This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - SgtMag1
31
« on: May 23, 2015, 05:40:45 PM »
T4 falling is pretty much a death sentence for SAA garrisons in Deir ez-Zor, Qamishli, and Hasakah. And it cripples the SyAAF because of all the aircraft stored there, and the regime's air supremacy is their sole decisive advantage left over the rebels. Regime would still have Deir al Zour airbase to run sorties in Hasakah, but the regime is better off letting the Kurds take Hasakah. They control most of it anyway. For what it's worth--even though this airbase is meaningless outside of Aleppo--the regime would still have Kweres airbase. Though, like I said, it's worthless outside of Aleppo. It's primary role now is to launch barrel bombing raids and to keep any sieges at bay. Speaking of which, since IS never released anything from their attempt a few weeks back, I'm assuming it went wrong for them. But, I concede. The loss of T4 would be major. For the record, though, I don't see this airbase falling easily. But it could go the route of Tabqa.
32
« on: May 23, 2015, 05:28:28 PM »
We need more SOF teams, more airstrikes, and boots on the ground. Hesitancy to deploy troops because of an upcoming campaign is holding back progress.
Yes
33
« on: May 23, 2015, 05:25:42 PM »
Yes. JTAC's and offensive SOF forces in Iraq are desperately needed.
As for Syria, I have no fucking clue. FSA is so irrelevant now and I don't think we're serious about building it back up. Al Qaeda basically owns the opposition now.
For Syria, there is one idea I can think of for ground proxies to back (which the US has already backed to some extent). Ever heard of Euphrates Volcano? They've been operating in Kobane canton with the YPG, and they're fighting exclusively against IS. But then there's the whole thing of Turkey supporting IS, as well as them sharing the only land border with Kobane.
Yeah, I've heard of them. For the record, I'm an official analyst now. A good portion of my job deals with Syria--there isn't much I haven't heard of there.
I support funding them, but they won't be an army. We would need a large-scale fighting force to fight both IS and the Assad regime, which can't happen. I know you support Assad, which is fine, but I'm not going to debate who you or I should support. We've been down this road before and got nowhere.
I also support funding and arming the YPG, but like other Kurdish groups, they couldn't care less about anything other than Kurdistan. So, we don't really have a Syria strategy, and to be honest, I don't know what one would look like right now.
Actually, I'm an opposition supporter now. Watched several videos about what Syria was like before the war, and I realized that Assad is a monster. There needs to be some sort of way to instigate a military coup in Syria, since the Assad family has proven time and time again that they aren't willing to seriously negotiate an end to the war.
And shit, you're an official analyst now? Are you working for any institution, or are you just an independent analyst?
Wow. Some major changes going on, broski. I don't know where I stand anymore, to be honest. I don't and couldn't support Assad, but the time for a moderate Syrian opposition has long since disappeared. And yeah: http://www.longwarjournal.org/
34
« on: May 23, 2015, 05:23:10 PM »
Regime still has some outposts in Ariha and al-Ghab plain Ariha will fall soon. The entire of Idlib will fall to al Qaeda within a matter of months. But don't worry...al Qaeda is supposedly dead. Also, in the past, you used to mock how the rebels couldn't touch Idlib city. Funny how things change. They could still possibly resupply by land, since most of the area between Damascus and Deir ez-Zor is just desert. That's possible, but it'll be difficult. The main road between Dimashq and Deir al Zour is now gone for the SAA. Eh, the Regime has Deir ez-Zor way too fortified. They even have their best Republican Guard brigade stationed there, and that city has proven to be a death trap for IS countless times. The next area that's likely to fall to IS is al-Sha'er gas fields, since its Eastern flank has totally collapsed due to IS's offensive in Tadmur. And after al-Sha'er, T4 airbase would be their next target since that airbase is pretty much what enables any significant air coverage by the SyAAF over Eastern Syria. I said "major." T4, while significant, would not be as major as the fall of Deir al Zour. And you're right, the best Republican Guard is there, the best Republican Guard commander is there, the defensive perimeter is solid, etc. However, this is based around the conditions they can be resupplied frequently. When that is cut off, or limited, it will become easier over time for the Islamic State to penetrate the defenses and eventually take the rest of the city. I don't really see IS doing anything major other than that unless they begin to make significant headway in Aleppo.
