War Against ISIS

T

Twain

Active Member
Turkish soldiers training Iraqi troops near Mosul: sources


Turkish soldiers training Iraqi troops near Mosul: sources | Reuters

As if things aren't complicated enough, reuters is reporting that there are turkish troops near Mosul in battalion strength for training pruposes. I wonder how Iran will react to this if true, there can't be many good intentions between turley and iran right now. It also makes me wonder what erdogan hopes gain by this?

Edit, I have to amend this post now, apparently Turkey wasn't invited into Iraq.

Turkish soldiers enter northern Iraq, Baghdad demands swift withdrawal

Turkish soldiers enter northern Iraq, Baghdad demands swift withdrawal | News | DW.COM | 05.12.2015

What does erdogan think he is going to gain by yet another provocation?
 
Last edited:
Feanor

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
ngatimozart said:
Maybe a third option where they work together and coordinate air traffic and sir strikes. However, this scenario hasn't come to pass yet where any of these options has to be exercised.
Click to expand...
Option 4 - they allow all coalition air strikes without restrictions, but prohibit any Turkish involvement?

That would make shooting down Turkish planes easy, it's just Syria defending their air space. Remember just because Syria has S-300s, doesn't mean that's what will be used for the shoot down. ;)
 
B

barney41

Member
I wouldn't put it past the Israelis to take matters into their own hands and deal with this unprecedented threat to their airspace. I suspect a lot of Arab countries would not object.
 
Feanor

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
barney41 said:
Could this be Putin's ploy, realizing that Coalition countries would require a UN resolution, subject to Russian veto, to authorize strikes against Syrian forces?
One wildcard is Israel. Netanyahu is OK with the S-400 under Russian control but has indicated in thd past that a Syrian S-300 that could threaten Israeli airspace is unacceptable.
Click to expand...
Well they could avoid that problem by basing them so their engagement envelopes are not in Israeli airspace. On the other hand, that is a little hard to do in a small country. I suspect at this point, Israel might simply have to swallow this fact.
 
W

wittmanace

Active Member
Feanor said:
Well they could avoid that problem by basing them so their engagement envelopes are not in Israeli airspace. On the other hand, that is a little hard to do in a small country. I suspect at this point, Israel might simply have to swallow this fact.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I'm not sure any country would welcome Israel going in after s-300s in Syria. The repercussions and potential for things to go wrong is quite a big "if" territory.

Given Syrias state and issues, they aren't the threat to Israel.

An extreme example of the very many unforeseen things that can happen, and what ifs, what if an israeli pilot were downed and Daesh got their hands on him?
 
W

wittmanace

Active Member
the concerned said:
Isn't there supposed to be an arms embargo on Syria so wouldn't continued supplies result In further sanctions against Russia.
Click to expand...

Those issues don't cover the s-300s as the Russians see it, and that means other countries also. ( defensive weapon). Not to mention the Russians supply Syria militarily anyway, from tanks, to ammo, to repairs to maintenance, to small arms etc etc etc. Where else would they be getting their equipment and arms? And that isn't a secret.
 
gf0012-aust

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
wittmanace said:
Given Syrias state and issues, they aren't the threat to Israel.
Click to expand...
and if the syrian govt doesn't control the Golan Heights (as one example) that vignette fails all the risk assessments
 
C

chemical bro

New Member
Faced with Russia's position in Syria, Turkey sends thousands of soldiers and dozens of tanks into Iraq, causing a sharp reaction of the authorities
The head of the Committee of the Iraqi Parliament security and defense Hakim al-Zamili threatened Turkish troops military action and recommended to Prime Minister to use the aircraft to launch attacks on Turkish troops, including their occupation, reported the Iraqi website Voice of Iraq.
US position - sending Turkish military to Iraq is not an coalition's action.

The kurdish deck is shuffled, started handing out cards
 
ngatimozart

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
chemical bro said:
Faced with Russia's position in Syria, Turkey sends thousands of soldiers and dozens of tanks into Iraq, causing a sharp reaction of the authorities
The head of the Committee of the Iraqi Parliament security and defense Hakim al-Zamili threatened Turkish troops military action and recommended to Prime Minister to use the aircraft to launch attacks on Turkish troops, including their occupation, reported the Iraqi website Voice of Iraq.
US position - sending Turkish military to Iraq is not an coalition's action.

