Backstory?

[Dillweed]

So what do we know? This is the offcial annoncement:

"The setting for CM:SF is 2007 Syria after a coup removes the current Assad government. I do not wish to go into the specifics of the backstory at this time, but the premise is that UN is called upon to remove the illegitimate regime. Support comes from all major nations and nearly all within the Middle East region. Leading this liberation is a coalition of mostly NATO states, with a strong contingent of Arab/Muslim states involved directly in the immediate and long term rebuilding of the nation. The player is in command of one of the more interesting missions - to slice through the center of the country and join up with other coalition forces around Damascus."

Did I miss anything or is this all the info we have. People seem to be poo-poo the backstory saying it is either unrealistic or just US pigdog imperialism.

Here is my guess:

The coup is by a hard line islamasist group who gets caught with its pants down in some sort of major terrorist op. They catch a guy with a 1-way ticket from damascus, a syrian passport and a backpack nuke on staten island sort of thing.

Just remember the support for going after the Taliban in 01. Even the Libians supported it.

Another possibility is if they continue to pull some sort of bull**** in Lebanon.

I think both of these would be much more realistic (not to mention less controversial) than the "Republicans decide they need a boost in the polls before the 08 election" scenario that people seem to be imagining.

Any other ideas?

[Dillweed]

So what do we know? This is the offcial annoncement:

"The setting for CM:SF is 2007 Syria after a coup removes the current Assad government. I do not wish to go into the specifics of the backstory at this time, but the premise is that UN is called upon to remove the illegitimate regime. Support comes from all major nations and nearly all within the Middle East region. Leading this liberation is a coalition of mostly NATO states, with a strong contingent of Arab/Muslim states involved directly in the immediate and long term rebuilding of the nation. The player is in command of one of the more interesting missions - to slice through the center of the country and join up with other coalition forces around Damascus."

Did I miss anything or is this all the info we have. People seem to be poo-poo the backstory saying it is either unrealistic or just US pigdog imperialism.

Here is my guess:

The coup is by a hard line islamasist group who gets caught with its pants down in some sort of major terrorist op. They catch a guy with a 1-way ticket from damascus, a syrian passport and a backpack nuke on staten island sort of thing.

Just remember the support for going after the Taliban in 01. Even the Libians supported it.

Another possibility is if they continue to pull some sort of bull**** in Lebanon.

I think both of these would be much more realistic (not to mention less controversial) than the "Republicans decide they need a boost in the polls before the 08 election" scenario that people seem to be imagining.

Any other ideas?

[Dillweed]

So what do we know? This is the offcial annoncement:

"The setting for CM:SF is 2007 Syria after a coup removes the current Assad government. I do not wish to go into the specifics of the backstory at this time, but the premise is that UN is called upon to remove the illegitimate regime. Support comes from all major nations and nearly all within the Middle East region. Leading this liberation is a coalition of mostly NATO states, with a strong contingent of Arab/Muslim states involved directly in the immediate and long term rebuilding of the nation. The player is in command of one of the more interesting missions - to slice through the center of the country and join up with other coalition forces around Damascus."

Did I miss anything or is this all the info we have. People seem to be poo-poo the backstory saying it is either unrealistic or just US pigdog imperialism.

Here is my guess:

The coup is by a hard line islamasist group who gets caught with its pants down in some sort of major terrorist op. They catch a guy with a 1-way ticket from damascus, a syrian passport and a backpack nuke on staten island sort of thing.

Just remember the support for going after the Taliban in 01. Even the Libians supported it.

Another possibility is if they continue to pull some sort of bull**** in Lebanon.

I think both of these would be much more realistic (not to mention less controversial) than the "Republicans decide they need a boost in the polls before the 08 election" scenario that people seem to be imagining.

Any other ideas?

[Hertston]

Originally posted by Dillweed:

"The setting for CM:SF is 2007 Syria after a coup removes the current Assad government. I do not wish to go into the specifics of the backstory at this time, but the premise is that UN is called upon to remove the illegitimate regime. Support comes from all major nations and nearly all within the Middle East region. Leading this liberation is a coalition of mostly NATO states, with a strong contingent of Arab/Muslim states involved directly in the immediate and long term rebuilding of the nation. The player is in command of one of the more interesting missions - to slice through the center of the country and join up with other coalition forces around Damascus."