35
« on: May 23, 2015, 05:15:43 PM »
Yes. JTAC's and offensive SOF forces in Iraq are desperately needed.
As for Syria, I have no fucking clue. FSA is so irrelevant now and I don't think we're serious about building it back up. Al Qaeda basically owns the opposition now.
For Syria, there is one idea I can think of for ground proxies to back (which the US has already backed to some extent). Ever heard of Euphrates Volcano? They've been operating in Kobane canton with the YPG, and they're fighting exclusively against IS. But then there's the whole thing of Turkey supporting IS, as well as them sharing the only land border with Kobane.
Yeah, I've heard of them. For the record, I'm an official analyst now. A good portion of my job deals with Syria--there isn't much I haven't heard of there. I support funding them, but they won't be an army. We would need a large-scale fighting force to fight both IS and the Assad regime, which can't happen. I know you support Assad, which is fine, but I'm not going to debate who you or I should support. We've been down this road before and got nowhere. I also support funding and arming the YPG, but like other Kurdish groups, they couldn't care less about anything other than Kurdistan. So, we don't really have a Syria strategy, and to be honest, I don't know what one would look like right now.
36
« on: May 23, 2015, 02:52:22 PM »
i would say pretty much always
Sometimes people deserve to die, though. Such as Hitler, Stalin, Bin Laden, et al.
37
« on: May 23, 2015, 02:22:01 PM »
Implications for us? The worst possible scenario, dude.
How so? I presume their territory and influence would expand, significantly. How could something like that even be fought?
A reconciliation between the two greatest terrorist organizations in the world does not bode well for anyone. Hell, the competition between the two doesn't bode well for anyone as well. But a reconciliation would be getting the gang back together... To fight it, it'd have to be fought like any other terrorist group. Military action will have to be used, but also an emphasis on the political, economical, and social dynamics of these things. I don't agree with what the administration has said about how "lack of opportunity" is more a factor into why people join terrorist groups, but poverty does play a role. However, with current Islamic militant groups, the ideology plays more of a role. Which is why working with local religious authorities is incredibly important. Either way, military action will have to happen. Either from local troops or Western, but the best method would be both. The military action would have to be effective; no occupation, no invasion, no overusage of drones, etc.
38
« on: May 23, 2015, 02:16:09 PM »
No.
39
« on: May 23, 2015, 02:12:36 PM »
Holy shit you're conceding defeat. You'd have never done that in the past 
But seriously, I think you're underestimating just how much al Qaeda and its allies have gained in recent months. In fact, you didn't even mention them at all. They now control all of Idlib (nominally right now. Give it time and they will take over whatever the regime has left near the Al Ghab plains), and control significant swaths in Daraa and Quneitra.
But the fact that IS has been able to mount more offensives in Syria is also worrying. The most important of which was taking Tadmur. This essentially shuts the SAA forces in Deir al Zour off from aid from Damascus by land. They could try to fly aid into the airbase at Deir al Zour, but that might be limited with the threat of IS anti air.
So, I think the next major thing to fall to IS in Syria will be Deir al Zour. Which will mean that IS will control all of that province. However, should be noted that Deir al Zour is basically desert but still.
I remember reading a news story a number of months ago about how IS and al-Qaeda could end up rebuilding bridges and forming a sort of alliance. Do you think this is possible? And what implications would it have for us?
It could be possible provided Abu Bakr al Baghdadi, Abu Muhammad Al Adnani, and a few others are killed. I don't think those two would ever agree to a reconciliation with al Qaeda. However, it is also possible a split occurs within the Islamic State's leadership. When they start losing, this has a greater chance of happening. Al Qaeda might also be able to co-opt any loyalists they have left in the organization (if any). However, you probably would have seen this happen while Baghdadi was injured. Implications for us? The worst possible scenario, dude.
