|
ProfessorCurly posted:Thinking on it, for the people actually living there, would this be a bad option? They'd get a functioning state apparatus, military and internal security, and all they'd have to do is put up with a few mad mullahs, but not quite as mad as the ones they already suffer under.
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2014 16:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 12:43 |
|
|
What would happen to the remaining land, then? Join Saudi Arabia? Jordan? Kuwait? Syria?
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2014 16:36
|
|
|
Cat Mattress posted:What would happen to the remaining land, then? Join Saudi Arabia? Jordan? Kuwait? Syria? Don't you mean Saudi, Jordan, Kuwait, and Syria will be joining them? 
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2014 16:41
|
|
|
eSports Chaebol posted:The one upside of the MIC: materiel so impractically expensive to maintain that our enemies can't afford to use it! The drat thing uses a turbine based powerplant. Maybe someone with more knowledge can chime in here, but I'd imagine if the powerplant broke, its probably a permanent loss.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2014 16:42
|
|
|
FAUXTON posted:How difficult is the M1 to operate (even with a crude level of efficiency) without training? Or would there be defectors with the appropriate training within ISIS? I assume at least someone knows the basics of "how to work a tank," and I understand it isn't like they're neck-deep in ammo, but are there expectations that this will be used? Dale Gribble: Have you also downloaded the classified instruction manual for this tank from Vladimir Putin's website, took a correspondence course in Russian, translated the manual, memorized it, and eaten it? Have you Hank? Putin?
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2014 16:49
|
|
|
1: Anyone claiming the situation could only go up is a complete optimist. 2: Concernign "Anschlussing" of the Shia areas, I think you underestimate the difference between Persians and Arabs. Even if both are Shia. It would perhaps be nice for the Mullahs, since those Shia Arabs would propably vote Mullah and not "reformist". A bit like "Novorussija", South-Iraqi Shiastan would be large enough to be a viable state on its own, and this would likely be seen as a prefereable option to joining Iran.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2014 16:54
|
|
|
FAUXTON posted:How difficult is the M1 to operate (even with a crude level of efficiency) without training? Or would there be defectors with the appropriate training within ISIS? I assume at least someone knows the basics of "how to work a tank," and I understand it isn't like they're neck-deep in ammo, but are there expectations that this will be used? They would be bombed if they took them out in public, and I can't seem them being able to stop it. Rebels in Syria captured a bunch of tanks from Assad, but you'd rarely see them used, and when they were, it was very quickly and then back to hiding. Tanks are useless if you can't defend them with infantry and with air support, and ISIS doesn't meet the criteria afaik.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2014 16:59
|
|
|
Russia has just flip-flopped a bit. The UNSC previously couldn't pass anything that went behind the back of the Syrian government, as Russia would vote against it or veto. Today, they passed resolution 2165, which gives UN aid convoys permission to travel into Syria without the permission of the government, with the Russian concession being "monitoring" of the aid to ensure that no weapons were being provided. What the extent of that monitoring is, and how much of this could be considered acting in good faith remains to be seen, but if Russia is on board with bypassing Assad to increase the effectiveness of aid inside Syria, Assad will likely allow it to happen. Last month, the regime said that any aid efforts done without going through them would be considered an attack, but with this resolution going through, I think it's probably just tough talk. Would be a huge win for the millions still in the country if it translates to more, consistent aid. Here's a good article on it. http://www.undispatch.com/syria-cross-boder Edit: Opposition response. Sounds like the FSA are ready to start providing corridors immediately. http://www.etilaf.us/unscr_2165 Volkerball fucked around with this message at 18:03 on Jul 14, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2014 17:59
|
|
|
whatever7 posted:Do you guys see the similarity between Maliki and Chiang Kai-shek (in 47, 48)? I think poo poo will hit the fans and it will end very badly for him. I'm seeing the dude more as a Diem, to be honest. I wouldn't call him a Chiang Kai-shek mainly because Baghdadi and ISIS sure as hell ain't no Mao and the PLA.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2014 19:21
|
|
|
blowfish posted:Border changes have a habit of blowing up into the next clusterfuck five years later. Then again, the situation in Iraq sounds like it can't go anywhere but up. In a hypothetical world where a destabilized Syria and insurgent Saudi-funded Islamic State shared a border with Iran having acquired the southern half of its old military nemesis due to the almost unbelievable incompetence of its even older ideological nemesis thus gaining an adjacent border to the Saudis funding the IS, you would not have to wait five years for it to turn into a clusterfuck. That's a promise!