"Liberation" from what? Other than a hardline Islamist government chucking nukes left, right, and centre, its hardly likely to be worse than the Syrians already have. And such people would be in no place to conduct a 'coup', only a revolution which would require at least an element of public support. I hadn't read that before, but its difficult to do so and still regard any of the possible alternatives, such as N. Korea or Taiwan as improbable!

That scenario is ludicrous on several accounts

That the UN would even consider such action ?

That the US/NATO and all the rest would be busting a gut to restore the 'legitimate' deposed Baathist regime of Assad?

That any Arab/muslim states would co-operate militarily with the US/NATO in any capacity at all?

As others have said, this is just one to play the game and forget about the background, I think.

[Hertston]

Originally posted by Dillweed:

"The setting for CM:SF is 2007 Syria after a coup removes the current Assad government. I do not wish to go into the specifics of the backstory at this time, but the premise is that UN is called upon to remove the illegitimate regime. Support comes from all major nations and nearly all within the Middle East region. Leading this liberation is a coalition of mostly NATO states, with a strong contingent of Arab/Muslim states involved directly in the immediate and long term rebuilding of the nation. The player is in command of one of the more interesting missions - to slice through the center of the country and join up with other coalition forces around Damascus."

"Liberation" from what? Other than a hardline Islamist government chucking nukes left, right, and centre, its hardly likely to be worse than the Syrians already have. And such people would be in no place to conduct a 'coup', only a revolution which would require at least an element of public support. I hadn't read that before, but its difficult to do so and still regard any of the possible alternatives, such as N. Korea or Taiwan as improbable!

That scenario is ludicrous on several accounts

That the UN would even consider such action ?

That the US/NATO and all the rest would be busting a gut to restore the 'legitimate' deposed Baathist regime of Assad?

That any Arab/muslim states would co-operate militarily with the US/NATO in any capacity at all?

As others have said, this is just one to play the game and forget about the background, I think.

[Hertston]

Originally posted by Dillweed:

"The setting for CM:SF is 2007 Syria after a coup removes the current Assad government. I do not wish to go into the specifics of the backstory at this time, but the premise is that UN is called upon to remove the illegitimate regime. Support comes from all major nations and nearly all within the Middle East region. Leading this liberation is a coalition of mostly NATO states, with a strong contingent of Arab/Muslim states involved directly in the immediate and long term rebuilding of the nation. The player is in command of one of the more interesting missions - to slice through the center of the country and join up with other coalition forces around Damascus."

"Liberation" from what? Other than a hardline Islamist government chucking nukes left, right, and centre, its hardly likely to be worse than the Syrians already have. And such people would be in no place to conduct a 'coup', only a revolution which would require at least an element of public support. I hadn't read that before, but its difficult to do so and still regard any of the possible alternatives, such as N. Korea or Taiwan as improbable!

That scenario is ludicrous on several accounts

That the UN would even consider such action ?

That the US/NATO and all the rest would be busting a gut to restore the 'legitimate' deposed Baathist regime of Assad?

That any Arab/muslim states would co-operate militarily with the US/NATO in any capacity at all?

As others have said, this is just one to play the game and forget about the background, I think.

[Kurtz]

Originally posted by Dillweed:

Just remember the support for going after the Taliban in 01. Even the Libians supported it.

Not surprising, since Libya issued an arrest warrant for Osama bin Laden through Interpol in 1998. IIRC Libya was the first country to do so.

[Kurtz]

Originally posted by Dillweed:

Just remember the support for going after the Taliban in 01. Even the Libians supported it.

Not surprising, since Libya issued an arrest warrant for Osama bin Laden through Interpol in 1998. IIRC Libya was the first country to do so.

[Kurtz]

Originally posted by Dillweed:

Just remember the support for going after the Taliban in 01. Even the Libians supported it.

Not surprising, since Libya issued an arrest warrant for Osama bin Laden through Interpol in 1998. IIRC Libya was the first country to do so.

[GSX]

I agree that both the background and supposition is somewhat laughable, but no more so than any other Tom Clancy inspired future world.

