Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => Politics => Topic started by: MicroBalrog on March 17, 2015, 11:46:40 PM
-
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4629820,00.html
. But Daesh made two critical mistakes, turning itself into the West's main enemy. The first mistake was the Yazidi massacre. The shocking reports about it landed on the United Nations Security Council's desk, sparking a major row. The second mistake was, and still is, the public beheading. What the murder of 200,000 people by the Syrian army failed to do was done by "Jihadi John" and his knife. The West launched a military intervention.
It is the fact that Daesh is organized in regular forces, more or less, which makes it very vulnerable in a frontal confrontation with the American military power.
Conclusions:
1. Military strength is not merely a result of dialing up the brutality. The people with the massacre-everything attitude are going to lose - again - to guided missiles and precision strikes.
2. I have said before, I say it again: Daesh/ISIS/ISIL is massively overrated.
-
Interesting article - I wonder if the Israeli censors removed any material about Israeli support for al Qaeda. It's a shame, that fellow who is in jail right now for reporting on it.
Daesh is actually very secure - its homeland in Saudi Arabia is a close US ally. Any ISIS a member who abandons the group can move there to find exactly the same "system of laws".
-
I repeat my prediction. By the end of 2015 Daesh will either be completely crushed militarily, or will be controlling only a fraction of the territory they control now.
-
I repeat my prediction. By the end of 2015 Daesh will either be completely crushed militarily, or will be controlling only a fraction of the territory they control now.
Do you think by that time Saudi Arabia will have become in some way distinguishable from Daesh?
-
I have the utmost confidence that if it is at all possible Obama will find a way to reverse any downward trends of ISIS' power and influences.
-
I think what people don't get about Daesh is that it did not advance across or cover all that territory, it is a large number of disparate Sunni Islamist militias who all decided to jump onto the ISIS/ISIL bandwagon with a snowball effect because Daesh got some street cred from what was happening in Syria.
People also don't understand the profound power vacuum that Daesh filled, with non-militant Sunni's and the Shias in the Iraqi military and government cutting and running from guys in Hiluxes with AK's, when they were sitting in Abrams and Bradleys, with millions.. billions of dollars worth of weapons we gave them. :facepalm:
And yeah, as quickly as it formed, Daesh will fall apart just as fast.
-
Do you think by that time Saudi Arabia will have become in some way distinguishable from Daesh?
I don't really care this much, really.
I have confidence in these guys (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5q_-VR3SF5E) as far as international terrorism goes.
-
I don't really care this much, really.
I have confidence in these guys (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5q_-VR3SF5E) as far as international terrorism goes.
I'm all for it. As long as we spend our dollars on the killing, and not the occupying and nation-building.
We could have invaded and pacified the ME 2-3 times over, for what the occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan for over a decade cost. And if leaving causes a Daesh/Al Quieda eruption? Then just go in and kill them again, then leave.
Lather, rinse, repeat. Go back in 1.5 to 2 years and do it again if we have to. Eventually they'll run out of combat-aged radicalized males. Then maybe there'll be peace for 20 years or so.
And we'd have a very finely honed military that would have everyone else on Earth quaking in their boots, and it wouldn't be worn down, logistically, monetarily, or morale-wise by the occupation, and the toll of asymmetric persistence warfare.
-
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4629820,00.html
Conclusions:
1. Military strength is not merely a result of dialing up the brutality. The people with the massacre-everything attitude are going to lose - again - to guided missiles and precision strikes.
2. I have said before, I say it again: Daesh/ISIS/ISIL is massively overrated.
It's not that I think Daesh/ISIS/ISIL consists of bionic supersoldiers that can sterilize whole countrysides with just a dirty look that makes me think Daesh .... is a BIG PROBLEM, it's that I don't see a lot of the surrounding countries (and America) doing enough to TKO Isis.
Missiles and bombs are good, but they (IMHO) are just not enough.
-
I'm all for it. As long as we spend our dollars on the killing, and not the occupying and nation-building.
We could have invaded and pacified the ME 2-3 times over, for what the occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan for over a decade cost. And if leaving causes a Daesh/Al Quieda eruption? Then just go in and kill them again, then leave.