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2014 19:32
|
|
|
Volkerball posted:Russia has just flip-flopped a bit. The UNSC previously couldn't pass anything that went behind the back of the Syrian government, as Russia would vote against it or veto. Today, they passed resolution 2165, which gives UN aid convoys permission to travel into Syria without the permission of the government, with the Russian concession being "monitoring" of the aid to ensure that no weapons were being provided. What the extent of that monitoring is, and how much of this could be considered acting in good faith remains to be seen, but if Russia is on board with bypassing Assad to increase the effectiveness of aid inside Syria, Assad will likely allow it to happen. Last month, the regime said that any aid efforts done without going through them would be considered an attack, but with this resolution going through, I think it's probably just tough talk. Would be a huge win for the millions still in the country if it translates to more, consistent aid. Syrian goverment sees the situation as a literal godsend to mitigate issues with the west and Turkey. While predicting their behaviour is always a bit iffy, I would guess that the Russians would strive to get Assads goverment involved in a coordinated anti IS action. There, it will be like: Assad:"We know this, this and this about IS. Their specific Saudi backers are this guy, this guy and this guy. In the event of a joint intervention in IS territory our army will do this, this and this. How much we commit to this depends on how much you do commit to this, but as a broad ballpark figure, we will match any Turkish/Kurd/Iranian division with like 0.7 divisions of our own. We know IS wants to kill us next, our division are by now pretty well experienced at that kind of stuff and you can expect full support. We only ask for the following conditions (reduction of sanctions, golden bridge to US exile for the "moderate" opposition, cessation of Qatari aid to other islamists etc.) because we dont want to fight on 2 fronts." Anyone who gets the reference gets one history cookie. They are absolutely delighted about the situation. What they said one month ago was under a completely different situation. Its kind of like USSR "flip flopping" in its relations with Imperial Japan after the overall strategical situation completely changed. And nothing would please Assad more than writing his reinvitation to the "normal word" with the blood of IS or of people he, creatively and perhaps post-mortemly, declares to be IS.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2014 19:41
|
|
|
Mightypeon posted:Syrian goverment sees the situation as a literal godsend to mitigate issues with the west and Turkey. While predicting their behaviour is always a bit iffy, I would guess that the Russians would strive to get Assads goverment involved in a coordinated anti IS action. If the West came in to fight ISIS, I'd bet money Assad would release every ISIS prisoner he had, if there's any left. There's 0 chance of a coordinated effort between forces fighting ISIS, and the regime, when the regime has been empowering ISIS all along. Also, the whole reason they had to pass this resolution was because Assad was forcing all UN aid to come through his forces, who would bullshit around with "Oh we would take you there but there's heavy fighting at the moment" because the regime was barrel bombing the poo poo out of all the "at risk" places. People starved to death over bureaucratic nonsense when UN aid could have gotten to them through opposition corridors. I don't think any of this suggests that Assad regained some reputation. It's saying we're tired of loving with you, so we're just going to go behind your back from now on. An interesting stance to take 3 years into the war. I'd imagine Russia has been getting a lot of pressure over the regime being uncooperative on even the most basic poo poo like aid getting to civilians, so with the concessions to make sure it won't help the opposition fight, they probably just said gently caress it. We'll see if Assad is on board with that soon enough.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2014 20:16
|
|
|
Exioce posted:If the Kurds go ahead with their referendum, what's stopping the Shiites from their own for a bit of Anschluss with Iran? The fact that they speak an entirely different language, for one. EDIT: Here's a primer for what it's like for the current Arabs living in Iranian Khuzestan: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_separatism_in_Khuzestan Sergg fucked around with this message at 20:49 on Jul 14, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2014 20:20
|
|
|
Sergg posted:The fact that they speak an entirely different language, for one. Granted, only 66% or so speak a Persian or close to Persian language, one thing people frequently forget about Iran is it is pretty multi-ethnic(although Arabs are only around 2% of the population).
