War Against ISIS

STURM · Jun 18, 2017

Toblerone said:
In my opinion they should intervene only in cases where they already have an ally to support, so chaotic situations can be a avoided. Trying to make "strategic alliances", training and equipping adhoc local forces and setting up bases around every corner is a failed strategy.

Indeed but there appears to be no alternative. The U.S. needs allies/proxies on the ground but allies/proxies often give a distorted picture [one is reminded of the Iraqi exiles whom the U.S. placed so much faith in] and may portray themselves as ''moderates'' to benefit from U.S. largesse [e.g. the ''moderate'' Syrians who weren't as ''moderate'' or effective as they wanted the U.S. to believe]. A major problem in Syria is that not only is there no clear strategy as to what happens if Assad leaves but all the outside players have their own allies/proxies; all of who have their own agendas which might be in conflict with the agendas of their patrons.

Sandhi Yudha · Jun 18, 2017

STURM said:
I'm not suggesting the Arabs are blameless [far from it] but decades of flawed and selfish Western policy towards the region has contributed to the mess we have now. What were the circumstances that led to the rise of AQ and IS? Has the longstanding policy of unconditional support for Israel [at great cost to American interests], isolating and demonising Iran and supporting Arab regimes that were never even elected actually benefited the U.S? Trump went all out to ingratiate himself with the oil rich Arabs but was silent over Yemen where quite a number of civilians have been killed. Do the human rights and well being of Syrian civilians matter more than that of Yemeni citizens? Assad gets vilified [and rightfully so] when his planes hit civilians but the West remains largely silent over the plight of Yemeni civilians at the hands of the Royal Saudi Air Force.

Are we any closer to solving the Israeli/Palestinian dispute? By the U.S. taking sides in the Sunni/Shia Cold War; does it actually benefit the U.S. and contributes to stability or does it only makes things worst? Which offers more benefits in the long run : a U.S/Iran rapprochement [based on realpolitik and diplomacy rather than Iran making compromises without getting much in return] or the continued policy of branding Iran as being responsible for all that's wrong in the region? Does it benefit the U.S. for the Gulf Arabs to be dependent on U.S. support [the case for several decades now] or does the U.S. really want the Arabs to pursue an independent policy without being beholden to the West?

As long as the double standards and hypocrisy continue; the region will continue to be a big mess and the people who live there will continue to pay the price.

Of course double standards are used, that's politics. The invasion of Iraq in 2003 and the so called peaceful 'Arabian Spring', which are in fact a couple of bloody years.... We, the Western Civilized World, supported them, all to replace the evil regimes by the Good Guys. In the end these regimes (where indeed not the right examples for democracy) collapsed and replaced by several unstable weak governments caused by the power-vacuum. Iraq, Lybia, Egypt, Yemen, all ended up into chaotic unstable countries, all in the name of Freedom and Democracy.

But hey, thats not a problem ofcourse, because an unstable Middle-East means a lot of military equipment acquisitions.....:soldier

Many Middle-East countries dont have a democratic system, sometimes even a supressive human-rights violating system, but as long they are on the good side (pro-US), nothing will change.

STURM · Jun 18, 2017

Sandhi Yudha said:
But hey, thats not a problem ofcourse, because an unstable Middle-East means a lot of military equipment acquisitions.....:soldier

It also means that the Gulf Arabs will continue to want a Western military presence there; not only to safeguard themselves against Iran but also from other Arab countries. If there was no AQ and IS and no Iran [whom some want us to believe is hellbent on supporting terrorism and destabilising the region]; would there be a need for a Western military presence in the region?

This is the real story behind the economic crisis unfolding in Qatar | The Independent

''Now the Qatari Emir hasn’t enough troops to defend his little country should the Saudis decide to request that he ask their army to enter Qatar to restore stability – as the Saudis persuaded the King of Bahrain to do back in 2011. But Sheikh Tamim no doubt hopes that the massive US military air base in Qatar will deter such Saudi generosity.When I asked his father, Sheikh Hamad why he didn’t kick the Americans out of Qatar, he replied: “Because if I did, my Arab brothers would invade me. Like father, like son, I suppose. God Bless America.''

Sandhi Yudha said:
Many Middle-East countries dont have a democratic system,

Apart from Israel and Lebanon [as well as non Arab Iran]; I can't think of any other countries in the region in which leaders are elected.

STURM · Jun 18, 2017

Apologies - double post.

Feanor · Jun 18, 2017

An interesting tidbit. Based on Syrian experience, the Russian military has decided to procure a small batch of BMPT fire-support vehicles. Given their active use of newest gear in Syria, and considering that analysis of combat actions in Syria led to this vehicle's procurement, I wouldn't be surprised to see a small deployment.

