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.
I would say airstrikes are more than just political support.
Military airstrikes against their enemies are not the same as giving away the weapons. Giving that Turkey is now on Russian "to do list" it may happen.
The Islamic State group (IS) is being mocked online after claims it faked footage of battles in its propaganda videos, and even used the soft drink Vimto as fake blood.
BBC Monitoring reports that the claims were contained in a video featuring an alleged IS defector, and came from a rival jihadi group which is vying for influence in Yemen.
The video begins with the defector describing how he was asked to attack mosques by IS commanders. But the section of the video that really captured the imagination of Twitter users outlines alleged IS trickery in filming fake battle scenes which the group falsely claimed as genuine military victories.
The defector describes how he was enlisted to fake fights and raids in front of the camera. In some scenes, he says, IS fighters pretended to be dead Houthi rebels and were daubed with fake blood in the form of the soft drink Vimto.
bit more at the link.
"......the video has prompted widespread jokes on Twitter by rival jihadists and other IS opponents, including the hashtag "Vimto Caliphate" in Arabic. One image being shared depicts IS spokesman Abu Muhammad al-Adnani as a Vimto delivery man:"
...so rival terrorist groups are arguing or beefing..on twitter.
.. World gets stranger by the hour.
The poor man really has a stake in the country. The rich man hasn't; he can go away to New Guinea in a yacht. The poor have sometimes objected to being governed badly; the rich have always objected to being governed at all
We love our superheroes because they refuse to give up on us. We can analyze them out of existence, kill them, ban them, mock them, and still they return, patiently reminding us of who we are and what we wish we could be.
"the play's the thing wherein I'll catch the conscience of the king,
Could post an information dump about recent alleged (i.e. totally true) American support for the Kurds or the Saudis dropping some funding to the Turks, but no this is a higher brow thread.
Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios
Lol, that's hilarious.
Vehicle driver was just like "lawl, nope!" *Moves 3 feet forward.
Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines
Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.
Yahoo! wrote:Kerry weighs ‘genocide’ label for Islamic State
Secretary of State John Kerry signaled today that he plans to decide soon whether to formally accuse the Islamic State of genocide amid what sources describe as an intense debate within the Obama administration about how such a declaration should be worded and what it might mean for U.S. strategy against the terrorist group.
“None of us have ever seen anything like it in our lifetimes,” Kerry said during a House subcommittee hearing Wednesday about beheadings and atrocities committed by the Islamic State.
But in response to questioning by Rep. Jeff Fortenberry, a Nebraska Republican who has been spearheading a resolution in Congress demanding the administration invoke an international treaty against genocide, Kerry was careful not to tip his hand on what has turned into a thorny internal legal debate with political and potentially military consequences.
Saying the department was reviewing “very carefully the legal standards and precedents” for a declaration of genocide against the Islamic State, Kerry added that he had received “initial recommendations” on the issue but had then asked for “further evaluations.”
In his first public comments on the issue, Kerry said he “will make a decision on this” as soon as he receives those evaluations. He didn’t elaborate on when that might occur.
The administration’s plans to invoke the powerfully evocative genocide label — an extremely rare move — was first reported by Yahoo News last November. But at the time, the State Department was focused on restricting the designation to the Islamic State’s mass killings, beheadings and enslavement of the Yazidis — a relatively small minority group of about 500,000 in northern Iraq that the terrorist group has vowed to wipe out on the grounds they are “devil worshipers.”
The disclosure set off a strong backlash among members of Congress and Christian groups who argued that Islamic State atrocities against Iraqi and Syrian Christians and other smaller minority groups also deserved the genocide label. Some conservatives even chastised the administration for displaying a “politically correct bias that views Christians … never as victims but always as Inquisition-style oppressors.”
The issue has since made its way into the presidential campaign; Sen. Marco Rubio has signed a Senate version of a House resolution, co-sponsored by Fortenberry and Rep. Anna Eshoo, for a broader genocide designation that incorporates Christians, Turkmen, Kurds and other groups. Hillary Clinton has also endorsed such as move. In response to a question from a voter at a New Hampshire town hall last December about whether she believes Christians as well as Yazidis should be declared victims of genocide, she said, “I will, because we now have enough evidence.”
But administration sources and others intimately familiar with the internal debate say the issue has proven more complicated. While ISIS has openly declared its intention of destroying the Yazidis, they argue, the terrorist group’s leaders have not made equally explicit statements about Christians even while committing killings, kidnappings, forced removals and the confiscation and destruction of churches aimed at Christian groups. As a result, administration officials and State Department lawyers have weighed labeling those acts “crimes against humanity” — a step that critics have said doesn’t go far enough. “We’ve been trying to tell them, crimes against humanity are not a bronze medal,” said one administration official, contending that it should not be viewed as a less serious designation.
