Two C-17s sent to Mali. What's forum's opinion, will it stop at this for logistical support or the first step to a bigger deployment?
uk.news.yahoo.com/mali-french-air-strikes-drive-back-militants-042604050.html
|
I pray it stops at this, i'm truly sick of our tin pot leaders telling the rest of the world how to run their lives, us paying through the nose for the privelidge of them throwing it at all and sundry like confetti, and then sending the best of our youth into dangerous idiotic politically strirred up hotspots...not for the politicians though eh you don't find them leading from the front.
Could someone explain the sense in bombing parts of the world to hell as it suits on the day in question, meanwhile some of the bombers recipients families and associates live in the aggressors country, and these apparently intelligent politicians wonder why there's a terrorist threat in the homeland, who's dafter politicians or the idiots who constantly vote them in.
|
The southern Sahara and Sahel, an arc running from Mauritania in the West to Chad in the East, used to be known as the French Sudan. France has former or current relations with the countries that compose it.
Algeria apart, all the countries can be described as 'weak' in the sense that they have smallish populations, often highly concentrated, and vast unpopulated desert areas in which outsiders are at risk of simply getting lost and dying of thirst, while those born in that sort of territory, who are few, are able to hide in the middle of nowhere and suddenly appear to capture a town or military outpost. Tuareg and other desert populations were traditionally raiders and bandits, but with honourable principles of hospitality, protection and so on. It's a cast of mind hard for sedentary Europeans to understand. Where these 'Islamist rebels' come from is obscure to me, but I would guess in some cases from Algeria and Libya.
It's quite reasonable for France to be worried about their presence and partial occupation of Mali, and it's quite reasonable for other western countries to share that anxiety. Air power can be an effective way of chasing such pirate groups out (analogies between the great Sahara and the world's oceans are not entirely fanciful). But strike fighters, helicopter gunships and the like have to be deployed forward and protected. And they won't necessarily win at all, let alone quickly.
Is this country supposed to snigger up its sleeve and tell the Frogs it's their problem? Surely not.
|
Probably a tit for tat arrangement in case it kicks off in the Falklands - Cameron was going on about re-inforcing the Islands yesterday as well - Another ship and submarine sent down there and also 16th Air Brigade put on stand-by...
Listening to iPlayer to Cabin Pressure last night - the destination of that episode is Timbuktu - there refusal to land their on the grounds of an ongoing civil war was the hook for the 1/2 hour laugh....how ironic.
Last edited by: R.P. on Sun 13 Jan 13 at 13:18
|
|
I was going to add: frontiers across the region are unmarked and often unpatrolled. The Islamists don't have to queue up and display their passports when moving from one country to another.
|
|
As the Afghanistan fiasco is running down our illustrious leaders must be looking around for the next war to spend a fortune on and try to impress everyone with their wisdom and power.
|
>> looking around for the next war to spend a fortune on and try to impress everyone with their wisdom and power.
I doubt that our leaders feel either wise or powerful. Power, such as it is, costs money to use and often involves a fair degree of risk. Nevertheless it needs to be used sometimes, in circumstances where 'wisdom' can sometimes be largely overruled by outside forces.
Having to take such decisions seems completely terrifying to me, and I don't doubt for a minute that our illustrious leaders are quite often in a muck sweat of pure funk. I wouldn't dare do it especially with my elbow being jogged constantly by professional curmudgeons far more capable than ON or anyone here. But someone has to, or so it seems.
|
>> far more capable than ON >>
I have an interest as I was one of the ones at the sharp end who carried out some of their bright ideas. When will they realise that we are not a world power and keep their noses out of other peoples problems. There are many countries who manage their lives well without being constantly at war, the Scandinavians for example, they contribute to NATO but within their means.
|
Africa has nothing to do with us, and its time the French realised they have no place there either. This effort of theirs strikes me as an attempt to divert public gaze away from their internal economic issues.
The only place in Africa we should be involved with is Anti Piracy off the Somalian coast, and we (along with other Navies) should be running escort duty on managed convoys past the place.
|
>> the Scandinavians for example, they contribute to NATO but within their means.
So do we. The differences between us and 'the Scandinavian countries', historical, political, economic and geographical, are too numerous and too obvious to mention.
It's a matter of proportion. What is it I wonder that makes people think this is a poor ruined country being looted and abandoned by its ruling class? It's no more like that than any other large democracy. Would you ON have served on one of the most powerful, terrifying bits of naval armament on the planet (setting aside whether we really need nuclear missile-launching subs these days), and have what I hope is a decent pension, if all this poor-mouth stuff were really true?
|
>> Would you ON have served on one
>> of the most powerful, terrifying bits of naval armament on the planet (setting aside whether
>> we really need nuclear missile-launching subs these days), and have what I hope is a
>> decent pension, if all this poor-mouth stuff were really true?
>>
I saw that, and other, systems go from being well funded world class outfits, to a ramshackle outfit run on a shoestring. A lack of funding lost a Nimrod and its crew, and only luck has prevented a bigger loss on several occasions..
|
>> lack of funding lost a Nimrod and its crew, and only luck has prevented a bigger loss on several occasions..
That would certainly rankle with a military man. Certainly there is and has been great waste and inefficiency. Obviously could be reduced, but is alas a general phenomenon.
I haven't claimed at any point that things are hunky-dory and couldn't do with radical change. It's just that people here seem to me to get it wrong. But perhaps I am wrong. It wouldn't surprise me in the least.