The kurdish deck is shuffled, started handing out cards
Click to expand...
Well a battalion is not thousands of troops and no mention of tanks. It's a mountainous area so not ideal tank country. The Iraqis are quite right in demanding that Turkey desist and withdraw because they are uninvited guests. Methinks that you are exaggerating the Turkish incursion somewhat and being somewhat inflammatory in your language. That my friend is breaching forum rules and protocols, which will incur the displeasure of the mods, which is not wise if one wishes to remain here.
 
W

wittmanace

Active Member
ngatimozart said:
Well a battalion is not thousands of troops and no mention of tanks. It's a mountainous area so not ideal tank country. The Iraqis are quite right in demanding that Turkey desist and withdraw because they are uninvited guests. Methinks that you are exaggerating the Turkish incursion somewhat and being somewhat inflammatory in your language. That my friend is breaching forum rules and protocols, which will incur the displeasure of the mods, which is not wise if one wishes to remain here.
Click to expand...
After the post I've been searching for it. It seems it states armoured vehicles, not tanks.

On topic regarding this, it seems the pro Turkish governor invited them in against the wishes of the federal government and they came in at night.

Edit: article today added: http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2015/...wal-turkish-troops-mosul-151205061510572.html
 
Last edited:
G

GermanHerman

Active Member
swerve said:
RAF & Italian Tornados & RAF (at least) Typhoons can drop an assortment of PGMs. Giving German Typhoons (though not their pilots) the capability should be a simple matter of loading 'em with the right software drops - & buying the weapons. The aircraft is perfectly suitable.

Italy uses GBU-31, GBU-32 & SDB on Tornado. What upgrade is needed for German Tornados to use them? RAF Tornados have a few different Paveways & Brimstone. They both carry Storm Shadow.

Germany has KEPD-350, but that's overkill (& too expensive) for Daesh targets. The Tornado ECRs have AGM-88, but again, there's likely to be a shortage of Daesh targets for it.

Ah. According to the Luftwaffe, it has GBU-24 on Tornado as well as GBU-54 LJDAM. Hmm. Probably not the best thing for plinking technicals, tanker lorries, etc.
Click to expand...
Yeah it seems I overlooked the GBU-24 but as it comes to the GBU-54 they seem to be introduced with ASSTA 3 which contains software updates. First flight tests have been conducted 2011 but the upgradings continues at the moment, here is a presentation about the update:

http://www.dglr.de/fileadmin/inhalt..._besten_Jahren_Potentielle_Zukunftsthemen.pdf

It states that 30 of the 85 Tornados have been updated so far and the process is scheduled to end 2018.

Given the 40% combat readyness rate for the german tornados (and this number appears to be solid given that most german newspapers are reporting it and there is no one questioning it) the question would be how many of those belong to the mordernized / updated planes and how far the integration of the new capabilitys is.

Considering that it appears even France and GB had some problems with the quantity of available GBU's during their operation over libya and the overall desolate state of german defencive forces one must wonder how many GBU's the Luftwaffe even has at the moment (there are quite some complains / rumors about the lack of any significant amounts of modern bombs / rockets).

The problem with the Luftwaffe is that air-to-ground capabilitys were mainly neglected prior to the afghanistan campaign and only when it became clear that german Tornados where not able to provide CAS in an effective manner with their GBU-31's / Board cannons the government got aware of this.

But the german armed forces have racked up quite a reputation for their desolate state.
 
C

chemical bro

New Member
ngatimozart said:
That my friend is breaching forum rules and protocols, which will incur the displeasure of the mods, which is not wise if one wishes to remain here.
Click to expand...
Your personal fault that you see me as a propagandist and agent of the Kremlin.I hate a propaganda and don't like being brainwashed. If you have data about the real size and the technical equipment of the Turks in Iraq, please share your information, please.Even without links. You, as expert and insider, I believe your word for it.
Your opinion about what can help Turkish troops in Iraq in the fighting against ISIS,it is very interesting for me too.
 
W

wittmanace

Active Member
chemical bro said:
Your personal fault that you see me as a propagandist and agent of the Kremlin.I hate a propaganda and don't like being brainwashed. If you have data about the real size and the technical equipment of the Turks in Iraq, please share your information, please.Even without links. You, as expert and insider, I believe your word for it.
Your opinion about what can help Turkish troops in Iraq in the fighting against ISIS,it is very interesting for me too.
Click to expand...

The answer is in the article I linked, and also he answered the numbers point. The problem is that all sources refer to numbers and gear much less significant than what you said. Inflaming and hyping is the problem, not getting numbers and so forth wrong.

