Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Social > Jet Blast
Reload this Page >

On the eve of war

Jet Blast Topics that don't fit the other forums. Rules of Engagement apply.

On the eve of war

Old 25th Jul 2018, 21:40
  #801 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Hampshire
Age: 72
Posts: 677
Teej: Now that sounds a perfectly reasonable assumption. Many thanks for that. The amount of stuff heading toward North Yemen from Saudi Arabia was tremendous, with the Galaxy deliveries every couple of days. It is ironic how things can change so rapidly. In 1967 the Saudis were supporting the Royalist side against the Communists in North Yemen and here we are 11 or 12 years later, they are supporting what used to be the enemy!
KelvinD is offline  
Old 25th Jul 2018, 23:21
  #802 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Lincs
Posts: 2,132
Originally Posted by KelvinD View Post
Teej: Now that sounds a perfectly reasonable assumption. Many thanks for that.
No problem, Kelvin.
TEEEJ is offline  
Old 26th Jul 2018, 01:10
  #803 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Texas
Age: 60
Posts: 5,340
Originally Posted by racedo View Post
As for you comment about about what I said about Israel being front man for US selling Arms to Iran
Given that I said nothing about that ... I know how the F-4 parts (and a few other things) got to Iran, it was all over the television about 30 years ago, and a bit more has come out about it since ... Kindly stop making stuff up. But wait, you can't help yourself. You've got a roughly Tornado-sized bug up your arse about the U.S. Might want to see a proctologist about it.

@Kelvin:
In 1967 the Saudis were supporting the Royalist side against the Communists in North Yemen and here we are 11 or 12 years later, they are supporting what used to be the enemy!
Check your sums.

@TEEJ
Thanks for the details.

As to the Saudis and their current fun and games with their neighbors: fun to watch the clown show. Had to put up with a few of those asshats when their noble sons were welcome in our flight training wings in Florida. If that's who is in charge now ... snort.

Getting back to the OP and the usual chicken little act: on the eve of war.
OK, tell me: who, and where and when does it start? Syria's already in a mess of it, the Iraqis are trying to clean up their ISIS (and a few others) problem, Saudis have the clown show going, and the Pakistanis get the usual bombs going off ... now the excuse is 'it's an election.' None of that is new, and the never ending fun and games in Afghanistan continues because they are not tired of it yet.
What war?
You've been wrong so far.
I recall that there have been a variety of "the Rapture is coming" pronouncements over the past few decades.
They too were wrong.

Last edited by Lonewolf_50; 26th Jul 2018 at 01:23.
Lonewolf_50 is offline  
Old 26th Jul 2018, 09:55
  #804 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: UK
Age: 54
Posts: 2,639
Originally Posted by KelvinD View Post
I am a good little "Assad loyalist" for various reasons and many of those reasons are as plain as the nose on one's face. Racedo is right. The White Helmets support the Syrian opposition and the Syrian Opposition is based mainly around those nice chaps who, among other things, seem to have a manifesto that includes "kill all non Muslims". And apparently operate franchises in places such as France and the UK.
If the White Helmets were what they say they are, they would not have used the name of a Syrian government organisation in their publicity (Civil Defence). Surely, they would have stayed away from any possible connection with the Assad government in both name and deed?
Too many of us on this forum are of an age where we were brought up to believe certain "facts", such as Russia is a thoroughly bad implacable enemy; Israel is always right, regardless of the nature or number of atrocities they may author. Or how about the "Castro is evil" theme that ran for donkey's years, despite history showing us what a corrupt, US backed dictator Batista was, prompting Castro to overthrow him. Or how the US was "right" to go to war with Vietnam. Or how the great triumvirate of the US, UK and God were right to organise a huge killing party in Iraq in 2003 for no apparent reason other than Saddam had insulted (perhaps even threatened to kill) Bush's Daddy.
Throughout recent history, we have been fed so much tripe which has been subsequently discredited it is small wonder we have little faith in our so-called "leaders". Given their track record over the years, I think we are right and sensible to look to others for at least their view on things and perhaps make up our own minds. Look at Crimea. For many years part of the USSR, the locals were unhappy with being a part of Ukraine and a referendum showed this And they showed it again in the recent Russian presidential election when the support for Putin in Crimea was higher than it was across Russia in general. History and democracy are not applicable here though and the US & UK governments led the charge to apply sanctions against Russia, preferring to support a right wing Ukrainian government that had seized power.
So, my argument would be; it is time we learned to listen to all sides and use our grown up intellects to sort the wheat from the chaff, not just hear one side and unquestioningly believe it as providing the only truth out there.

