|
On that note, Brown Moses or anyone else, is there a handy resource to look at what kind of aircraft-borne bombs the government has in its arsenal? I thought the impetus behind barrel bombs is that helicopters cost less than jet aircraft to fly by hour, and that barrel bombs were created in pursuit of a munition that transport helis could drop.
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 04:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 03:44 |
|
|
Xerxes17 posted:Why the gently caress would Syria be buying MiG-31s? It's probably something they already paid for.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 04:33
|
|
|
Xerxes17 posted:Why the gently caress would Syria be buying MiG-31s? Gotta spend that check from Iran somehow 
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 05:04
|
|
|
Kinda hard to crash planes into busy markets at mach 2.83* without MiG-31 (or -25) now aint' it  *Special high altitude markets
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 05:21
|
|
|
Imapanda posted:So the sinful allepo breadshops can be cleansed with greater efficiency Mig-31's are interceptors
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 09:13
|
|
|
The deal was made in '06 or '07 I think.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 09:45
|
|
|
Panzeh posted:It's probably something they already paid for. According to Iranian state media its under a contract signed in 2007, with 2 more jets to come later
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 09:46
|
|
|
What does the US pulling its Patriot missiles out of Turkey mean?
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 10:13
|
|
|
Sucrose posted:What does the US pulling its Patriot missiles out of Turkey mean? Probably nothing, Isis doesn't have strategic missiles, and those were only placed in '13. I'm guessing redeployment that has something to do with Russia. Nato also said in the statement that Turkey will receive them again if the threat arises. ass struggle fucked around with this message at 11:18 on Aug 17, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 10:47
|
|
|
sparatuvs posted:Nato also said in the statement that Turkey will receive them again if the threat arises. Hopefully launched from outside Turkey warhead first.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 11:24
|
|
|
It now is illegal in Egypt to intentionally report false information on militant/terrorist attacks - as in information that contradicts the official statements. But don't worry, the punishment is only a massive fine instead of imprisonment as it originally was planned. Al Jazeera - Guardian
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 11:43
|
|
|
radical meme posted:
This is me catching up, but aren't we already involved militarily in Syria? I wasn't advocating an Iraq style ground invasion, but if we spent as much money and effort bombing Iraq and Syria in one day in the present, back in 2012-13 in an effort at real stabilization (outreach to promising groups, negotiations with Russia, China, and other foreign states, etc), maybe we wouldn't have what looks like an endless military campaign today.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 14:59
|
|
|
Edit: My post was redundant. I should refresh the page more.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 15:16
|
|
|
Shageletic posted:I wasn't advocating an Iraq style ground invasion, but if we spent as much money and effort bombing Iraq and Syria in one day in the present, back in 2012-13 in an effort at real stabilization (outreach to promising groups, negotiations with Russia, China, and other foreign states, etc), maybe we wouldn't have what looks like an endless military campaign today. Who would you have bombed in 2012? Assad? If so, you would have had to deal with his air force, his air defense systems, and the ire of Russia.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 15:45
|
|
|
Invicta{HOG}, M.D. posted:Who would you have bombed in 2012? Assad? If so, you would have had to deal with his air force, his air defense systems, and the ire of Russia. Heaven help the US air force if it actually needs to fight an opponent armed with something other than small arms.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 15:52
|
|
|
Invicta{HOG}, M.D. posted:Who would you have bombed in 2012? Assad? If so, you would have had to deal with his air force, his air defense systems, and the ire of Russia. Oh no, Russia has such great terms with the West at the moment.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 15:57
|
|
|
Morrow posted:Heaven help the US air force if it actually needs to fight an opponent armed with something other than small arms. And what happens if you decimate their forces but the opposition that forms is, say, a vicious Islamist force bent on establishing a Caliphate? Or if Assad doesn't fall and there is a stalemate on the ground?