Im not so sure a Stryker unit would be the tip of the Spear anyhow.

So Im in the, lets see how it plays and forget the blah camp.

[GSX]

I agree that both the background and supposition is somewhat laughable, but no more so than any other Tom Clancy inspired future world.

Im not so sure a Stryker unit would be the tip of the Spear anyhow.

So Im in the, lets see how it plays and forget the blah camp.

[GSX]

I agree that both the background and supposition is somewhat laughable, but no more so than any other Tom Clancy inspired future world.

Im not so sure a Stryker unit would be the tip of the Spear anyhow.

So Im in the, lets see how it plays and forget the blah camp.

[GSX]

In fact, the more I think about it, the more the former Soviet Republics look a more reasonable scenario.

Think about it, crisis in Something-a-Stan, nuclear material/Fanatic government take-over, we know the story by now.

However, time is short, the Paras have secured an airfield and the only unit available to be air transported is - yes, the mighty Stryker, doing what its designed to do. This would also get around the, why are there not hundreds of M-1, as only a few could be air transported.

If the story is only there as a backfill, this seems far more plausible.

[GSX]

In fact, the more I think about it, the more the former Soviet Republics look a more reasonable scenario.

Think about it, crisis in Something-a-Stan, nuclear material/Fanatic government take-over, we know the story by now.

However, time is short, the Paras have secured an airfield and the only unit available to be air transported is - yes, the mighty Stryker, doing what its designed to do. This would also get around the, why are there not hundreds of M-1, as only a few could be air transported.

If the story is only there as a backfill, this seems far more plausible.

[GSX]

In fact, the more I think about it, the more the former Soviet Republics look a more reasonable scenario.

Think about it, crisis in Something-a-Stan, nuclear material/Fanatic government take-over, we know the story by now.

However, time is short, the Paras have secured an airfield and the only unit available to be air transported is - yes, the mighty Stryker, doing what its designed to do. This would also get around the, why are there not hundreds of M-1, as only a few could be air transported.

If the story is only there as a backfill, this seems far more plausible.

[Cpl Steiner]

As I think I posted once before, the setting may have been chosen more for utilitarian reasons than anything else. By utilitarian, I mean it has more varied terrain than some of the others regions suggested, thus providing more possibilities for military action.

The Something-a-Stan countries mentioned above, for instance, don't have coastlines. Syria also has the Euphrates river running through it. These features of Syria would allow for things like amphibious assaults (maybe the Marines add-on module hinted at), aircraft carriers offshore for air support, and battles for control of major bridges. The terrain west of the main mountain range and around Damascus is also less arid than would probably be the case in the Something-a-Stan countries.

In some ways, thinking about the above, there are a lot of similarities with Iraq. It may have just been easier for Battlefront to extrapolate how a war would go in Syria based on the initial stages of OIF.

By the way, I'm no expert on Syrian terrain, I'm only quoting from a few web sites and posts I've looked at on the subject, so forgive me if any of this is inaccurate.

[Cpl Steiner]

As I think I posted once before, the setting may have been chosen more for utilitarian reasons than anything else. By utilitarian, I mean it has more varied terrain than some of the others regions suggested, thus providing more possibilities for military action.

The Something-a-Stan countries mentioned above, for instance, don't have coastlines. Syria also has the Euphrates river running through it. These features of Syria would allow for things like amphibious assaults (maybe the Marines add-on module hinted at), aircraft carriers offshore for air support, and battles for control of major bridges. The terrain west of the main mountain range and around Damascus is also less arid than would probably be the case in the Something-a-Stan countries.

In some ways, thinking about the above, there are a lot of similarities with Iraq. It may have just been easier for Battlefront to extrapolate how a war would go in Syria based on the initial stages of OIF.

By the way, I'm no expert on Syrian terrain, I'm only quoting from a few web sites and posts I've looked at on the subject, so forgive me if any of this is inaccurate.

[Cpl Steiner]

As I think I posted once before, the setting may have been chosen more for utilitarian reasons than anything else. By utilitarian, I mean it has more varied terrain than some of the others regions suggested, thus providing more possibilities for military action.