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2014 20:46
|
|
|
Volkerball posted:If the West came in to fight ISIS, I'd bet money Assad would release every ISIS prisoner he had, if there's any left. There's 0 chance of a coordinated effort between forces fighting ISIS, and the regime, when the regime has been empowering ISIS all along. Also, the whole reason they had to pass this resolution was because Assad was forcing all UN aid to come through his forces, who would bullshit around with "Oh we would take you there but there's heavy fighting at the moment" because the regime was barrel bombing the poo poo out of all the "at risk" places. People starved to death over bureaucratic nonsense when UN aid could have gotten to them through opposition corridors. I don't think any of this suggests that Assad regained some reputation. It's saying we're tired of loving with you, so we're just going to go behind your back from now on. An interesting stance to take 3 years into the war. I'd imagine Russia has been getting a lot of pressure over the regime being uncooperative on even the most basic poo poo like aid getting to civilians, so with the concessions to make sure it won't help the opposition fight, they probably just said gently caress it. We'll see if Assad is on board with that soon enough. Is there any good evidence of Assad "empowering" ISIS? I'd heard many times that his forces didn't fight ISIS, with the implication that they were in cahoots somehow because of the damage ISIS was doing to other rebel groups. But I never saw anything more than speculation.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2014 22:34
|
|
|
Count Roland posted:Is there any good evidence of Assad "empowering" ISIS? I'd heard many times that his forces didn't fight ISIS, with the implication that they were in cahoots somehow because of the damage ISIS was doing to other rebel groups. But I never saw anything more than speculation. It seems about as based in reality as Maliki's claims last week that the kurds support ISIS. MiddleOne fucked around with this message at 22:53 on Jul 14, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2014 22:47
|
|
|
^^ I think it's more to do with the reports that Assad trained Islamist insurgents and sent them to Iraq during the US occupation.  Can someone who understand Arabic language translate the sentences above? According to this, the ISIS account above "make Takfeer on Hamas and mention that fighting Hamas is more important than fighting Jews"
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2014 22:52
|
|
|
Section 31 posted:^^ I'm bad at translating from Arabic to English, but he says that "Hamas trades religion in the name of jihad and fighting the Jews" that god should reveal their ruse and how he should punish them. Its a very weird twitter post. Edit: to elaborate further it means they're using religion as an excuse to fight jihad and the jews.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2014 23:07
|
|
|
No functional airports in Libya right now, though Tripoli should reopen soon.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2014 00:05
|
|
|
Volkerball posted:They would be bombed if they took them out in public, and I can't seem them being able to stop it. Rebels in Syria captured a bunch of tanks from Assad, but you'd rarely see them used, and when they were, it was very quickly and then back to hiding. Tanks are useless if you can't defend them with infantry and with air support, and ISIS doesn't meet the criteria afaik. Keep in mind that in this case, ISIS does seem to be capable of providing decent support, and the Iraqi air force isn't being nearly as effective as most would expect. However, I do agree that they aren't likely to be used in a traditional role; if any were drivable, they'd probably get turned into dug-in artillery. Even more likely, I think they'd be stripped of any usable parts and ammunition, with the size of the haul depending on how long the site was secure. If they had enough time to take everything, and nothing was too seriously damaged, then from the three tanks that were lost by the Iraqi Army, ISIS could potentially gain 3x 120mm guns with ~120 rounds, 9 machine guns + ammo, smoke grenades, laser rangefinders, GPS, and brand new FLIR systems (thermal, infrared, nightvision), all of which could be useful in other roles. If they could drive or tow the things away, then they have the engines as well, plus armor and treads, and we've already seen some interesting Mad Max poo poo out of Syria and Libya. Personally I'm kind of excited at the prospect of some sort of FrankenAbrams.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2014 00:31
|
|
|
Xandu posted:No functional airports in Libya right now, though Tripoli should reopen soon. This might just be rumor, but apparently the control tower in Tripoli got hit really bad. If so, it may take more than just a day or two to get things back online.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2014 00:40
|
|
|
That might explain why they had to close Misrata (they said there were technical difficulties stemming from closure of Tripoli's airport). Benghazi's been closed off for months though.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2014 00:44
|
|
|
Yeah, looking around a bit more a couple of reputable places confirm that the control tower took a Grad rocket during a rocket bombardment. Looks like Libya just got a lot harder to get around in for at least a little bit.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2014 00:49
|
|
|
Does ISIS have any means to even take on an M1? Especially if its on the move? I ask because they could have driven them off base(at no risk from small arms) instead of letting them get captured. Also, do they have any protection from theft like keys or password? Its mostly unusable without its electronics right?