Kerry seemed to hint as much in his responses to Fortenberry at Wednesday’s hearing, noting that Christians in Syria “and other places” have been forcibly removed from their homes. “There have been increased, forced evacuations,” he said. “No, its not — they are killing them in that case — but it’s a removal and a cleansing, ethnically and religiously, that is equally disturbing.”
At the same time, two sources familiar with the debate said, Pentagon officials have expressed concerns that a genocide designation would morally obligate the U.S. military to take steps — such as protecting endangered populations or using drones to identify enslaved women — that could divert resources from the campaign to defeat the Islamic State. (An administration official told Yahoo News Wednesday that any such concerns have not been raised in “interagency” discussions over the genocide issue. “There is no resource issue,” the official said.)
In fact, many legal scholars say, there is considerable debate about just what practical impact a genocide designation would have. It would be made under a loosely worded 1948 international treaty that compels signatory nations, including the United States, “to prevent and to punish” the “odious scourge” of genocide defined as acts “committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical (sic), racial or religious group.” As documented by Samantha Power, now the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, in her 2002 book, “A Problem from Hell,” President Clinton’s Secretary of State Warren Christopher, resisted labeling the mass murder of the Tutsis in Rwanda in 1994 as genocide for fear, as one State Department memo put it at the time, “it could commit [the U.S. government] to actually do something.”
But 10 years later, Secretary of State Colin Powell declared the killings of non-Arab people in Darfur to be genocide — the first time the U.S. invoked such a declaration during an ongoing conflict. But he did so only after receiving a secret State Department memo concluding the designation “has no immediate legal — as opposed to moral, political or policy consequences for the United States.”
Administration officials have argued they are already taking extraordinary steps to protect threatened minorities in Iraq, pointing to, for example, the 2014 evacuation of Yazidis from Mount Sinjar — and that a genocide designation wouldn’t change that. White House press secretary Josh Earnest said as much when he was pressed on the issue during a recent White House briefing during which he said a genocide designation is “an open question that continues to be considered by administration lawyers.”
“The decision to apply this term to this situation is an important one,” Earnest said during a Feb. 4 briefing. “It has significant consequences, and it matters for a whole variety of reasons, both legal and moral. But it doesn’t change our response. And the fact is that this administration has been aggressive, even though that term has not been applied, in trying to protect religious minorities who are victims or potential victims of violence.”
"allahu akbar" is often used as an expression of surprise in Arabic. Just like "oh my God" is in English. Arabs aren't praising God every time they say allahu akbar, it can also be used to express distress or determination.
I love how one Russhobic degenerate in the comments says: "Looks like a real Reliant Robin of a missile, trundling down from the hills at the speed of a drunken slug. Must be Russian made."
The missile on the video is an American-made wire-guided TOW.
"allahu akbar" is often used as an expression of surprise in Arabic. Just like "oh my God" is in English. Arabs aren't praising God every time they say allahu akbar, it can also be used to express distress or determination.
It is also used, as in "God is great. He let it be so". In other words, God is great in letting them not be destroyed by the ATGM.
Yaraton wrote: I love how one Russhobic degenerate in the comments says: "Looks like a real Reliant Robin of a missile, trundling down from the hills at the speed of a drunken slug. Must be Russian made."
The missile on the video is an American-made wire-guided TOW.
Yes, and clearly anglophobic too from his references to the Reliant Robin....
I hate to point this out, but saying something critical of a given nation's products doesn't make you X-phobic. There have been Russian made ATGMs that were every bit as gak as their western rivals.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/02/26 01:43:22
Fate is in heaven, armor is on the chest, accomplishment is in the feet. - Nagao Kagetora
Yaraton wrote: I love how one Russhobic degenerate in the comments says: "Looks like a real Reliant Robin of a missile, trundling down from the hills at the speed of a drunken slug. Must be Russian made."
The missile on the video is an American-made wire-guided TOW.
Yes, and clearly anglophobic too from his references to the Reliant Robin....
I hate to point this out, but saying something critical of a given nation's products doesn't make you X-phobic. There have been Russian made ATGMs that were every bit as gak as their western rivals.
Yes, and clearly anglophobic too from his references to the Reliant Robin....