The Something-a-Stan countries mentioned above, for instance, don't have coastlines. Syria also has the Euphrates river running through it. These features of Syria would allow for things like amphibious assaults (maybe the Marines add-on module hinted at), aircraft carriers offshore for air support, and battles for control of major bridges. The terrain west of the main mountain range and around Damascus is also less arid than would probably be the case in the Something-a-Stan countries.

In some ways, thinking about the above, there are a lot of similarities with Iraq. It may have just been easier for Battlefront to extrapolate how a war would go in Syria based on the initial stages of OIF.

By the way, I'm no expert on Syrian terrain, I'm only quoting from a few web sites and posts I've looked at on the subject, so forgive me if any of this is inaccurate.

[Midnight Warrior]

Here is an interesting article that might shed some light on what would make a credible background story. Apparantly (according to the article) there is some connection between Syria and Iran. Perhaps the Iranians starts something and the fire spread to Syria. Perhaps NATO gets involved becuase the situation becomes too threatening to Europes oil lifeline. Perhaps there is a wider war with Iran and Syria is just one part of a bigger war just as in Iraq and Afganistan.

article

BTW, by cited this article I am not endorsing any or all of what it says rather this is just FYI

[Midnight Warrior]

Here is an interesting article that might shed some light on what would make a credible background story. Apparantly (according to the article) there is some connection between Syria and Iran. Perhaps the Iranians starts something and the fire spread to Syria. Perhaps NATO gets involved becuase the situation becomes too threatening to Europes oil lifeline. Perhaps there is a wider war with Iran and Syria is just one part of a bigger war just as in Iraq and Afganistan.

article

BTW, by cited this article I am not endorsing any or all of what it says rather this is just FYI

[Midnight Warrior]

Here is an interesting article that might shed some light on what would make a credible background story. Apparantly (according to the article) there is some connection between Syria and Iran. Perhaps the Iranians starts something and the fire spread to Syria. Perhaps NATO gets involved becuase the situation becomes too threatening to Europes oil lifeline. Perhaps there is a wider war with Iran and Syria is just one part of a bigger war just as in Iraq and Afganistan.

article

BTW, by cited this article I am not endorsing any or all of what it says rather this is just FYI

[C'Rogers]

They catch a guy with a 1-way ticket from damascus, a syrian passport and a backpack nuke on staten island sort of thing.

This is a very good idea and would make the back story not only much more reasonable but potentially more balanced (in a realism sense).

My problem with the back story hasn't been that of military action in Syria, more so of the entire world jumping on. I can imagine Syria giving a hard fight to any major power, but if the whole world (including the surrounding Arab states as the intro suggests) helped out than it should be decimating.

Now let's bring nukes or another WMD into the backstory as you suggest.

After overthrowing the Assad regime it is found that the new government has/is building a nuke and fully intends to do as much damage as possible (if they really wanted to have the whole world jump on as they have suggested, than an attack could already have taken place).

So you still have a vast power differential, but now time is much more of an issue. Even in a situation where all nations wanted to take a military action against Syria, if they only had a few days to set it up, how effective would it be.

So if it is thought about this way the US has a far more challenging time. After the coop in Syria, and potentially a devastating terrorist attack, the UN quickly authorizes military action. The USA has the most troops in the region, but even they could probably only mobilize a small force on such short notice. With how long the USA took to mobilize troops for the Gulf wars, they probably could not get more than some special forces and maybe close by troops to combat that quickly (if someone knows more about mobilization times and what could be thrown against Syria given like a week I would love to hear it).

So a few, fairly lightly armored and supported but highly trained, troops are sent in. One company (you) is given the task of cutting right through the middle. So while you have superior equipment/training, you would be going at a dangerous rushed pace with minimal back up.

Of course that is in all likelihood that isn't how the BFC story will go, just how I think it could go.

But personally if the game plays well, which I almost undoubtedly think it will, it could be the USA vs Sri Lanka and I would gladly get it. A good back story is a nice bonus though.

[C'Rogers]

They catch a guy with a 1-way ticket from damascus, a syrian passport and a backpack nuke on staten island sort of thing.

This is a very good idea and would make the back story not only much more reasonable but potentially more balanced (in a realism sense).