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2014 00:52
|
|
|
Shaocaholica posted:Does ISIS have any means to even take on an M1? Especially if its on the move? ISIS has in fact destroyed or disabled several M1 tanks in the last couple of months. Keep in mind that the US gave Iraq the M1A1, not the most up to date version of the tank, which the US still lost dozen of (mostly disabled, not "catastrophic" losses) over the course of the Iraq War.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2014 00:55
|
|
|
ChaosSamusX posted:You shouldn't make normative suggestions for international policy if you don't even want to consider people's motives and context. Oh, I'm interested in the grand scheme of things. ReV VAdAUL posted:In your opinion was the Iran Iraq war a good thing? It certainly wasn't a terrible thing for the US but no, not 'good'. Two countries going at it who don't pose a vital threat to the US isn't really comparable with two terror groups targeting one another. New Division posted:Keep in mind that the US gave Iraq the M1A1, not the most up to date version of the tank, which the US still lost dozen of (mostly disabled, not "catastrophic" losses) over the course of the Iraq War. IS got their hands on Heavy AT weapons? That's a little unnerving. pro starcraft loser fucked around with this message at 02:11 on Jul 15, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2014 02:03
|
|
|
If I'm not mistaken, I think export models of the Abrams dont have the same armor as the models used by the US military. So it might be quite a bit easier for ISIS to destroy Iraqi Abrams. Also US tank crews don't have a habit of jumping out of their tanks and running away....
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2014 02:07
|
|
|
The Libyan interim government is contemplating a request for an international force for Libya. This could be interesting.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2014 02:11
|
|
|
New Division posted:The Libyan interim government is contemplating a request for an international force for Libya. This could be interesting. Who would actually send troops in? The French?
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2014 02:15
|
|
|
Just The Facts posted:Who would actually send troops in? The French? Sending the French Foreign Legion into Libya could be sort of cool in a retro way.  I'm not sure what the reaction would be. This is still a very recent development. They haven't made an official request yet, they're just thinking about it. Though the fact that this is even a possibility may indicate that they don't believe they have the ability to reign in the militias by themselves. New Division fucked around with this message at 02:19 on Jul 15, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2014 02:17
|
|
|
Charliegrs posted:
Thats whats confusing to me. If you're in a tank, why jump out unless you had a better chance of survival on foot. That would be quite the odd scenario. But I guess it sounds like the tanks were probably just parked.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2014 02:18
|
|
|
Shaocaholica posted:Thats whats confusing to me. If you're in a tank, why jump out unless you had a better chance of survival on foot. That would be quite the odd scenario. But I guess it sounds like the tanks were probably just parked. Look, getting out of your tank and running away when you first take fire in in the Iraqi Army training handbook.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2014 02:20
|
|
|
I found this article in pando.com and wanted to get feedback on its accuracy. I found it odd that pando.com would even have this article but, it raises an interesting point. Is ISIS really just filling a vacuum instead of actually winning any military engagements? quote:You’ll notice the similarity to earlier scare-maps that showed the spread of Soviet Communism, or Nazi fascism, or “Red Chinese” domination over a terrified world. But for God’s sake, those groups were more or less formidable—maybe not as formidable as the defense contractors and Birchers made them out to be, but all possessed of serious military and industrial power.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2014 02:48
|
|
|
You don't necessarily have to completely destroy the tank either. If your tank gets immobilized in the middle of an IS ambush the tank will probably be abandoned. With an older Abrams, you can probably do that with a lucky RPG-7 to the treads; certainly you could with an RPG-29 which the Syrian army uses. A large IED would also be effective in an ambush situation.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2014 02:49
|
|
|
eSports Chaebol posted:The one upside of the MIC: materiel so impractically expensive to maintain that our enemies can't afford to use it! Big downside of the MIC: Selling this star wars poo poo to anyone who'll solemnly pinky swear not to be bad, resulting in a situation where enough of it is captured from a rinky-dink vassal by a comparatively sophisticated enemy and used to massacre whole villages in rather elegant fashion, such as driving over their bodies or strapping them to the muzzle and firing.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2014 02:55
|
|
|