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 15:57
|
|
|
Trogdos! posted:It now is illegal in Egypt to intentionally report false information on militant/terrorist attacks - as in information that contradicts the official statements. But don't worry, the punishment is only a massive fine instead of imprisonment as it originally was planned. But I'm sure it has the people's support, unlike Morsi apologists would have you think
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 16:01
|
|
|
Invicta{HOG}, M.D. posted:And what happens if you decimate their forces but the opposition that forms is, say, a vicious Islamist force bent on establishing a Caliphate? Or if Assad doesn't fall and there is a stalemate on the ground? All of which occurred anyway.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 16:12
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:But I'm sure it has the people's support, unlike Morsi apologists would have you think Which is funny because Egypt has become decisively more illiberal under Sisi than it was under Morsi.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 16:20
|
|
|
Morrow posted:All of which occurred anyway. Exactly, so then what do we do? Continue to bomb ISIS as we are and let the rest of the country fight their civil war. Or, I guess, we'd also have to still be bombing Assad as well but we'd have to make sure that we were bombing them both the same because otherwise we'd have one side start winning. Or maybe we'd have to bomb one side more because it was winning and eventually enough bombs would lead to peace and reconciliation. I'm always interested in hearing how much people think that we could have somehow just bombed the right place at the right time and prevented all of this but the chances are we would have bombed the wrong places at the wrong time and instead would be on the hook for another blood Middle East civil war.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 16:24
|
|
|
Sucrose posted:What does the US pulling its Patriot missiles out of Turkey mean? The daily press here says they're going to the US for scheduled upgrades, though I have no idea whether that's true or not.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 16:31
|
|
|
Invicta{HOG}, M.D. posted:Exactly, so then what do we do? Continue to bomb ISIS as we are and let the rest of the country fight their civil war. Or, I guess, we'd also have to still be bombing Assad as well but we'd have to make sure that we were bombing them both the same because otherwise we'd have one side start winning. Or maybe we'd have to bomb one side more because it was winning and eventually enough bombs would lead to peace and reconciliation. No matter how many times bombing for peace fails to work, the instinctive feeling that there has to be something we can do means there will always be people trying to make the case that this time will be different.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 16:43
|
|
|
I feel like we could do something, but it would require such a comprehensive overhaul of our society and approach to international relations in general that it's about as useful as talking about whether the US ought switch to a five year plan or a four year plan system.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 16:58
|
|
|
Invicta{HOG}, M.D. posted:I'm always interested in hearing how much people think that we could have somehow just bombed the right place at the right time and prevented all of this but the chances are we would have bombed the wrong places at the wrong time and instead would be on the hook for another blood Middle East civil war. When your
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 17:04
|
|
|
Invicta{HOG}, M.D. posted:Who would you have bombed in 2012? Assad? If so, you would have had to deal with his air force, his air defense systems, and the ire of Russia. I wouldn't have bombed Assad. Bombing only leads to broken infrastructure, institutions, and structures. But if we spent a small percentage of what we currently do for military operations in the ME towards financing democractic activists, parties, and anyone willing to be on the ground in Syria and build a viable, non-extremist state, then the chances of us having to return to the area for yet another trillion dollar futile effort would have diminished. Asking for a Marshall Plan for the ME is naive, but at least post WWII we had leaders with clear enough vision to spend a penny today, to avoid spending a hundred tomorrow, even if it is not as automatically fulfilling launching JDAMS at people we hate. EDIT: I think I've mentioned it before in this thread, but our militaristic stance overriding any peaceful foreign aid has repeatedly come to bite America in the rear end. The book State v. Defense is really good at pointing this out.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 17:10
|
|
|
suboptimal posted:Which is funny because Egypt has become decisively more illiberal under Sisi than it was under Morsi. That is, indeed, the proverbial joke.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 17:38
|
|
|
Shageletic posted:I wouldn't have bombed Assad. Bombing only leads to broken infrastructure, institutions, and structures. But if we spent a small percentage of what we currently do for military operations in the ME towards financing democractic activists, parties, and anyone willing to be on the ground in Syria and build a viable, non-extremist state, then the chances of us having to return to the area for yet another trillion dollar futile effort would have diminished. This sounds good (in theory, maybe not easy in practice) but I was responding to your call to "bomb Iraq and Syria" and I'm not sure who you'd be bombing in 2012.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 18:19
|
|
|
Invicta{HOG}, M.D. posted:Who would you have bombed in 2012? Assad? If so, you would have had to deal with his air force, his air defense systems, and the ire of Russia. lmao Syria's famous air defenses. remember when they installed AA bases on the bottom of valleys because putting them on top of hills would require extensive latrines and that's just too hard to do for the might Syrian army?
