Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Jihadin wrote:
I can see this thread turning into two camps. Those of us familiar with SOFA. Those who are not familiar with it.

The third camp is people who opposed starting the war in the first place, who have been proved correct time and again.

The SOFA agreement is irrelevant to the commencement of the war.

Meanwhile in Syria....



...the world continues to resolutely not give a gak.

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 Jihadin wrote:
I can see this thread turning into two camps. Those of us familiar with SOFA. Those who are not familiar with it.

The third camp is people who opposed starting the war in the first place, who have been proved correct time and again.

The SOFA agreement is irrelevant to the commencement of the war.

Lay that one on the politicians feet

As for Syria. That played well into Putin scheme of things

Yeowsers!

al-Queda (ISIS) took over Monsul and kidnapped 80 Turkish Embassy folks. o.O

Dafuq is going on?

I've a feeling A.Q. going to regret that

 Jihadin wrote:
I've a feeling A.Q. going to regret that

Doesn't Turkey have a bad ass special ops forces?

 whembly wrote:

al-Queda (ISIS)

They are the same now? ...

They like knives. Really sharp knives

 Minx wrote:

 whembly wrote:

al-Queda (ISIS)

They are the same now? ...

Not the same "group"... separate militants who pledged allegience to A.Q.

Does the Articles in NATO cover that?

 Jihadin wrote:
Does the Articles in NATO cover that?

Oh gak.


Is that Embassy considered Turkish territory?

Yes


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 whembly wrote:

 Jihadin wrote:
Does the Articles in NATO cover that?

Oh gak.


Is that Embassy considered Turkish territory?

woops

Yes

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:


I want to say it was near Adelaide, but could be wrong... From a buddy who was stationed there, he said it was in a region that has heavy aboriginal violence (as in, the aborigines commit more crimes against non-aborigines as well as have them commited against them more heavily in the region than elsewhere in Australia).. but that it was also near one of the larger heavier security prisons in the country, where... unsurprisingly, a lot of aboriginal criminals go

Sadly that description doesn't help much Ensis. Violence is rife in Aboriginal communities. Aboriginal women are 6 times more likely to be murdered than other women in Australia. Last I heard violence in aboriginal communities in the north eastern part of Northern Territory (apparently there were 3 towns involved in some long running dispute) was particularly bad. I'd guess though the north eastern tip of Northern Territory would be an ideal place to put a base.

As a reference for the violence done to/by aboriginals: http://www.aifs.gov.au/nch/pubs/reports/wabrief.pdf

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 Jihadin wrote:
I can see this thread turning into two camps. Those of us familiar with SOFA. Those who are not familiar with it.

The third camp is people who opposed starting the war in the first place, who have been proved correct time and again.

The SOFA agreement is irrelevant to the commencement of the war.

Which doesn't absolve us of our responsibility to try to clean up the messes we start, rightly or wrongly.

 Hordini wrote:
Which doesn't absolve us of our responsibility to try to clean up the messes we start, rightly or wrongly.

Even if the country doesn't want our help?

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:

 Hordini wrote:
Which doesn't absolve us of our responsibility to try to clean up the messes we start, rightly or wrongly.

Even if the country doesn't want our help?

That's their decision.

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:

 Hordini wrote:
Which doesn't absolve us of our responsibility to try to clean up the messes we start, rightly or wrongly.

Even if the country doesn't want our help?

No, that's their decision, as Jihadin said. But that's why it was right to at least try to put together a SOFA, rather than just picking up and leaving as soon as things started going south.

 Jihadin wrote:

That's their decision.

Which should provide some decent popcorn newscasting... watching Iraq beg us for help when turkey comes to feth them up


If any Iraqi actually has internet, and actually plays 40k, and is registered on this site: There's ALWAYS more turks than there appear to be (if you see one, there's probably more like 15-20, you just don't see them)

 Jihadin wrote:
That's their decision.

That's what I was trying to get at. With no SOFA the Iraqi government clearly did not want US forces in country, lets wish them the best of luck with this problem.

