ISIL attack Egypt.

[Courtney Mil]

ISIS carry out rocket strike on Egyptian navy patrol boat in the Mediterranean | Daily Mail Online (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3163910/Terror-high-seas-Egyptian-navy-vessel-erupts-huge-fireball-ISIS-carry-rocket-strike-patrol-ship-Mediterranean.html)

Time for Middle East nations to take on the fight?

[beardy]

Aviation related?

[Hangarshuffle]

Not strictly aviation related. Our own military aviation is limited and operating from Cyprus, am I right?
But an act of military violence? Next target civilian cruise ships transiting Suez? (If they still use it that is). Or elsewhere?
Are ISIL leaving all the military behind>? Beating the military? They are playing a long game, ultimately successful one?
Cant believe a hit like that didn't cause loss of life for the crew. Is it an anti tank missile?
Actually to answer the original question, are not most Middle eastern nations up to their necks in violence at the moment? Seems so.

[Pontius Navigator]

HS, lots of cruise ships use the canal on their world cruise segments. Itineraries are published two years in advance and in national press months ahead.

[Courtney Mil]

Aviation related?

Well, only because there is mil av targeting ISIL in other parts of the Middle East and this article suggests that their sphere of influence is expanding, yet again. So I would submit, in answer to your two-word spasm, that it is relevant to mil av.

Egypt will now have to work out what action to take and other Middle East nations will have to do the same - either before or after they are targeted by ISIL.

Maybe you would prefer that I wait until one of those nations actually launches an aircraft before posting news such as this?

Happy to discuss.

[Bob Viking]

As an aside, the forum description says nothing about what we should discuss. It merely says it is a forum for military air and ground crews. Surely we can discuss our belly buttons or underwear preferences if we wish. Or even BBQs.

Why does someone always have to bemoan the topic of conversation when it is not immediately aviation related?

I think the attack in the Sinai region is an extremely valid topic of conversation.

Finally before anyone pipes up, because they often do, I don't care if a guy is current or retired. All opinions are valid.

BV

[MPN11]

Another case for MPA with a broad offensive capability? Something like an MRA4?


Hat/coat/taxi :)

[Courtney Mil]

Thank you, BV. Well said. :ok:

[Always a Sapper]

Seconded Courtney.

[dagenham]

At the risk of being mr obvious.....

Missiles fly or at least defy gravity through brute force....much like ( insert ugly but legendary airframe with mahhoosive engine reference of your choosing) it is surely aviation related.

With that in mind - this does not seem to another grad / home made design as it hit something smaller than the desert and possibly moving and therefore, a guided missile of some western / russian / persian / libyian origin..... any one care to venture what it might be?

[beardy]

I do apologise. I assumed that, apart from Jet Blast, this BB was about aviation with various specialist subsections, this one being as described in it's title ' Military Aviation.'

Carry on.

[Stitchbitch]

Something very similar happened earlier this year. Egypt is stuck between a rock and a hard place. Good luck fellas. :(

[ShotOne]

"No loss of life for crew..?" Sadly I find this hard to believe. The BBC website shows the entire vessel enveloped in intense white flame burning as high as the vessel is long.

Military aviation relevance? Well our Air Force is currently flying operations against this foe; getting rid of tourists and depriving govt's of their revenue is a key part of their strategy. They've already been 100% successful in this in Tunisia. Egypt next? A pretty clear message; if they can destroy a well-armed warship, how hard is a cruise liner or parked airliner?

[strake]

about aviation with various specialist subsections, this one being as described in it's title ' Military Aviation.

The military missile flew into the ship.

[Herod]

Can I post the suggestion that we use the term "Daesh" when referring to the assorted murdering thugs roaming that part of the world?

[Courtney Mil]

Herod,

Laurent Fabius says that's the term we have to use in France, so I guess I'd better do as you suggest. :ok:

[Easy Street]

Can I post the suggestion that we use the term "Daesh" when referring to the assorted murdering thugs roaming that part of the world?

"Daesh" is the English transliteration of the Arabic acronym for "Islamic State in Iraq and al-Sharm". Arabic speakers like "Daesh" because it sounds like their word for "trample underfoot". So please let's not join Cameron and Obama in their attempts to engage in doublespeak. "Daesh" means Islamic just as much as "ISIL" or "ISIS" means Islamic; it's just not so obvious to the uninformed. This suits an agenda which prioritises a veneer of political correctness over accurate analysis, strategy development and public discourse.

ISIL's Islamic doctrine:
What ISIS Really Wants - The Atlantic (http://www.theatlantic.com/features/archive/2015/02/what-isis-really-wants/384980/)

Western leaders pretending to be scholars of Islam:
Prominent Non-Muslims Decide What Islam Is and Is Not :: Daniel Pipes (http://www.danielpipes.org/blog/2013/08/prominent-non-muslims-decide-what-islam-is-and-is)

From the latter link, it is particularly noteworthy that al-Azhar University, full of actual scholars of Islam, has found itself unable to brand ISIL's core doctrine as heretical!

[Courtney Mil]

Well, the name seems to change every month anyway (Rebels, ISIS, IS, ISIL and now Daesh) so let's, please, settle on one. I'm going to stick with this one because I don't want a late night visit from Laurent's big guys in black Citroens to explain to me that "Liberté, égalité, fraternité" means do as we say or we'll raise your taxes. :cool:

[downsizer]

Well, the name seems to change every month anyway (Rebels, ISIS, IS, ISIL and now Daesh) so let's, please, settle on one. I'm going to stick with this one because I don't want a late night visit from Laurent's big guys in black Citroens to explain to me that "Liberté, égalité, fraternité" means do as we say or we'll raise your taxes. :cool:

You forgot the beebs favourite, "The so called Islamic State"....:\

[Easy Street]

ISIS and ISIL mean the same thing anyway as "al-Sham" is just the Arabic equivalent of "Levant". IS is just a contraction. Daesh means ISIS. They haven't been described as rebels since al-Baghdadi declared the Caliphate. Simples.

[Courtney Mil]

Well that's not an answer. Just more facts. We don't need facts, we need a name.

[Easy Street]

Well, I prefer ISIL since all of the constituent parts of the acronym are English terms, so it maximises understanding of the nature of the organisation. However I do consider the argument between ISIL, ISIS and IS to be a pointless waste of time - it's like arguing the toss over whether to describe the US as the US, the USA, the United States, America, etc. Everyone knows precisely what is meant when each term is used in context, so what is the problem?

What I do object to is the attempt to adopt the foreign term Daesh. To continue the American analogy, it's like an English speaker describing our transatlantic chums as the Etats-unis. But in the case of Daesh, it's clearly an attempt to neuter or avoid any discussion of the tricky question of the Islamic character of ISIL, a question which raises all sorts of uncomfortable issues regarding our permissive policy on extremist preachers and our relationships in the Middle East, particularly with Saudi Arabia and Qatar. Thorny issues, but ones which need to be tackled for a long-term settlement - a settlement which will not be reached through Western military action, whether from air or land.

[strake]

I've had a go at what to call them using Google Translate. You may need to re-arrange the words a bit but I think it's fairly accurate...:
دهاء اللعنة القرون الوسطى

[melmothtw]

You can suggest what you like Herod, but they call themselves Islamic State and that's what we should call them. Hizbullah is not the party of God, and the IRA was not an army. The only reason politicians want to use Daesh is because they don't want to be seen as associating them with the majority of Muslims.