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 19:49
|
|
|
Mans posted:lmao Syria's famous air defenses. Right, the air defenses which would have to be neutralized prior to widespread bombing of Assad in 2012 in order to provide for a peaceful transition to democracy for the country so that everyone can live happily ever after.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 20:53
|
|
|
If we'd bombed Assad in 2012 then the posters decrying us not bombing Assad now would be really happy and not at all posting about how dare America launch another Mideast war of regime change.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 21:55
|
|
|
A long form article on the three girls who left London for Syria and were widely publicized when CCTV footage of them crossing the Turkish - Syrian border appeared online. What rises to the top most of all is how ISIS-sympathetic social media appeals to them, and creates a feeling that if they join they're actually being authentic to themselves. When you feel like a minority for the way you look, talk, dress and where you worship, it's easy to see how ISIS in a perverse way offers both the act of rebellion (running away, rejecting the mainstream) and also feels faithful to your beliefs, which, per your family, are central to your identity (your muslim roots). And, to be charitable, that experience of finding solace in your unique history and culture is common and very human. We just have this weird new world of instant social media and a nation state being run by theocratic terrorists. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/18/world/europe/jihad-and-girl-power-how-isis-lured-3-london-teenagers.html An excerpt: NY Times posted:These images turned the three Bethnal Green girls, as they have become known, into the face of a new, troubling phenomenon: young women attracted to what some experts are calling a jihadi, girl-power subculture. An estimated 4,000 Westerners have traveled to Syria and Iraq, more than 550 of them women and girls, to join the Islamic State, according to a recent report by the Institute for Strategic Dialogue, which helps manage the largest database of female travelers to the region.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 22:11
|
|
|
What if they're letting this all drag on so that just in time for the next war they can say "see? THAT is what happens when you don't let us invade!"
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 22:19
|
|
|
suboptimal posted:Which is funny because Egypt has become decisively more illiberal under Sisi than it was under Morsi. Scary Muslims have a 3x illiberalism score multiplier.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 22:28
|
|
|
Best Friends posted:If we'd bombed Assad in 2012 then the posters decrying us not bombing Assad now would be really happy and not at all posting about how dare America launch another Mideast war of regime change. Morrow posted:All of which occurred anyway. The longer it takes to remove/kill Assad, the more Syria looks like what it does currently today. Actually removing Assad would probably lead to Libya-style factional fighting, but it's definitely possible that the overall death toll/number of refugees would still be less than the 330,000 dead, 3 million refugees, 6.5 million internally displaced people that Syria's currently at, especially since the Civil War shows no signs of ending anytime soon. Syria would definitely still be a clusterfuck, but without Assad there likely wouldn't be the thousands of organized Barrel Bomb droppings on schools/markets/bakeries/other civilian areas, as one example. Syria might also look more like Egypt, but honestly that would probably still be an improvement over the status quo too, which is kinda sad. Basically, it's kinda difficult to see a worse option than the status quo. Like Shageletic posted, a Marshall Plan would probably have been/be the best strategy, but yeah  good luck at getting anything like that in the current political climate.In non-hypothetical news:  ISIL is once again pushing on Mare/Azaz/FSA lines in northern Syria, so Erdogan's/Turkey's hypothetical "safe zone" plans look to be going down in flames. Turkey absolutely does not want to send its own troops in, so we'll have to see if the FSA can stop ISIL's advance like they did last time. Reminder that Azaz is one of the Northern FSA's main supply lines, so any serious disruption to that line would have far-reaching consequences. Also in the general Aleppo vicinity: https://twitter.com/Abduhark/status/632989232164904961 quote:#YPG forms a new force in Shiekh Maqsoud neighborhood in the liberated part of #Aleppo  
fade5 fucked around with this message at 23:07 on Aug 17, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 23:02
|
|
|
apparently the turks are torturing and raping female PKK fighters let ISIS kill the turks, they were made for each other
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 23:02
|
|
|
If the FSA loses out in the northwest, they've got nothing left except a few pockets near the Jordanian border, right? Nearly the entire opposition will be made up of jihadists. I wonder if ISIS is going to try to push into explicit al-Nusra terrtiroy as well.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 23:12
|
|
|
Mans posted:apparently the turks are torturing and raping female PKK fighters source?
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2015 23:22
|
|
|
kustomkarkommando posted:uh oh Not sure what to make of this being announced while he's Iran.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2015 00:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 03:44 |
|
|
Invicta{HOG}, M.D. posted:Who would you have bombed in 2012? Assad? If so, you would have had to deal with his air force, his air defense systems, and the ire of Russia. The Syrian Air Force is a complete joke, their AA network only slightly less. The only serious issue in that hypothetical would be the Russian reaction, and they wouldn't start a war with NATO over Syria.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2015 00:30
|
|