Absolutely, spot on! The truth is out there...somewhere.
TURIN is offline  
Old 26th Jul 2018, 11:58
  #805 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Darkest Surrey
Posts: 5,816
Originally Posted by Lonewolf_50 View Post
Given that I said nothing about that ... I know how the F-4 parts (and a few other things) got to Iran, it was all over the television about 30 years ago, and a bit more has come out about it since ... Kindly stop making stuff up. But wait, you can't help yourself. You've got a roughly Tornado-sized bug up your arse about the U.S. Might want to see a proctologist about it..
You the one who threw accusations of me being an Anti Semite with zero proof so not me with the issue perhaps.
racedo is offline  
Old 26th Jul 2018, 16:34
  #806 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Age: 65
Posts: 1,954
Originally Posted by KelvinD View Post
KenV: Trust me. No "claims" here; ony the facts as I saw and experienced them. The F5s and a large contingent of Northrop people were based at Taif at the time, as was I. The F5s won't show up on databases anywhere with regards to Iraq as they were officially "loaned" to the Iraqis.
Think this through. You claimed US C-130 arrived delivering parts that got transhipped to Iraqi transports and Saudi F-5s were being knocked down by Northrop personnel and put into Iraqi transports. Who's going to put them back together again in Iraq and test fly them after they are put together? Who's going to train Iraqi pilots to fly them? Let's ignore those three "minor" problems. Those F-5s will have comm, IFF, nav, and weapon systems totally incompatible with the stuff Iraq uses. And totally incompatible with the tools their mechanics use to maintain them, all the way down to the hose fittings for fueling the aircraft. The Iraqis don't even have the right ammo to put in the guns, never mind missiles and bombs. This makes zero sense. And nobody but you have any knowledge or record of these Iraqi F-5s. Do you see how all this makes your claims more than a little suspect?
KenV is offline  
Old 26th Jul 2018, 19:15
  #807 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Hotel Sheets, Downtown Plunketville
Age: 72
Posts: 687
Originally Posted by Lonewolf_50 View Post
Given that I said nothing about that ... I know how the F-4 parts (and a few other things) got to Iran, it was all over the television about 30 years ago, and a bit more has come out about it since ... Kindly stop making stuff up. But wait, you can't help yourself. You've got a roughly Tornado-sized bug up your arse about the U.S. Might want to see a proctologist about it.

@Kelvin: Check your sums.

@TEEJ
Thanks for the details.

As to the Saudis and their current fun and games with their neighbors: fun to watch the clown show. Had to put up with a few of those asshats when their noble sons were welcome in our flight training wings in Florida. If that's who is in charge now ... snort.

Getting back to the OP and the usual chicken little act: on the eve of war.
OK, tell me: who, and where and when does it start? Syria's already in a mess of it, the Iraqis are trying to clean up their ISIS (and a few others) problem, Saudis have the clown show going, and the Pakistanis get the usual bombs going off ... now the excuse is 'it's an election.' None of that is new, and the never ending fun and games in Afghanistan continues because they are not tired of it yet.
What war?
You've been wrong so far.
I recall that there have been a variety of "the Rapture is coming" pronouncements over the past few decades.
They too were wrong.
What war and when ? But enough shit flying around to at least consider it`s likelihood I`d have thought. Pearl Harbour comes to mind when the shit finally caught the US full frontal. Followed by the stars and stripes bugged up someones arse and beyond any proctologist`s expertise to extract it. But does anyone really learnanything from history.
Chronus is offline  
Old 26th Jul 2018, 19:26
  #808 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Москва/Ташкент
Age: 49
Posts: 781
I'm of the opinion that under Trump the likelihood of war has actually decreased, unlike Hillary (the complete opposite of war-averse Bill) Trump might be a lot of bluster but suspect he does this to bully the other side from a position of strength before backing down for the negotiation (his classic trick).

Bolton on the other hand worries me, I think he was the wrong pick, and his unresolved issues with Iran may well lead us into conflict. As for North Korea... much overrated... they bluster like Trump (heck Trump and the Fat Wun share many similarities) but that is all it is... bluster... and possibly that might be resolved.

