Coalition? - FSIC Messageboard

FSIC Messageboard

Flame Wars

Coalition?

profile | register | preferences | faq | search

UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone!

next newest topic | next oldest topic

Author	Topic: Coalition?
3dp Pilot	posted 11-02- 12:31 PM One of the things that has been bothering me, more and more as the days go by, is that for all of the talk of a "coalition against terrorism", all of the attacks have been carried out by U.S. forces with the exception of TLAMs fired from either HMS Trafalgar or HMS Triumph on the first day. I am well aware of the vital conributions of the RAF (particularly in the air-to-air refuelling of USN aircraft, USAF tankers not being compatible), I check the British Ministry of Defense website regularly. I am also sure that there have been SAS teams on the ground in Afghanistan from day one, but there is a world of difference between supporting us and actually getting your hands dirty and participating in the bombing. Other countries are supporting us in different, vital ways, but when we have at least one ally, the UK, willing to participate directly, why are we seemingly excluding them? If PR is important, even small participation by other nations would be symbolically significant. Any ideas? ------------------ Be seeing you, 3dp Visit RAF Harkness! [This message has been edited by 3dp (edited 11-02-2001).] IP: Logged
Jerry Pilot	posted 11-02- 01:39 PM Turkey is sending 90 (Muslim) Special Forces soldiers to assist the Northern Allience. IP: Logged
Snickers Pilot	posted 11-02- 02:21 PM I have a sneaking suspicion that the SAS was on the ground on Sept 12 and we were on the ground on Sept 13. The SAS kicks butt... [This message has been edited by Snickers (edited 11-02-2001).] IP: Logged
3dp Pilot	posted 11-02- 03:18 PM I have a sneaking suspicion that SAS teams were on the ground before September 11, who knows. I am also aware of Turkey's contribution, but both it and the SAS deal more with the invisible. News reports about Turkish troops come and go and hardly anyone except the likes of us on this BB notice them. What would get into the wider public's conciousness (where the PR battle is going on) would be reports about a major strike by RN Harriers on Khandahar or Turkish F-16s hitting Kabul. The PR effect of those few RN Tomahawks was tremendous but it has now faded. The question I'm getting at is why does the administration seem to be keeping others who are willing out of the visible war? ------------------ Be seeing you, 3dp Visit RAF Harkness! [This message has been edited by 3dp (edited 11-02-2001).] IP: Logged
Snickers Pilot	posted 11-02- 03:35 PM With the exception of carpet bombing, I suspect the "visible war" will soon dis-appear. I made a predition to my boss when this started that they would be carpet bombed. He disagreed, not enough to do damage on... Not enough _physical_ damage. But even the Ruskies never did anything like that. Comment came back from a Taliban soldier that there were too many bombs to count. Psyhchological impact. When Russia was fighting the Afghans, I remember the following statement, "We are not afreaid of the Russians. We _are_ afraid of their helicopters." I wonder what they say about us... IP: Logged
Spanky the Mad Dog Pilot	posted 11-02- 05:02 PM I thought I heard something about our PM saying something about sending some F-18s but our planes and people can't operate from carriers. About getting your hands dirty. Would SAS men on the ground be getting their hands plenty dirty? Even more so then the Air units? I know what you ment but it was a poor choice of words. I also think it would look better if their were more countries activly involved in the actually bombing. And yeah SAS does rock IP: Logged
Jerry Pilot	posted 11-02- 05:31 PM I'm wondering if limiting the current action to 99% US is a political move. After all, we were the ones attacked and have the best reason for attacking back. An all out offensive by NATO and other "Christian" countries would look even more like a West vs. Islam war and feed the bin Laden propaganda machine. Just a thought. IP: Logged
Smokey Pilot	posted 11-02- 05:36 PM The coalition is fucked. Two years from now, if were still in this and I think we will and should be, you will have forgotten who was in the coalition to start with. I think it will be us, Great Britain, Canada and Austrailia who'll be left. [This message has been edited by Smokey (edited 11-02-2001).] IP: Logged
Snickers Pilot	posted 11-02- 06:08 PM Actually if we are still in there, I wouldnt be surprised at all if the Turks are. They have ties to some of the Northern Alliance people... Nasty, nasty fighters. In Korea, they would run through an enmy camp at night, slitting the throats of every other person. If you were one of the lucky ones and woke up in the morning, imagine finding the person to your left and right dead. AND not even knowing there was a fight. Demoralizing.... IP: Logged
Snickers Pilot	posted 11-02- 06:13 PM quote: Originally posted by Spanky the Mad Dog: I also think it would look better if their were more countries activly involved in the actually bombing. They found out in the gulf war that this doesnt work too well. Too much to coordinate, to much chance for a mid-air mistake. It probably would look better, but its not us (as in you and me) making the decisions . [This message has been edited by Snickers (edited 11-02-2001).] IP: Logged
