Syria: Iran's Path To The Sea

[Direckshun]

Can somebody explain this to me, please?

MR. ROMNEY: Well, let's step back and talk about what's happening in Syria and how important it is. First of all, 30,000 people being killed by their government is a humanitarian disaster.

Secondly, Syria's an opportunity for us because Syria plays an important role in the Middle East, particularly right now. Syria is Iran's only ally in the Arab world. It's their route to the sea. It's the route for them to arm Hezbollah in Lebanon, which threatens, of course, our ally Israel. And so seeing Syria remove Assad is a very high priority for us. Number two, seeing a -- a replacement government being responsible people is critical for us. And finally, we don't want to have military involvement there. We don't want to get drawn into a military conflict.

[cosmo20002]

Originally Posted by Donger

Why is that?

Because it has a coastline.

[Donger]

Originally Posted by cosmo20002

Because it has a coastline.

And what body of water laps up against that coastline?

[cosmo20002]

Originally Posted by Donger

And what body of water laps up against that coastline?

Yeah, nice try.

[Donger]

Originally Posted by cosmo20002

Yeah, nice try.

It isn't a try. It's geographic fact.

[Amnorix]

Seriously, who ever talks about a country needing a route to the sea unless (1) that country is landlocked, or (2) that country is the old USSR which was not landlocked but which had very, very few (basically no) ports that weren't either frozen solid during significant parts of the year or easily blockaded (Black Sea).

[Donger]

Originally Posted by Amnorix

Seriously, who ever talks about a country needing a route to the sea unless (1) that country is landlocked, or (2) that country is the old USSR which was not landlocked but which had very, very few (basically no) ports that weren't either frozen solid during significant parts of the year or easily blockaded (Black Sea).

I would guess that he meant this in a more metaphorical sense than literal, Amno.

[ChiTown]

Originally Posted by Donger

I would guess that he meant this in a more metaphorical sense than literal, Amno.

No way!

Just like O literally meant that there were 57+ states in our Union............

[petegz28]

Yeah, I mean Iran's enemies are Israel and Turkey for the most part in that region. Their natural access to the sea grants them 0 access to either of those countries but Syria indeed does provide a spot for ports on the Med that would be crucial for Iran.

[Saulbadguy]

Originally Posted by stevieray

It's the route to arm hez in lebanon...

pretty much.

LOL

[BigCatDaddy]

Per BoiseChief in another thread

"Route to the sea is a military tactician's reference to your last last hope. Military leaders invading a foreign land had to have a rear guard protecting your route to the sea. If you didn't have a rear guard or your rear guard was defeated you would be in an untenable position. You have to either win outright or face being surrounded and overwhelmed."

Thread = Fail

Mitt Wins.

[cosmo20002]

Originally Posted by Donger

It isn't a try. It's geographic fact.

That Iran does not require Syria to access "the sea?" I agree.

But if you want to disect your ball-licking of Romney, "sea" is a generic term that can be used to refer to any large body of water.
Iran doesn't need Syria to access a large body of water.

If you want to insist he meant an actual "Sea," he could I guess have been referencing the Arabian Sea (Syria not needed), Red Sea (Syria not needed) or the Caspian Sea (Syria not needed).

If you are saying that he was referring to the Mediterranean Sea as "The Sea," that really wouldn't make sense considering there is no waterway linking Iran to the Med Sea, particularly one that first goes through Syria.

So, what you are saying is that what he was referencing was a land-based path through Iraq or Turkey, then through Syria to reach the Med Sea. Ok, sure.

The guy was trying to show off and he said something stupid. Defending it is even stupider.

[Donger]

Originally Posted by cosmo20002

That Iran does not require Syria to access "the sea?" I agree.

But if you want to disect your ball-licking of Romney, "sea" is a generic term that can be used to refer to any large body of water.
Iran doesn't need Syria to access a large body of water.

If you want to insist he meant an actual "Sea," he could I guess have been referencing the Arabian Sea (Syria not needed), Red Sea (Syria not needed) or the Caspian Sea (Syria not needed).

If you are saying that he was referring to the Mediterranean Sea as "The Sea," that really wouldn't make sense considering there is no waterway linking Iran to the Med Sea, particularly one that first goes through Syria.

So, what you are saying is that what he was referencing was a land-based path through Iraq or Turkey, then through Syria to reach the Med Sea. Ok, sure.

The guy was trying to show off and he said something stupid. Defending it is even stupider.

I'm glad to sea that you realize that a gulf isn't a sea.

[cosmo20002]

Originally Posted by Slick

Per BoiseChief in another thread

"Route to the sea is a military tactician's reference to your last last hope. Military leaders invading a foreign land had to have a rear guard protecting your route to the sea. If you didn't have a rear guard or your rear guard was defeated you would be in an untenable position. You have to either win outright or face being surrounded and overwhelmed."

Thread = Fail

Mitt Wins.

So, Mitt was using the term as a military tactician in the context of Iran invading a foreign land?
And never mind that it would still mean going through Iraq. Donger makes more sense than this.

[petegz28]

Originally Posted by cosmo20002

So, Mitt was using the term as a military tactician in the context of Iran invading a foreign land?
And never mind that it would still mean going through Iraq. Donger makes more sense than this.

Yeah because Iraq has done a great job of keeping Iran out.

[Donger]

Originally Posted by Slick

Per BoiseChief in another thread

"Route to the sea is a military tactician's reference to your last last hope. Military leaders invading a foreign land had to have a rear guard protecting your route to the sea. If you didn't have a rear guard or your rear guard was defeated you would be in an untenable position. You have to either win outright or face being surrounded and overwhelmed."

Thread = Fail

Mitt Wins.

I've never heard of that before.