If I had to guess I would argue a regional escalating conflict with Iran could possibly ramp up fast and spin out of control possibly with Bolton's fingerprints all over it.
flash8 is offline  
Old 26th Jul 2018, 22:49
  #809 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Hampshire
Age: 72
Posts: 677
Lonewolf: You really ought to read things through before getting arsey. Here's something I wrote earlier in this thread:
The extent of my knowledge of the affair was to witness the arrival of the Iraqi Il75 aircraft and to see some bulky items being stowed in them, plus the assertion from some of the Northrop guys on site that a number of the aircraft had been knocked down and shipped out. Where in Iraq they ended up, I don't know. As far as I know, they were probably not used. After all, a couple of F5s turning up in an air force that was MiG through and through would cause some head scratching.
Now for one of yours:
You claimed US C-130 arrived delivering parts that got transhipped to Iraqi transports
please show me where I said that.
You also invited me to "check my sums". I have a better idea, you check them for me. In my post I referred to Saudi assistance to the Royalists in Yemen in 1967. I then said 11 or 12 years later they were supporting what used to be the enemy. The South vs North Yemen kicked off in 1979. Now, be a good man and do the sums for me.
I see you must have read the post from Teej. Did you read that thoroughly? If you had, you would have added Saudi Arabia to your comprehensive list. And it is pointless looking at Wikipedia. I used to watch them flying training missions almost daily from Taif, either from the tower or from a perch on top of the localiser antenna array when they were taking off in a southerly direction. (only 1 runway had ILS then). At that time the Saudis had F5s based in Taif. (In Tabuk and Dhahran they had English Electric Lightnings. I can't remember what they had in Khamis Mushayt but I think it may also have been a Lightning base.)
KelvinD is offline  
Old 27th Jul 2018, 14:02
  #810 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Texas
Age: 60
Posts: 5,340
Originally Posted by KelvinD View Post
Lonewolf is accused of saying this
Your incoherence is beginning to show. Slow down.
You claimed US C-130 arrived delivering parts that got transhipped to Iraqi transports
Please provide the link to the post where I typed that. That does not look like something I have written recently. Please, go to the post, copy the link, and put that in a reply to this. I think you may have me confused with another poster who was differing with you. That person might be KenV. Now lets look at the wall of text balderdash you posted that got two people questioning your reasoning and memory.
Ironically, not too long after this period, I was based at Taif and while there watched the import of F5 components, usually on US Air Force C130s and Northrop personnel knocking down F5s to fit into Iraqi Air Force planes (don't remember the type but it was the Russian one that looked a carbon copy of the C141 but with a perspex bomb aimer's bubble under the nose Was it the Il 70 something or other?).And what was happening to these assets (including missile batteries)? They were going to assist Saddam when he kicked off the Iraq/Iran war.
It is very easy to infer from that noisy and run on pile of text what you were challenged on.
You also invited me to "check my sums". I have a better idea, you check them for me.
Let me explain that remark.
here we are 11 or 12 years later, they are supporting what used to be the enemy!
Here we are (not here we were) indicates present tense. The year now is 2018. Here we were would have nicely placed your comment into a temporal context, as you apparently intended. Proof reading, per my initial remark.
.... Saudi Arabia to your comprehensive list.
They were already on my list, had you bothered to actually read my post. It was interesting to read of your experiences, and to see a few others try to place what you observed in context.
Your lack or coherence, though, still leaves on wondering.
Lonewolf_50 is offline  
Old 27th Jul 2018, 21:56
  #811 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Москва/Ташкент
Age: 49
Posts: 781
C'mon guys we shouldn't be bickering about bits 'n' pieces

Anyway as I said I reckon Iran is next, based on John "Psycho" Bolton's past and present statements... lets face it he doesn't like the place! He worries me....

Can anyone tell me how this is likely to evolve if it does start? I am sure initially will be Israeli or other air strikes against perceived Iran Nuclear targets, my interest is what would Iran do once this is in operation? Their air power is pretty old and limited (F-15's?) though they have a big army I guess that wouldn't be much use.... how could they respond and what would the KSA (who I gather hate them) and others do?

Could it spread rapidly?
flash8 is offline  
Old 27th Jul 2018, 23:03
  #812 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Darkest Surrey
Posts: 5,816
Originally Posted by flash8 View Post
C'mon guys we shouldn't be bickering about bits 'n' pieces

Anyway as I said I reckon Iran is next, based on John "Psycho" Bolton's past and present statements... lets face it he doesn't like the place! He worries me....

Can anyone tell me how this is likely to evolve if it does start? I am sure initially will be Israeli or other air strikes against perceived Iran Nuclear targets, my interest is what would Iran do once this is in operation? Their air power is pretty old and limited (F-15's?) though they have a big army I guess that wouldn't be much use.... how could they respond and what would the KSA (who I gather hate them) and others do?