I hate to point this out, but saying something critical of a given nation's products doesn't make you X-phobic. There have been Russian made ATGMs that were every bit as gak as their western rivals.
I don't give rats ass about his "anglophbia" since I didn't even know what "Reliant Robin" until I googled it. When did you have a first hand experience with Russian-made ATGMs to be such an expert? I never said the TOW is bad, just pointed out that an bonehead, seeing that on video a missile is going from side to side (for course correction) hatefully states that it must be a "Russian missile". Are you telling me what to notice and think?
Yaraton wrote: I love how one Russhobic degenerate in the comments says: "Looks like a real Reliant Robin of a missile, trundling down from the hills at the speed of a drunken slug. Must be Russian made."
The missile on the video is an American-made wire-guided TOW.
Yes, and clearly anglophobic too from his references to the Reliant Robin....
I hate to point this out, but saying something critical of a given nation's products doesn't make you X-phobic. There have been Russian made ATGMs that were every bit as gak as their western rivals.
Careful, he might accuse you of bigotry.
Just send a mod e message about personal remark. For a person who put me on his ignore list you spend too much time being butthurt with what I have to say.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2016/02/26 05:01:44
I don't give rats ass about his "anglophbia" since I didn't even know what "Reliant Robin" until I googled it. When did you have a first hand experience with Russian-made ATGMs to be such an expert? I never said the TOW is bad, just pointed out that an bonehead, seeing that on video a missile is going from side to side (for course correction) hatefully states that it must be a "Russian missile".
The 9M14 Malyutka was infamous for having exactly that slow flight profile, and was the widest produced Russian ATGM, and is commonly in use in Syria. So, no, there's nothing 'Russophobic' about him assuming that a missile that acted in a similar manner was Russian.
Those exact shortcomings are WHY Sagger is no longer commonly used by actual Russian troops, who currently use Kornet IIRC.
Fate is in heaven, armor is on the chest, accomplishment is in the feet. - Nagao Kagetora
Yaraton wrote: I love how one Russhobic degenerate in the comments says: "Looks like a real Reliant Robin of a missile, trundling down from the hills at the speed of a drunken slug. Must be Russian made."
The missile on the video is an American-made wire-guided TOW.
hate to point this out, but saying something critical of a given nation's products doesn't make you X-phobic.
No, but instantly assuming that when something is crappy, it must be Russian-made, that is pretty russophobic.
The 9M14 Malyutka was infamous for having exactly that slow flight profile, and was the widest produced Russian ATGM, and is commonly in use in Syria. So, no, there's nothing 'Russophobic' about him assuming that a missile that acted in a similar manner was Russian.
Those exact shortcomings are WHY Sagger is no longer commonly used by actual Russian troops, who currently use Kornet IIRC.
I would rather bet my money on an average Brit not even knowing what "ATGM" stands for.
Iron_Captain wrote: No, but instantly assuming that when something is crappy, it must be Russian-made, that is pretty russophobic.
3BM17 APFSDS, anyone? T-72M? Mig 23 MS?
You do know that as a matter of policy the Russian government exported substandard and severely downgraded versions of their hardware to allied countries, right? It hasn't done their brand any favors.
If you don't want people to assume that their substandard defective equipment is Russian, Russia shouldn't sell defective substandard equipment.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/02/26 17:36:45
Fate is in heaven, armor is on the chest, accomplishment is in the feet. - Nagao Kagetora
T-34 (tank), MI-24 (helicopter), MiG 29 (aircraft). All elite examples of Russian engineering.
Russian tech, like any other tech in the developed world, is full of examples of both good and bad products.
We were once so close to heaven, St. Peter came out and gave us medals; declaring us "The nicest of the damned".
“Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'”
You do know that as a matter of policy the Russian government exported substandard and severely downgraded versions of their hardware to allied countries, right? It hasn't done their brand any favors.
If you don't want people to assume that their substandard defective equipment is Russian, Russia shouldn't sell defective substandard equipment.
So why did Iran buy S-300 directly from Russia and not a Chinese knock-off of it? Why Russia has 25% of Global arms sales if their brand is so damaged, according to you?
Because there's a lot more in who you buy weapons from than the quality of weapons. I can only imagine all the gakky tanks and aircraft the US pawned off on other countries back in the 50s and 60s simply because the big names in the game were America and Russia, and no one would buy from Russia unless they wanted to be associated with Communism. Even today, the purchase/transfer of weapons is a lot less about quality than it is about establishing trade agreements and bolstering relations. How do you think the US actually managed to sell the F35 to anyone
Of course the Russian gear is crap joke is a myth propagated during the Cold War. I think someone did a study on it some time ago and found that Russian equipment had about the same range of suck/not suck as most arms manufacturers. That Russia tends to make cheap but reliable weapons, probably helped to further the myth because in the West "cheap" is often falsely equated with "crap."
feeder wrote: T-34 (tank), MI-24 (helicopter), MiG 29 (aircraft). All elite examples of Russian engineering.