My problem with the back story hasn't been that of military action in Syria, more so of the entire world jumping on. I can imagine Syria giving a hard fight to any major power, but if the whole world (including the surrounding Arab states as the intro suggests) helped out than it should be decimating.

Now let's bring nukes or another WMD into the backstory as you suggest.

After overthrowing the Assad regime it is found that the new government has/is building a nuke and fully intends to do as much damage as possible (if they really wanted to have the whole world jump on as they have suggested, than an attack could already have taken place).

So you still have a vast power differential, but now time is much more of an issue. Even in a situation where all nations wanted to take a military action against Syria, if they only had a few days to set it up, how effective would it be.

So if it is thought about this way the US has a far more challenging time. After the coop in Syria, and potentially a devastating terrorist attack, the UN quickly authorizes military action. The USA has the most troops in the region, but even they could probably only mobilize a small force on such short notice. With how long the USA took to mobilize troops for the Gulf wars, they probably could not get more than some special forces and maybe close by troops to combat that quickly (if someone knows more about mobilization times and what could be thrown against Syria given like a week I would love to hear it).

So a few, fairly lightly armored and supported but highly trained, troops are sent in. One company (you) is given the task of cutting right through the middle. So while you have superior equipment/training, you would be going at a dangerous rushed pace with minimal back up.

Of course that is in all likelihood that isn't how the BFC story will go, just how I think it could go.

But personally if the game plays well, which I almost undoubtedly think it will, it could be the USA vs Sri Lanka and I would gladly get it. A good back story is a nice bonus though.

[C'Rogers]

They catch a guy with a 1-way ticket from damascus, a syrian passport and a backpack nuke on staten island sort of thing.

This is a very good idea and would make the back story not only much more reasonable but potentially more balanced (in a realism sense).

My problem with the back story hasn't been that of military action in Syria, more so of the entire world jumping on. I can imagine Syria giving a hard fight to any major power, but if the whole world (including the surrounding Arab states as the intro suggests) helped out than it should be decimating.

Now let's bring nukes or another WMD into the backstory as you suggest.

After overthrowing the Assad regime it is found that the new government has/is building a nuke and fully intends to do as much damage as possible (if they really wanted to have the whole world jump on as they have suggested, than an attack could already have taken place).

So you still have a vast power differential, but now time is much more of an issue. Even in a situation where all nations wanted to take a military action against Syria, if they only had a few days to set it up, how effective would it be.

So if it is thought about this way the US has a far more challenging time. After the coop in Syria, and potentially a devastating terrorist attack, the UN quickly authorizes military action. The USA has the most troops in the region, but even they could probably only mobilize a small force on such short notice. With how long the USA took to mobilize troops for the Gulf wars, they probably could not get more than some special forces and maybe close by troops to combat that quickly (if someone knows more about mobilization times and what could be thrown against Syria given like a week I would love to hear it).

So a few, fairly lightly armored and supported but highly trained, troops are sent in. One company (you) is given the task of cutting right through the middle. So while you have superior equipment/training, you would be going at a dangerous rushed pace with minimal back up.

Of course that is in all likelihood that isn't how the BFC story will go, just how I think it could go.

But personally if the game plays well, which I almost undoubtedly think it will, it could be the USA vs Sri Lanka and I would gladly get it. A good back story is a nice bonus though.

[Dirtweasle]

Ideas? Oh, yea. Just read the daily news and you can imagine several scenarios. Look here's a story form the WaPo this morning -

US, France To Isolate Syria Over Hariri Assassination

The United States and France are planning to introduce two U.N. resolutions next week aimed at holding Syria to account for meddling in Lebanon and for its alleged links to the assassination of former Lebanese prime minister Rafiq Hariri, according to several sources close to the diplomacy.

The moves would be the toughest international action ever taken against Syria and would be designed to further isolate President Bashar Assad, who for the first time is getting the cold shoulder from key Arab governments such as those in Egypt and Saudi Arabia, Western envoys said.

The impending actions will be "the perfect storm for Damascus," said a Western diplomat at the United Nations, speaking on the condition of anonymity because planning is still underway. "It's pretty clear the Syrians don't have any friends left."