tomahawk cruise has been used in:

1993 - Iraq

1995 - Bosnia

1996 - Iraq

1998 - Iraq, Sudan and Afghanistan

2001 - Afghanistan

2003 - invasion of Iraq, more than 725 used

2009 - Yemen

2011 - Libya, more than 159 used.

Rather than being unused and obsolete the United States Navy has a stockpile of around 3,500 Tomahawk cruise missiles of all variants.

You're more on the money with use of Electronic Warfare (Growler) which can disable or take control of Syrian computers (including those in air defence).

The US has also recently being refining electromagnetic pulse (EMP) technology - in cruise or faster rocket powered missiles.

Other cyber malware might also be used.

The value of EW or Cyberweapons is low casualties, non-violent use. .

Australia is infected by or combats 1,000s of bits of malware (low level cyber weapons) daily.

Pete

What DavidG hasn't wrapped his tiny mind around is that the Taliban went from governing a country and a large chunk of Pakistan to disparate rag tag bunch of insurgents, and that Afghanistan and Iraq are not governed by the insurgents.

In a set piece battle, the Syrians would last only a few weeks, and the ability of the US to do immense damage in a couple of days would heavily weaken the Syrian ability to fight the insurgents.

youknow nuithin

here is what we KNOW
every second word = WE KNOW

no no no no no

NO..!

KNOW..YOU DONT KNOW..

nuthin..but what big fibber$$$..
[professional liars]..tell you to say you know

they may thinktoknow
but really dont KNOW..cant proove theyKNOW

knowingisntproving..nomastter how manytimes you SAY..youKNOW

WE DONT want to know
what you decieve you KNOW

we still say NO

now go..
we heard..all you think..you *know
and suggest..instead of destruction..you all grow up
stop blowing things up..

our KNOWN/KNOWNS
reveal..you DONT know..dont know now
YOU lot..didnt KNOW then..now go..we know

known/knowns of clowns
to us in the known..yes WE KNOW..outhink you know
but your known/knowns..been known to be wrong KNOWING..*before

UOG,
Will you still recommend saying no when they start uprisings here in Australia ?

looks like your correct

A reporter with Israel’s most widely read newspaper..has been told by defense establishment officials..that a US-led attack on Syria will begin on Saturday..and end when Barack Obama meets Vladimir Putin on Wednesday.

i trust your..both wrong

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=5984#170948

Geoff of Perth,

For pity’s sake Geoff, do you really think the Ruskis have glass bottomed subs, march the decks singing songs and drink copious amounts of vodka? Lighten up man.

Belay that, I think the vodka one might have some merit.

Peter/Plantagenet,

Thanks for the research and of course you are right about the continued use of CM variants since 1991. I guess the point I was making is that of the subsequent conflicts you cite, I don’t think the CM’s were up against the S 300 systems? In the case of Syria they are. This is why I think the US might use a different mix of systems.

The other thought I have was about the probable confrontation between US and Russian Naval Forces if the US Navy was actually firing at Syria? Would it make more sense for the US to assign their Naval Task Group to just offer Aegis type support to coordinate, suppress and defend assets rather than be “seen” to be actually launching weapons right under the noses of the Ruskis? A little too provocative perhaps?

Given that we both agree the US has significant other capabilities, why would they deploy conventional CM’s against a potential S 300 threat and at the same time wave a red rag at the Ruskis?

Since we don’t know what the US currently is thinking in terms of potential targets, we can’t guess at the type of weapons they would need to deploy.

Academic I suppose, I guess they will do whatever they think they must.

My view remains the same, it is a humanitarian disaster but they should all stay out of it.