The simple point is these forums aren't for hype and hysteria or advancing ones political views, but rather debate grounded in reality, and sharing real information and its significance. They are not for emotional chest-beating, fan boyism etc.

Reading more and writing less helps. I have been on here daily for nearly a decade and have not gotten high post numbers. It is much better to read and learn from people more knowledgeable and experienced than oneself, and then only contribute fact or questions rather than hysteria or content not based on reality for a clam and level debate. Stoking emotions, hysteria, poking people etc aren't the way here, thankfully. It is one of many major reasons many of us come here and value the resource and the threads here.
 
H

Hone C

Active Member
wittmanace said:
Apparently it was Turkish media that said tanks were included (20-25)

Iraq orders Turkey to 'immediately' withdraw troops sent across border | World news | The Guardian
Click to expand...
Seems there has been a lot of misinformation coming out in the media about the size of the force, ranging from 3 regiments to a single 'heavily armed battalion'. The most reliable sounding sources indicate a 130 man training team, based at the Nargizliya camp (also known as al-Shekhan camp), a militia base in Shekhan District. I'll quote part of the article below:

In keeping with the adage that things are seldom what they seem, reports from Dec. 4 that a Turkish military spearhead had penetrated northern Iraq were exaggerated. Local news media claimed that three Turkish regiments entered Iraqi territory on Dec. 3, deploying in the vicinity of the Islamic State-held city of Mosul in Nineveh province. As it turns out, this supposed Turkish intervention was simply a small rotation of forces, switching out troops assigned to a routine training mission across the border. Ankara reportedly has been training Kurdish peshmerga and other Sunni volunteer forces in the Kurdish-controlled regions of Iraq since November 2014.

Source is www.stratfor.com (you have to subscribe to see unfortunately)

https://www.stratfor.com/analysis/routine-nature-turkeys-presence-iraq
 
Ranger25

Ranger25

Active Member
Staff member
wittmanace said:
Yeah, I'm not sure any country would welcome Israel going in after s-300s in Syria. The repercussions and potential for things to go wrong is quite a big "if" territory.

Given Syrias state and issues, they aren't the threat to Israel.

An extreme example of the very many unforeseen things that can happen, and what ifs, what if an israeli pilot were downed and Daesh got their hands on him?
Click to expand...
O
Click to expand...
I think the IDF is more concerned with Assads support of Hezboullah on its borders than Assad. The S300s could fairly easily be hit by the IAF



I think it's quite possible the tacit coordination between Western Coalition and the Russian Air Force can do to use despite the deployment of a Syrian S300. Could become a larger issue should the Russians (most likely) running the system decide to track/target a coalition aircraft without any missile shoot. Just a track and lock.
 
S

swerve

Super Moderator
GermanHerman said:
Yeah it seems I overlooked the GBU-24 but as it comes to the GBU-54 they seem to be introduced with ASSTA 3 which contains software updates. First flight tests have been conducted 2011 but the upgradings continues at the moment, here is a presentation about the update:

http://www.dglr.de/fileadmin/inhalt..._besten_Jahren_Potentielle_Zukunftsthemen.pdf

It states that 30 of the 85 Tornados have been updated so far and the process is scheduled to end 2018.

Given the 40% combat readyness rate for the german tornados (and this number appears to be solid given that most german newspapers are reporting it and there is no one questioning it) the question would be how many of those belong to the mordernized / updated planes and how far the integration of the new capabilitys is.

Considering that it appears even France and GB had some problems with the quantity of available GBU's during their operation over libya and the overall desolate state of german defencive forces one must wonder how many GBU's the Luftwaffe even has at the moment (there are quite some complains / rumors about the lack of any significant amounts of modern bombs / rockets).

The problem with the Luftwaffe is that air-to-ground capabilitys were mainly neglected prior to the afghanistan campaign and only when it became clear that german Tornados where not able to provide CAS in an effective manner with their GBU-31's / Board cannons the government got aware of this.

But the german armed forces have racked up quite a reputation for their desolate state.
Click to expand...
Thanks for that, but I think that the highlighted bit is mistaken. The UK bought some more PGMs after the Libyan campaign, but IIRC that was just bringing stocks back to what was thought prudent levels, & I think it was the same for France. France has even cut planned purchases since then. As far as one weapon (Brimstone) is concerned, Libya could be seen as an opportunity to run down surplus RAF stocks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top