Think Turkey would become unhinged if they executed their Embassy staff and Diplomats. Even the Kurds are telling AQ affiliates they're "Dead Stupid"

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:

 Jihadin wrote:
That's their decision.

That's what I was trying to get at. With no SOFA the Iraqi government clearly did not want US forces in country, lets wish them the best of luck with this problem.

I could be mis-remembering, but I think the Iraqi government did want a SOFA, but we didn't want to.

Day late and ten dollar short Whembly. Go back to page ONE

 Jihadin wrote:
Think Turkey would become unhinged if they executed their Embassy staff and Diplomats. Even the Kurds are telling AQ affiliates they're "Dead Stupid"

I think the Kurdish leaders are talking simultaneously to AQ, and Turkish officials... To the Turks they're probably saying, "hey, when you're done fething up these stupid Iraqis, can you just leave us a decent chunk of land so we can FINALLY after like, 3000 years have our own damn lands? We'll just take a slice of Iraq, we don't even want any of your lands "

Looks like we are friends again!

(CNN) - Iraq's government Wednesday indicated a willingness for the United States military to conduct airstrikes against radical Islamist militants who have taken over one large city and are threatening to fully control another, a U.S. official told CNN.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/06/11/world/meast/iraq-violence/index.html?c=homepage-t

Knew that was coming. US Military Assistance. I say. No. I rather not for the US to get involve again

It's a lost fight anyway. Assad is a competent leader and he's barely holding on; Maliki is just some guy who got swept into a position of power. ISIL, on the other hand, has shown that they are quite able to project their power and took a lot of lessons from the Taliban playbook. Unless the west invades again, Iraq's a goner and will be replaced by something akin to Taliban Afghanistan.

Perverse as it may be, our best hope to contain these monsters would be Assad, Turkey and Iran, in no particular order. Pick your poison.

PS: Not that anyone would be able to tell them apart by their goals, but ISIL is *not* affiliated with al Qaeda anymore, they had a huge fallout earlier this year (?) because ISIL refused to bow down to the al Qaeda clowns who in their eyes are all talk and no results, which arguably isn't too far from the truth.

 Jihadin wrote:
Knew that was coming. US Military Assistance. I say. No. I rather not for the US to get involve again

I've heard rumblings that's it's quite likely that we will be sending a few BCT over there.

I really would not be surprised if we end up in a very large force over there, very soon.

 Allod wrote:
It's a lost fight anyway. Assad is a competent leader and he's barely holding on; Maliki is just some guy who got swept into a position of power. ISIL, on the other hand, has shown that they are quite able to project their power and took a lot of lessons from the Taliban playbook. Unless the west invades again, Iraq's a goner and will be replaced by something akin to Taliban Afghanistan.

Perverse as it may be, our best hope to contain these monsters would be Assad, Turkey and Iran, in no particular order. Pick your poison.

PS: Not that anyone would be able to tell them apart by their goals, but ISIL is *not* affiliated with al Qaeda anymore, they had a huge fallout earlier this year (?) because ISIL refused to bow down to the al Qaeda clowns who in their eyes are all talk and no results, which arguably isn't too far from the truth.

And I'm sure that Iran wants Iraq to stay weak also

Can't we just seal the borders in that whole region and let them get on with it? It's the 21st Century... if you can't play nice with others then you shouldn't be allowed to play at all. It's not even them v The West, it's them v them. "My way of worshiping Allah is better than yours..." sheesh!

 Wolfstan wrote:
Can't we just seal the borders in that whole region and let them get on with it? It's the 21st Century... if you can't play nice with others then you shouldn't be allowed to play at all. It's not even them v The West, it's them v them. "My way of worshiping Allah is better than yours..." sheesh!

When others espouse this idea we get looked at funny.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Reports are now that the Kurds have taken Kirkuk.

Is it me or does Iraq look like its about a maybe a week away from breaking apart? Biden may have been more prescient then we thought.