Gur Khan attacks!: ÐœÐ¸Ð½Ð¸ÑÑ‚ÐµÑ€ÑÑ‚Ð²Ð¾ Ð¾Ð±Ð¾Ñ€Ð¾Ð½Ñ‹ Ð Ð¤ Ð³Ð¾Ñ‚Ð¾Ð²Ð¸Ñ‚ÑÑ Ðº Ð·Ð°ÐºÑƒÐ¿ÐºÐµ Ð‘ÐœÐŸÐ¢ "Ð¢ÐµÑ€Ð¼Ð¸Ð½Ð°Ñ‚Ð¾Ñ€"

STURM · Jun 18, 2017

Something just occurred to me. Has there been any reported use of Shmel or other types of thermobaric weapons in the Syrian conflict?

Toblerone · Jun 18, 2017

So a US F/A-18 shot down a syrian SU-22 that was supposedly bombing SDF forces south of Raqqa in a contested town.

https://mobile.twitter.com/ragipsoylu/status/876537748743745536/photo/1

If it was really bombing the SDF I am starting to think that maybe the syrian airforce also did the chemical attack that resulted in the Tomahawk strikes. Back then it seemed to me that they couldn't possibly be so stupid, so I was very skeptical about that strike. But if they are attacking the SDF, maybe they are just stupid and always have been. :hul

Noone needs this kind of escalation, the syrians need to sit down. Just continue clearing the desert, break the Deir Ezzor siege and keep the western rebels in check. Forget about Raqqa.

Anyway, I hope we learn what really was going on there between the SAA and the SDF and if SDF forces were attacked.

ngatimozart · Jun 19, 2017

The US is becoming concerned about the Daesh threat in South East Asia. Apparently Daesh are funneling fighters to the Philippines now, with Daesh telling foreign recruits via a video, in June 2016, that if they can't get to Syria to go to the Philippines instead. Islamic State threat in Southeast Asia raises alarm in Washington. Also of note, the US Treasury Dept has stated that a Daesh facilitator was moving recruits through Turkey with ease. Islamic State facilitator moved recruits through Turkey, US says | FDD's Long War Journal. This is something that posters have commented upon here frequently, so comes as no surprise.

Iraqi troops are now pushing into the Old City of Mosul, which is the last Daesh stronghold in Mosul. Iraqi troops move into Mosul's Old City, last ISIS stronghold

Germany intend to move their Luftwaffe AAR tanker (A310 derived tanker) from Incirlik to Azraq, Jordan by mid July. The Luftwaffe six Tornadoes will be operational from Azraq, Jordan by October. Germany to start moving anti-ISIS planes to Jordan in July

Relations between Turkey and Saudi Arabia have soured after Turkey's support for Qatar. There are calls from within Saudi Arabia for the Saudis to boycott Turkey. Saudi-Turkish ties strained over differing views on Qatar

STURM · Jun 19, 2017

IS fighters have been in the Philippines for quite a while now. According to the Philippines military there were foreign IS fighters in Marawi City [Malaysian, Indonesian, Chechen and Singaporean]; a number of whom have been killed. The mastermind behind the attempt to seize the city was Malaysian.

6 foreigners among terrorists killed in Marawi â€“ AFP

http://www.straitstimes.com/asia/se...nvolved-in-isis-linked-insurgency-in-southern

Malaysia's most wanted terrorist played key role in plotting Marawi City siege in Philippines, SE Asia News & Top Stories - The Straits Times

Despite whatever reverses it has faced; IS is still able to draw people to its ideology. Even the loss of Raqqa and other places it currently holds will unfortunately not change this.

Feanor · Jun 20, 2017

Toblerone · Jun 20, 2017

Newest info is that the SDF are holding the pilot and he is safe. Good, at least this will help in deescalation. I still don't know if he was bombing the SDF or not, if an SDF unit called for US assistance or if the US did yet another attack to hold the SAA's dash forward.

And in the same day Iran launched a salvo of quasi-ballistic missiles? Exciting times

colay1 · Jun 20, 2017

It's a high stakes game of "Chicken" it would seem. Which side will blink first? The last thing needed at this point is for Trump to start tweeting on the incident and muddling the situation when clarity is called for.

White House says it retains right to self-defense in Syria; Moscow warns Washington - Nasdaq.com

gazzzwp · Jun 20, 2017

colay1 said:
It's a high stakes game of "Chicken" it would seem. Which side will blink first? The last thing needed at this point is for Trump to start tweeting on the incident and muddling the situation when clarity is called for.

White House says it retains right to self-defense in Syria; Moscow warns Washington - Nasdaq.com

Any idea what this actually means?:

"As a result of recent encounters involving pro Syrian regime and Russian forces, we have taken prudent measures to reposition aircraft over Syria so as to continue targeting ISIS forces while ensuring the safety of our aircrews given known threats in the battle space," coalition spokesman Col. Ryan Dillon told CNN.

Are they referring to more of an offensive posture or are they taking heed of Russia's warning?

STURM · Jun 20, 2017

Australia has just announced it has suspended air operations over Syria. According to Al Jazeera the last combat sorties flown by the RAAF [6 Hornets deployed] was in May.

Amidst all the public rhetoric and statements by the U.S. and Russia; there will no doubt be a lot of back channel talks going on to ensure things don't get worst. The last thing either wants is for hostilities to erupt. Of course not only IS but others will be hoping for hostilities between the U.S. and Russia as this will be to their advantage.

gazzzwp · Jun 20, 2017

STURM said:
Australia has just announced it has suspended air operations over Syria. According to Al Jazeera the last combat sorties flown by the RAAF [6 Hornets deployed] was in May.

Amidst all the public rhetoric and statements by the U.S. and Russia; there will no doubt be a lot of back channel talks going on to ensure things don't get worst. The last thing either wants is for hostilities to erupt. Of course not only IS but others will be hoping for hostilities between the U.S. and Russia as this will be to their advantage.

I hope they liased with the US first before taking such a unilateral decision. A weakening of the coalition can only be good for the Russia-Iran-Syrian alliance. Disappointing that they did not hold in there. Are the Brits still flying sorties these days?

t68 · Jun 20, 2017

gazzzwp said:
I hope they liased with the US first before taking such a unilateral decision. A weakening of the coalition can only be good for the Russia-Iran-Syrian alliance. Disappointing that they did not hold in there. Are the Brits still flying sorties these days?

More than likely a reaction from Canberra when informed by defence of the additional risks posed by the new situation, I would expect operations to continue once more detailed risk analysis is completed, it may be that flights over Syria may be enlarged so they can have more enhanced air to air capability for protection.

STURM · Jun 20, 2017

gazzzwp said:
I hope they liased with the US first before taking such a unilateral decision.

We can safely assume that they did. It's extremely unlikely that Australia would have made the announcement without first informing the Americans.

[Australia Halts Syria Air Strikes After Russia Warning]
Australia halts Syria air strikes after Russia warning | Syria News | Al Jazeera

The Russians were very annoyed when the U.S. hit a convoy of Assad friendly troops/militia who were getting too close to a base where there was a U.S. presence. The downing of the Syrian jet was probably the last straw for them in announcing that any coalition jets west of the Euphrates would be targeted. The U.S. has shown that it'll use force to protect its proxies and troops on the ground; now the Russians are sending the same message. Lets just hope that both sides do what's needed to prevent things from escalating.

[The US Seems Keener To Strike At Syria's Assad Than It Does To Destroy Isis]
The US seems keener to strike at Syria's Assad than it does to destroy Isis | The Independent

Toblerone · Jun 20, 2017

I don't see any reports of dead SDF soldiers by SAA airstrikes or videos of aftermath. I am thinking, the US are the ones who screwed the pooch in this one. This isn't the way a power should act, flail their arms around when under pressure.

Where is the evidence that syrian planes bombed the SDF?

http://www.syriahr.com/en/?p=68314

2007yellow430 · Jun 20, 2017

Toblerone said:
I don't see any reports of dead SDF soldiers by SAA airstrikes or videos of aftermath. I am thinking, the US are the ones who screwed the pooch in this one. This isn't the way a power should act, flail their arms around when under pressure.

Where is the evidence that syrian planes bombed the SDF?

http://www.syriahr.com/en/?p=68314

Its being teported that the US has shot down a Syrian drone outside of the protected area. I see big triuble shortly.

Art

gazzzwp · Jun 20, 2017

2007yellow430 said:
Its being teported that the US has shot down a Syrian drone outside of the protected area. I see big triuble shortly.

Art

Most likely. They will have deserved it though. Why push the Americans? Syria knows already that they bite hard. Are Syria doubling down on their strategy to draw the two biggest militaries into a wider conflict?

If so Syria will be the ultimate loser. If you are going to get two heavyweight boxers together make sure it is not in your own house.

War Against ISIS

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Super Moderator

Well-Known Member

Banned Member

Super Moderator

Well-Known Member

Super Moderator

Banned Member

Member

Member

Well-Known Member

Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Banned Member

Active Member

Member