Zero's claim that this country has no interest in Africa, especially French Africa, and the French have no business there either, is just rubbish. Not knowing is one thing, not wanting to know is another. Countries including this one may follow policies that sometimes seem crudely utilitarian in practice. But to have that as the national attitude is a very poor idea. We are already widely suspected of cynicism, so it seems idiotic to come out as cynical, however predominant realpolitik may seem.
|
>> don't have to queue up and display their passports when moving from one country to another.
And I would further add, in case anyone is misled by shading on maps to indicate occupied territory, that these enormous swathes of desert aren't really 'occupied' at all. There isn't much to occupy; and if the government army can't occupy it and defend its frontiers, some group of mobile chancers, however tough and well-armed, can't occupy it either. All the shading means is that they are in there somewhere.
Something similar applies to the 'capture' of towns. They are captured when tooled-up chaps appear in land cruisers and the local garrison either departs or puts its hands up, while the population keeps its head down in resigned fashion. Intense fighting is quite rare and these towns, even big ones like Timbuktu, can change hands bloodlessly - and three or four times in a week because everyone, even Islamists, knows that discretion is often the better part of valour. Some bunch of pseudoreligious criminals did some really dreadful thuggish vandalism in Timbuktu a few months ago though.
It's tiresome for the populations because supplies of everything are disrupted - food, fuel, electricity, water, everything. Indeed in the Sahara, which does resemble an ocean in some ways, supplies of these things are crucial not least for the bad guys, but for anyone who wants to go there or do anything there - including of course the French military. Hence our big fat modern jet Herculeses full of kit.
|
|
I'm sorry you edited that Rob. I thought 'Flaklands' was a sly deliberate typo. How disappointing!
|
|
I changed it before John H came here with his ZSU Flak tank. I was going to leave it for much the same reason as you mention AC !
|
With all the hotspots around the world, some threats to the UK, some not immediately so, it beggars belief that our politicians are dismantling the armed forces as quickly as they can.
Idiots !
|
>> our politicians
>>
>> Idiots !
>>
Shirley the idiots are the ones who voted them in?
GB and you should stand in the next election so that people who share your views have the option of voting you in (to earn MP scale mega salaries to boot).
|
>> I changed it before John H came here with his ZSU Flak tank. >>
too late. see below.
>> there refusal to land their
>>
I bet you now wish you hadn't picked on an illiterate on another forum.
Last edited by: John H on Sun 13 Jan 13 at 13:58
|
|
No still happy to do that thank you John.
|
I do agree with your point about Falklands and quid-pro-quo re. helping the French with transport in Mali - even if you confuse your spelling s of "their" and "there".
Last edited by: John H on Sun 13 Jan 13 at 14:04
|
|
Rob could have said "there refusing to land they're forces their..." but that would have been showing off.
|
|
What about the legality of stepping in to help another country that is stepping into a third country, neither of the outsiders having been authorised to do so as part of a UN operation ?
|
>> neither of the outsiders having been authorised to do so as part
>> of a UN operation ?
>>
Any threatened country is entitled to ask for help from its allies.
Mali has requested French help, and we are an ally of France.
|
|
And who, exactly, is threatening the French?
|
>> And who, exactly, is threatening the French?
>>
Mali is being threatened by insurgents, France has been asked to help.
A reponsible former colonial power, like ourselves on occasions, responds to pleas from its former colonies.
|
Ah colonial power! Those colonies, for 100 years they try and cut your throat, then they demand reparations, then the corrupt regime cry help to the mother country when it all goes tits up. You get independence you look after yourself.
There is no security threat to France form the centre of Mali, and certainly none to us. And what were the French doing poking around in Somalia and getting their troops and hostage shot up the other day?
|
>> Those colonies, for 100 years they try and cut your throat, then they demand reparations, then the corrupt regime cry help to the mother country when it all goes tits up. You get independence you look after yourself.
>> There is no security threat to France form the centre of Mali, and certainly none to us.
What a simple, colourful little world you live in Zero. I'm amazed that someone of your intelligence can stand the boredom.
|
If anyone caught This Week last night, its grand guest Kofi Annan gave a pretty good thumbnail sketch of what is really going on in Mali, and the bewildering, chaotic nature of the various forces in play.
Comparisons between Mali and places like Iraq and Afghanistan are misplaced. In the latter countries foreign troops are seen as occupants and resented by many locals, wrongly sometimes, but understandably. In Mali they are seen by most Malians (who are concentrated in the southern part of the country) as allies and liberators. The people they are there to fight are not essentially Malians but ideologues and chancers from nearby countries.
|
|
. Seems like the Danes and the spams are helping out. They've both sent transport aircraft..
|
I've been sent a couple of anarchist links that explain all this beautifully. Apparently the US and its craven European allies are masterminding all these events in North Africa with a view to causing armed conflict in Algeria, using El Qaeda which is their own instrument. The suggested motive is to keep the oil price high so that fracking will be economically viable.
The weakness of this sort of conspiracy theory isn't the suggestion that there is really wicked realpolitik at work in the world, for there is alas, plenty of it. The weakness is the preposterous idea that the US or any western country can control events in the way suggested. Goddam piffle.
|
|
Channel 4 reporting six UK fatalities now. Don't usually watch it but want to catch the Simpsons Movie on 4+1 !
|
|
I wonder how far Mokhtar Belmokhtar has moved up the USAs hit list. They are reported to be using drones over Mali and Algeria flown from Sicily but controlled from the USA.
|
|
Quite high - read somewhere that the bounty on his head had gone up by more than the rate of inflation. He'll be on the banks of the rivers of honey and milk and catapulted to paradise or wherever these fanatics go, before the month's out with a bit of luck.
|
>> (Daily Mail)
Not clicking then.
|
|
Suit yourself, it is not compulsory.
|
|
Thanks, whoever shifted it.
|
Mali deployment - -