AGAS - 5 Pilot	posted 11-02- 06:49 PM Spanky, RAAF F18's & tankers are flying out of Diego Garcia (for time being anyway). A great place...like a huge carrier permanently anchored in the Indian Ocean. I listened to the Taliban declare Jihad on Australia yesterday....the nice thing that followed was when they interviewed a few senoir Australian Muslims afterwards. Words to the affect, they said 'Jihad is fighting for their country to protect what they think is right......Australia is our country and we will fight to the death to protect her......' I heard from a reliable source that other more isolated training camps around the world have recently been visited by the coalition....apparently the Taliban have lost all communications with them.... Isolate, demorilise & destroy. IP: Logged
Sv JAG	posted 11-02- 07:09 PM I heard that Saudi and Egypt said that if we attack Iraq then they will decare war on us. Coalition: Game Over. IP: Logged
Jerry Pilot	posted 11-02- 07:51 PM Where did you hear that Sv? Sounds far fetched. Withdraw support, yes. But declare war? If it were to happen, we just turn the Israelis lose and let them do their thing while we take over all the oil wells. If they truely want an East vs. West war there will be a lot of glass in the middle east. IP: Logged
3dp Pilot	posted 11-02- 11:30 PM Because something's difficult does not mean don't do it if it's the right thing to do, and including Allies is the right thing to do. I'm also afraid that the apparent exclusion might alienate some, or even be used by third parties to say "Look the Americans are so smug they don't even trust their own so-called allies to do things right", or similar sentiments. I think I am quite well read about the Gulf War and to the best of my knowledge, there was no inordinate difficulty in coordinating the Allies, at least not in the air. I don't think there were any mid-air collisions even though they were expected simply due to the volume of aircraft operating. Nevertheless, military cooperation between like-minded nations is one of the cornerstones of organizations like NATO, etc. Even if there were difficulties in 1991, they've had ten years to smooth such problems out in light of experience. Also, I'm not worried about Arab public opinion at this point. The radicals at least see this as a West/Islam conflict anyway. It's more the Western public I'm worried about. My fears about Western attitudes in the absence of friendly casualties and the presence enemy civilian casualties (see other topics elsewhere on this BB) have come true already. I can only hope I'm wrong this time. P.S. No slight of the SAS was intended. I'm one of their biggest fans (if that's the word?). I guess I should have said "visibly get their hands dirty". Also as I've stated in other topics, I firmly believe it is they and other units like them who will play the most important role in winning this war. ------------------ Be seeing you, 3dp Visit RAF Harkness! [This message has been edited by 3dp (edited 11-02-2001).] IP: Logged
AGAS - 5 Pilot	posted 11-02- 11:59 PM 3dp, Your last point is very pertinant...and closer to the truth than many realise. A conflict fought on all fronts requires the use of many tools of war. One of these tools is the use of Information Operations - not just against the Taliban, but against the worlds media. As the media focuses on the CONUS, Afganistan, and the Middle East in general; would it not be a good idea to let them play along with that so the coalition (notice my use of this word) can isolate remote training bases in countries around the world and destroy them. It has to be done eventualy, so it's best done now while the media arelooking the other way (these guys claim to be on the side of the right - but at the end of the day just want to keep their circulation levels up high). How can we do this to sovereign nations and not here about it you say ? Well, one of the things about espionage and diplomacy is that it's OK if 'you know that I know and I know that you know - as long as the media don't know'....it's called embarrasment. IP: Logged
Sv JAG	posted 11-03- 07:49 PM I heard it on a usually very accurate radio talk show... so maybe it is not true. I heard the story like this: Without any prompting by the US, Saudi and Egypt had a press conference and announced that any attack by the US on Iraq would follow by both nations having to be at war with the US. I will look into this more, maybe it is not true... IP: Logged
3dp Pilot	posted 11-03- 10:58 PM Just heard that Harriers were used for the first time today (3 Nov). Wonder if they were RN or RAF flying from HMS Illustrious? ------------------ Be seeing you, 3dp Visit RAF Harkness! IP: Logged
Jerry Pilot	posted 11-03- 11:07 PM They were US Marine Harriers. IP: Logged
Snickers Pilot	posted 11-05- 04:14 PM quote: Originally posted by Sv: Without any prompting by the US, Saudi and Egypt had a press conference and announced that any attack by the US on Iraq would follow by both nations having to be at war with the US. I think you and listen to the same station.... If we were to bomb Iraq, I suspect compelling evidance of the need would be presented to not only these two governments but NATO as well.... IP: Logged

All times are CT (US)	next newest topic \| next oldest topic
Administrative Options: Close Topic \| Archive/Move \| Delete Topic
	Hop to:

Contact Us | Fighter Squadron Information Center