T-34: Sold stripped down to their allies at the same time the Russians were using the T-55.
Hind: You do realize that the export versions of Hind gunships were infamous for shoddy equipment. The Russians stripped their own electronics out and put in versions made in Mexico. They also got cheap on the armor and bullet resistant glass.
Fulcrum: I'll give you that one, she does perform well, but also does not have a single 'export model', either. Instead each buyer gets theirs custom.
Yaraton wrote:
To think that an average Joe is an average Joe is a "hypocrisy"? Are you sure you are not the one who is easily offended?
No, the hypocrisy comes in because if someone said the average Russian would not know what an ATGM was, you'd have rageposted about what a terrible, nasty, Russophobic racist they were. But it's A-Ok for you to insinuate that the poster who suggested that the TOW was possibly a Russian made missile because it had a similar flight characteristic, rather than being informed on the subject, was most likely an ignorant bigot who couldn't possibly know anything about Russian missiles.
Yaraton wrote:So why did Iran buy S-300 directly from Russia and not a Chinese knock-off of it? Why Russia has 25% of Global arms sales if their brand is so damaged, according to you?
Well, one, because China isn't selling atm. They do have a knockoff, though, sadly, it's performance is, supposedly, much superior to the Russian original, with a range increase of almost a quarter. Thus far, though, we're all waiting on seeing it for ourselves.
Two, because Iran has been buying Russian made equipment since the Iran-Iraq war, and has people with technical experience in maintaining and servicing Russian aeronautic equipment.
Three, Russia's prices are so low that I can buy a T-72M, fully loaded, for slightly over what I'd pay for a car in the current market. Comparable western tanks will set you back about a quarter million. Low prices do tend to offset inferior quality, and there's a lot of poor countries out there that want something they can at least call a tank and not have people laugh.
LordofHats wrote: Because there's a lot more in who you buy weapons from than the quality of weapons. I can only imagine all the gakky tanks and aircraft the US pawned off on other countries back in the 50s and 60s simply because the big names in the game were America and Russia, and no one would buy from Russia unless they wanted to be associated with Communism.
Actually the US tends to screw you over when buying ships from them, rather than aircraft or tanks. Mostly because they figure the real money is in parts and service and upgrade packages (oh my!).
Fate is in heaven, armor is on the chest, accomplishment is in the feet. - Nagao Kagetora
feeder wrote: T-34 (tank), MI-24 (helicopter), MiG 29 (aircraft). All elite examples of Russian engineering.
T-34: Sold stripped down to their allies at the same time the Russians were using the T-55.
Hind: You do realize that the export versions of Hind gunships were infamous for shoddy equipment. The Russians stripped their own electronics out and put in versions made in Mexico. They also got cheap on the armor and bullet resistant glass.
Fulcrum: I'll give you that one, she does perform well, but also does not have a single 'export model', either. Instead each buyer gets theirs custom.
I was addressing the list of shoddy Russian equipment. Of course some of it is gak. They also make some really nice stuff. Everyone does.
Concerning the quality of their export stuff, well, I don't think the Soviets trusted each other very much, let alone their Bloc "allies". They probably tried to keep the good stuff close.
We were once so close to heaven, St. Peter came out and gave us medals; declaring us "The nicest of the damned".
“Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'”
You guys do understand that Most ATGM's move like the vid, right?
Its about tracking. All the gunner has to do is keep the sight on the target, and the missile will hit. But that does'nt mean that the missile goes at the target like an arrow. Any little movement by the gunner translates down the wires and moves the missile.Alot.
That TOW in the vid was nothing special.
bound for glory wrote: Any little movement by the gunner translates down the wires and moves the missile.Alot.
I'll point out that Kornet's a beamrider, like the South African ZT3 Ingwe. Latest handheld is, IIRC, Khrizantema, and she's both laser and radar guided so she can double as a manpad in a pinch.
I'm sure the export version will be guided by pulling on strings, but as is it's pretty nifty.
Fate is in heaven, armor is on the chest, accomplishment is in the feet. - Nagao Kagetora
Ultramarines, 3rd Co. and friends, 16k+ 
4k 
Competition Index