Could it spread rapidly?
I don't think it will be obvious at the start ...................... maybe something fired from Yemen with big impact where Saudi's blame Iran.
Then start lobbing stuff at Qatar as claim it is supporting Iran and then it just spirals.
Figure Saudi's will attempt to use their buckets of sunshine maybe get 1 away before they get clobbered by one of the UN SC 5 with multiple ones and the Pakista decide to use one of theirs with same result.
racedo is offline  
Old 28th Jul 2018, 18:43
  #813 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Hotel Sheets, Downtown Plunketville
Age: 72
Posts: 687
There are quite a few bush fires starting here and there. Will they all combine to make a very big conflagration. Our focus is currently in the Middle East, but the situation in the Far East is also unsettled. China is by far the the greatest threat in that area.
The Week poses the question in their article published on 24 July. It can be read at :Are we heading towards World War 3? | The Week UK
Here is an extract from it:
"Former Trump adviser Steve Bannon went one step further in March of last year, saying: “We’re going to war in the South China Sea in five to ten years… There’s no doubt about that.”"
Chronus is offline  
Old 28th Jul 2018, 18:44
  #814 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Hotel Sheets, Downtown Plunketville
Age: 72
Posts: 687
There are quite a few bush fires starting here and there. Will they all combine to make a very big conflagration. Our focus is currently in the Middle East, but the situation in the Far East is also unsettled. China is by far the the greatest threat in that area.
The Week poses the question in their article published on 24 July. It can be read at :Are we heading towards World War 3? | The Week UK
Here is an extract from it:
"Former Trump adviser Steve Bannon went one step further in March of last year, saying: “We’re going to war in the South China Sea in five to ten years… There’s no doubt about that.”"
Chronus is offline  
Old 28th Jul 2018, 20:16
  #815 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 674
Originally Posted by Chronus View Post
Here is an extract from it:
"Former Trump adviser Steve Bannon went one step further in March of last year, saying: “We’re going to war in the South China Sea in five to ten years… There’s no doubt about that.”"
Yes, but he himself won’t!
Maybe it’s about time we forced those that start wars to fight in them!
Stan Woolley is online now  
Old 28th Jul 2018, 20:29
  #816 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Москва/Ташкент
Age: 49
Posts: 781
Maybe it’s about time we forced those that start wars to fight in them!
Blair, Cameron (Libya), Obama, The Bush clan.... none of them ever saw active service, or any service in fact...
Actually only one president comes to mind as being war averse... well two... Jimmy Carter... and oddly enough Bill Clinton (although he wasn't totally clean he was far more than most regarding war).
flash8 is offline  
Old 28th Jul 2018, 21:29
  #817 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Darkest Surrey
Posts: 5,816
Originally Posted by flash8 View Post
Blair, Cameron (Libya), Obama, The Bush clan.... none of them ever saw active service, or any service in fact...
Actually only one president comes to mind as being war averse... well two... Jimmy Carter... and oddly enough Bill Clinton (although he wasn't totally clean he was far more than most regarding war).
I believe it was stated at the time that NO US service personnel died in combat during Carter's Presidency which has not occurred for a long time if ever.

Think this excluded fated Iram hostage mission
racedo is offline  
Old 29th Jul 2018, 20:16
  #818 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Texas
Age: 60
Posts: 5,340
Originally Posted by flash8 View Post
and oddly enough Bill Clinton (although he wasn't totally clean he was far more than most regarding war).
The residents of Belgrade will probably want a quiet word with you on that one. 1999 was the year, 70 days the length of the bombing of Serbia. That "not a war" has IMO colored US/Russian relationships for nearly two decades.
@racedo quite right about Carter, the American public had a healthy case of war fatigue thanks to Viet Nam. (And good point on the Desert 1 dead not being counted by Carter apologists, given the rampant anti military sentiment among the liberals in the US in the 70's. I faced it with some frequency, even among friends).
I am sure that President Carter himself, on the other hand, felt the death of each of those servicemen (at Desert 1) deeply and personally.
Lonewolf_50 is offline  
Old 29th Jul 2018, 20:34
  #819 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: se england
Posts: 1,126
Nukes make no sense due to collateral damage to often friendly countries neighbouring an 'enemy'. Eg Saudis nuke Qatar bye bye Dharan and a few thousand Americans too. Can you nuke NK without impacting RoK-no? Could Russia use nukes in Ukraine -no. On the other hand if you are a very large nation with no militarily significant or belicose neighbours and you are oceans away from most other land masses then maybe they are viable.

If there is going to be nuclear conflict the nation that starts it is the only nation that has used nukes and that is the USA, all potential targets are thousands of miles away unless one includes Alaska and Siberia. Sorry to be blunt but this idea that only a few countries can have nuclear weapons cannot be sustained unless current nuclear powers scale back. Western powers and that includes the US have to realise that in the 21st century it is not for them alone to determine whats right and wrong in the world.
pax britanica is offline  
Old 29th Jul 2018, 20:36
  #820 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Texas
Age: 60
Posts: 5,340
Would you rather the Chinese did that, pax? Determine what's right and wrong in the world?
Lonewolf_50 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.