radical meme posted:I found this article in pando.com and wanted to get feedback on its accuracy. I found it odd that pando.com would even have this article but, it raises an interesting point. Is ISIS really just filling a vacuum instead of actually winning any military engagements? Pretty sure Brecher put out an article for the War Nerd a little while back where he made the same point. There's no doubt ISIS is mostly opportunistic and expanding to fill in power vacuums, if they were the types to put a foot wrong and walk face-first into overwhelming conventional forces they'd have done it by now. ISIS's advance into Iraq has followed the path of least resistance and they've definitely preferred breaking the fragile Iraqi Army rather than taking on hardened militias on home turf. It's not exactly completely stunning insight though, and Brecher spends a lot of that article puffing himself up for it and sneering at the media for buying into ISIS's scare tactics to boost their ratings. Yes, it's true, ISIS isn't about to march out and destroy more established forces like the Peshmerga, but the instability their actions bring all but guarantees there'll be more openings for them to exploit in the future. That's something worth discussing, and it's premature to believe ISIS has definitely reached their high watermark already.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2014 03:08
|
|
|
New Division posted:Look, getting out of your tank and running away when you first take fire in in the Iraqi Army training handbook. The "Highway of Death" in the Gulf War was literally this writ large. It's fairly well-known as a traffic jam blown up vehicles a mile long. An Iraqi convoy got boxed by American aircraft, and the soldiers abandoned their vehicles en masse - probably a wise idea, because they were all shot to pieces. "But Kaal," you ask, "doesn't that highway have a reputation for being the burial ground of ten thousand poor Iraqi soldiers murdered by trigger-happy American imperialists?" It does! Thanks to the sterling efforts of people, like journalist and thread-favorite Seymour Hersh, who basically fabricated the story. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highway_of_Death#Controversies Kaal fucked around with this message at 07:32 on Jul 15, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2014 03:09
|
|
|
radical meme posted:I found this article in pando.com and wanted to get feedback on its accuracy. I found it odd that pando.com would even have this article but, it raises an interesting point. Is ISIS really just filling a vacuum instead of actually winning any military engagements? A lot of it is this. They walked into Mosul where Iraqi Army soldiers had already abandoned their posts ahead of time. Most of their controlled territory in Syria is up north, far from the all the crucial cities like Damascus, Aleppo, Homs, Idlib, etc. They have a presence in some of these areas, but every rebel group hates them and actively fights them, so they haven't exactly set up a caliphate in Aleppo. Most of their actual fighting is against rebel groups who are facing multiple fronts, and ISIS exploits that, because there is very limited fighting between ISIS and the regime. Even with that advantage, their biggest victories have been ones where they decimated forces by sucker punching them or stabbing them in the back in various ways. They're somewhere between 5-15,000 strong, but they've been covered more than groups that have 100,000 plus in Syria since they were barely 2,000 strong and controlled absolutely nothing. Sure they have money and weapons, but they've made effectively no sustained gains against the Kurds in the north. They've been up there for a good two weeks now fighting in Kobane with all their spoils from Iraq, and they still haven't (and aren't in position to any time soon) taken the city, and Kurds are just now getting reinforcements from Turkey. Aside from Deiz ez-zor, Mosul, and Raqqa, they control desert, and Mosul is dependent on them maintaining relationships with Sunni groups in the area who ALLOWED them to move in. Were the Iraqi prime minister Sunni, or perhaps even just trying to be balanced in good faith, ISIS would have nothing in Iraq. They are the same opportunistic terror bombing group they have been for their entire history. It's pretty funny because international news outlets portray them as battle-hardened warriors, but they are a running joke among all the fighting forces in the region not named the Iraqi army. People say they're just a bunch of naive European kids. The experienced ones only learned how to fight like they did in Iraq, which is how they fight in Syria: Retreat rather than take heavy losses, use car bombs, IED's, and ambushes, and outside of that, keep your head low. In direct military action, they'd get their heads kicked in. But when it comes to the sexiness of covering international events like a school shooting, Syria is front and center, and ISIS are the Adam Lanza-est guys around. I think that plays more of a role than journalists buying into their bullshit, because everyone reporting on Syria knows drat well what they are as a force. Volkerball fucked around with this message at 03:26 on Jul 15, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2014 03:23
|
|
|
I think the ISIS are decent fighters myself but they're hardly the Viet Cong. The core fighters of the force (who are mostly Iraqi) are pretty experienced and resilient. The Euro kids don't know anything, but they can function as suicide bombers and car bombers in a pinch. Beating up on the lovely Iraqi Army and fresh faced militia recruits with 7 days of training is definitely making them look better than they are though. edit: 90% of the airplanes at Tripoli International airport have been damaged or destroyed apparently. This in addition to a destroyed control tower and damaged runways.... and fighting is still ongoing according to recent buzz from Tripoli. I think Libya's basically lost its civil aviation system for the near future. Might be months before even a rudimentary system can be restored, and that assumes a restoration of some measure of stability. New Division fucked around with this message at 03:46 on Jul 15, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2014 03:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 12:43 |
|
|
Can someone give a rundown of what's going on in Libya right now? Is it an east/west, urban/rural, or religious/secular divide?
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2014 04:17
|
|