40
« on: May 23, 2015, 09:29:03 AM »
Yes. JTAC's and offensive SOF forces in Iraq are desperately needed.
As for Syria, I have no fucking clue. FSA is so irrelevant now and I don't think we're serious about building it back up. Al Qaeda basically owns the opposition now.
Oh shit, man, good to see you. About time you turned up here; we need some more people with an interest and understanding of foreign policy:
OT: some infantry support for the Kurds, increased air strikes, more covert operations and maybe even a ground assault on Dabiq wouldn't go amiss.
I support everything but the ground assault on Dabiq. Two reasons: 1. It's not that strategically important. I don't care what they think about Dabiq and their end times ideology, it's not strategic in the long run. 2. How would that be mounted? We don't really have the capabilities to mount a large scale assault deep into IS territory in Syria. Also, increased airstrikes will require JTACs. And glad to be here.
41
« on: May 23, 2015, 09:26:12 AM »
Holy shit you're conceding defeat. You'd have never done that in the past But seriously, I think you're underestimating just how much al Qaeda and its allies have gained in recent months. In fact, you didn't even mention them at all. They now control all of Idlib (nominally right now. Give it time and they will take over whatever the regime has left near the Al Ghab plains), and control significant swaths in Daraa and Quneitra. But the fact that IS has been able to mount more offensives in Syria is also worrying. The most important of which was taking Tadmur. This essentially shuts the SAA forces in Deir al Zour off from aid from Damascus by land. They could try to fly aid into the airbase at Deir al Zour, but that might be limited with the threat of IS anti air. So, I think the next major thing to fall to IS in Syria will be Deir al Zour. Which will mean that IS will control all of that province. However, should be noted that Deir al Zour is basically desert but still.
42
« on: May 23, 2015, 09:18:09 AM »
Yes. JTAC's and offensive SOF forces in Iraq are desperately needed.
As for Syria, I have no fucking clue. FSA is so irrelevant now and I don't think we're serious about building it back up. Al Qaeda basically owns the opposition now.
43
« on: May 23, 2015, 09:15:14 AM »
Doesn't matter. It's all about that body. But if I had to choose, blondes.
And personality, too. But we all know that at first sight we don't give a shit about that.
44
« on: May 23, 2015, 09:11:41 AM »
Some of my work directly relates to Iran's proxies in Iraq, but I also know a great deal about Iran's relationship with al Qaeda--which they also use in pursuit of regional hegemony. I can read it and offer some constructive criticism.
ayy look who's here!!!
Now I have someone I can discuss the Middle East with. And about Iran's relationship with al-Qaeda, are you referring to Assad's (who's pretty much an Iranian puppet now) support for al-Qaeda during the Iraq War, or are you referring to a more direct connection that I'm not aware of?
Happy to do so when I'm here. Both. Iran has directly supported AQ by allowing them to operate on its soil, so long as they don't plot against Iran inside Iran. It's literally "the enemy of my enemy is my friend."
45
« on: May 23, 2015, 09:10:13 AM »
Some of my work directly relates to Iran's proxies in Iraq, but I also know a great deal about Iran's relationship with al Qaeda--which they also use in pursuit of regional hegemony. I can read it and offer some constructive criticism.
Our lord and savior has returned.
You know it bbe.
46
« on: May 22, 2015, 03:07:16 PM »
Oh shit, when did you get here?
This morning. I'm here to fuck shit up and drop some knowledge on the jihadis.
47
« on: May 22, 2015, 05:47:22 AM »
^^
Not much, really. Al Qaeda will continue to gain through the chaos in Yemen, despite several top leaders being picked off recently.
The real question is, how much will this hurt al Qaeda? Al Ansi was a deputy General Manager of the entire organization. I assume he will be replaced no problem (that's the nature of how these groups work), but at what cost?
48
« on: May 22, 2015, 05:43:07 AM »
Some of my work directly relates to Iran's proxies in Iraq, but I also know a great deal about Iran's relationship with al Qaeda--which they also use in pursuit of regional hegemony. I can read it and offer some constructive criticism.
|
Show Posts