Lather, rinse, repeat. Go back in 1.5 to 2 years and do it again if we have to. Eventually they'll run out of combat-aged radicalized males. Then maybe there'll be peace for 20 years or so.
And we'd have a very finely honed military that would have everyone else on Earth quaking in their boots, and it wouldn't be worn down, logistically, monetarily, or morale-wise by the occupation, and the toll of asymmetric persistence warfare.
Look very very carefully at the DARPA Robotics Challenges.
That's all I'll say.
-
I'm all for it. As long as we spend our dollars on the killing, and not the occupying and nation-building.
We could have invaded and pacified the ME 2-3 times over, for what the occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan for over a decade cost. And if leaving causes a Daesh/Al Quieda eruption? Then just go in and kill them again, then leave.
Lather, rinse, repeat. Go back in 1.5 to 2 years and do it again if we have to. Eventually they'll run out of combat-aged radicalized males. Then maybe there'll be peace for 20 years or so.
And we'd have a very finely honed military that would have everyone else on Earth quaking in their boots, and it wouldn't be worn down, logistically, monetarily, or morale-wise by the occupation, and the toll of asymmetric persistence warfare.
That was the British strategy in Afghanistan. It seemed to work well enough. They wanted to keep Russian influence far away from India, and did so by deposing any ruler in Afghanistan that was sympathetic to Russian/Persian interests. They had to send in a column of redcoats about once a generation (and lost one of those columns rather spectacularly, iirc), but they did succeed in keeping the right rulers in charge there.
I don't think that would work for us. Evil white westerners killing brown people in one sided conflicts, over and over again, just isn't going to fly these days. We couldn't stomach it.
-
I don't really care this much, really.
I have confidence in these guys (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5q_-VR3SF5E) as far as international terrorism goes.
It is a farce because people doing all the same things as Daesh are still there. But they cooperate on strategic matters so their terrorism doesn't matter.
-
It is a farce because people doing all the same things as Daesh are still there. But they cooperate on strategic matters so their terrorism doesn't matter.
I would not say it doesn't matter, but not targeting America gets even world-class rat bastards some consideration. Of course, I don;t think we ought to let them in our country.
-
I have confidence in these guys (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5q_-VR3SF5E) as far as international terrorism goes.
You are clearly underestimating Obama's capacity and desire to emasculate and disembowel the United States military.
-
It's hard to defeat an ideology.
-
That was the British strategy in Afghanistan. It seemed to work well enough. They wanted to keep Russian influence far away from India, and did so by deposing any ruler in Afghanistan that was sympathetic to Russian/Persian interests. They had to send in a column of redcoats about once a generation (and lost one of those columns rather spectacularly, iirc), but they did succeed in keeping the right rulers in charge there.
I don't think that would work for us. Evil white westerners killing brown people in one sided conflicts, over and over again, just isn't going to fly these days. We couldn't stomach it.
Part of the solution is the lighting fast strikes etc. there's less time for an on the ground press presence.
-
It's hard to defeat an ideology.
I can think of a few ways. We don't have the stomach for it though
-
It's hard to defeat an ideology.
It's easy to defeat an organization.
-
But do we have enough bullets and explosives?
-
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/pentagon-loses-sight-of-500-million-in-counterterrorism-aid-given-to-yemen/2015/03/17/f4ca25ce-cbf9-11e4-8a46-b1dc9be5a8ff_story.html
"Pentagon loses track of $500 million in weapons, equipment given to Yemen"
Did we just give ISIS an aid package?
-
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/pentagon-loses-sight-of-500-million-in-counterterrorism-aid-given-to-yemen/2015/03/17/f4ca25ce-cbf9-11e4-8a46-b1dc9be5a8ff_story.html
"Pentagon loses track of $500 million in weapons, equipment given to Yemen"
Did we just give ISIS an aid package?
Not really. If you look at what went missing, it's mostly stuff that they already have(guns), can't use(planes), or can't maintain and aren't really trained on how to use(NVGs).