ISIL, ISIS, Daesh discussion thread.

Then you've got all the civilian and coalition aircraft flying around in the way in all countries. Yes there is big sky theory and the chances of hitting something en route is low but if it did happen it could be catastrophic.
 
scorza said:
The missiles were launched from the Caspian sea, they pretty much have to fly over Iran and Iraq to get to Syria. It's safe to assume the Iranian government are OK with that, but you'd think the USA would have some influence in the Iraqi government who should be furious.
Click to expand...

Iraqi govt is Shia and reasonably friendly with the Syrian regime and Iran - Russia is fighting on behalf of all of them in some sense, Iraq isn't going to kick up a fuss at all, they want ISIS attacked... and they don't really care about any other Sunni militant groups either

the US has refused to get too involved with fighting ISIS in Iraq as it doesn't want to take sides in a sectarian conflict - it is bombing ISIS targets in Syria and trying to stop them from gaining territory in Iraq but it isn't prepared to step up the campaign and just act for the Shia govt in Iraq which has sidelined the Sunni minority and by doing so allowed ISIS to expand in the first place...

There is also no doubt plenty of pressure on the US from the Saudis - frankly they'd hate it to see Assad propped up so the US is trying to get rid of Assad and trying to get the Iraqi govt to still work with the moderate Sunni leaders - in order to do that they're not prepared to intervene too much in Sunni areas.
 
A spokesman for US Secretary of State John Kerry said he could not confirm that Russian missiles had crashed in Iran.

John Kirby said: 'I can't confirm it but I think it points all the more towards the need to have proper de-confliction procedures in place.'

So have they fallen or not?
 
Lol, Iran/Russia are denying the US report and saying "an unidentified flying object" crashed, Iran even showed a picture of a drone.

I think they're trying to make it look like the US lost a drone and is trying to use their missiles as a cover lol.
 
Putin_Syria_Stability.jpg
 
Every day I struggle more and more to believe anything the US says about events in the middle east. They're full of ****. They actually make the Russians look trustworthy.
 
RoboCod said:
The US has refused to get too involved in fighting ISIL in Iraq? Eh??
Click to expand...

yup

Obama dragged his heels over the issue from the start, won't officially commit to troops on the ground despite repeat requests from the Iraqi govt - just limited airstrikes at the moment and whatever the various SF types are up to
 
dowie said:
yup

Obama dragged his heels over the issue from the start, won't officially commit to troops on the ground despite repeat requests from the Iraqi govt - just limited airstrikes at the moment and whatever the various SF types are up to
Click to expand...

Ah so why didn't you say that in the first place, because that applies to Syria too. If we're going to state he isn't commiting to fighting ISIL in Iraq then the same applies to Syria and surely you see the problem in that.

So what's your point? You do realise the decision not to apply troops to ground has largely been down to lack of public appetite? The idea was that the Iraqi Army sorted their turf out, along with the US air support. Unfortunately, they've largely been unsuccessful since much of the IA us inexperienced and also lacking appetite to fight.
 
Evangelion said:
Putin_Syria_Stability.jpg
Click to expand...

Syria doesn't have oil*, people just assume it does because it's in the desert and the west/Russia are interested in it.


*Obviously everywhere has oil to some degree, but Syria doesn't have enough to be considered oil rich, by comparison Iran/Iraq have ~6000% more, Kuwait/UAE/Russia have ~3900% more, the US and Libya have 10x more, the UK has nearly 3x the amount and Saudi Arabia and Venezuela have over 10000% more (obviously the are a lot more countries with more, but I can't list them all, just some in order to get the point over).
 
Made me laugh on the news this morning, the US are criticising Toyota because in all the ISIS videos they are always driving Landcruisers and other Toyota models...and how they should look into how and why ISIS are getting and using their vehicles....


Errr.....so ISIS running around with all your military hardware isn't a bigger issue than what car they are driving? :D:p
 
Freakbro said:
Made me laugh on the news this morning, the US are criticising Toyota because in all the ISIS videos they are always driving Landcruisers and other Toyota models...and how they should look into how and why ISIS are getting and using their vehicles....


Errr.....so ISIS running around with all your military hardware isn't a bigger issue than what car they are driving? :D:p
Click to expand...

aren't they driving loads of american army issue humvees
 
Freakbro said:
Made me laugh on the news this morning, the US are criticising Toyota because in all the ISIS videos they are always driving Landcruisers and other Toyota models...and how they should look into how and why ISIS are getting and using their vehicles....


Errr.....so ISIS running around with all your military hardware isn't a bigger issue than what car they are driving? :D:p
Click to expand...

The US hasn't been criticising Toyota - that's just media spin, it's just been asking how Islamic State are getting hold of all these brand new models, which is a fair question. I doubt Toyota has any dealerships in the Islamic State so they must be buying them in another country - if we can identify those individuals, send them for a quick holiday in Uzbekistan, we can find out more about the way IS is run and maybe hamper their operations a bit.

arknor said:
aren't they driving loads of american army issue humvees
Click to expand...

It wouldn't surprise me if Landcruisers and Hiluxes were better suited to the job than Humvees.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom