maqroll Posted January 4, 2016 Share Posted January 4, 2016 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted January 5, 2016 Moderator Share Posted January 5, 2016 We seem more fussy about some places than others. We should be equally concerned about all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eames Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 (edited) Is it just me or is there going to be a huge Middle Eastern **** in the near future. A massive Shia vs Sunni religious war? (worth noting that yes - the Middle East is already a but of a mess) Edited January 5, 2016 by Eames Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awol Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 4 hours ago, Eames said: Is it just me or is there going to be a huge Middle Eastern **** in the near future. A massive Shia vs Sunni religious war? (worth noting that yes - the Middle East is already a but of a mess) No it's not just you, and yes that seems increasingly likely. Saudi and its mad King are in a very tight spot and its foreign policy is in ruins. Russia has bollixed Saudi's attempt to overthrow Assad; the Iran nuclear deal will put them back on the path to international reintegration and inevitable Middle East hegemony; Having attacked Yemen 40% its population (Zayidi Shias) are kicking their arses; Oil prices are in the basement for the foreseeable; Iraq is dominated by the Shia majority population and lost to Saudi control; their counter terrorism alliance (attempt to shotgun the Sunni Muslim world into supporting their anti-Shia sectarianism) was laughed out of Cairo, Jakarta and Islamabad; ISIS is rather popular with its general population... and did I mention the King is mad as a box of frogs? Saudi's in the deep and brown stuff, so their only option is to try and provoke a war with Iran to draw in the US and bail them out. Given their epic misjudgements to date that is probably not a good plan, but it won't stop them trying. Hopefully Iran will keep its cool and not rise to the bait (like Sheikh Nimr Al Nimr being executed) of which their will be more, but the regional blocks are forming quite clearly (both with outside sponsors) and it's hard to see how a general war at some point soon will be averted. Happy New Year. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villakram Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 As long as the 5th fleet w/ it's aircraft carrier lives in Bahrain then Saudi vs Iran will remain relatively cold, but the US did leave the gulf w/o an aircraft carrier for the first time in ages earlier this year. Nominally, this was to support work in Syria or some such but I'm sure this was also intended to send a msg to the Saudi's. I'd love to know what type of catastrophe Bandar is scheming these days... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glarmorgan Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 This comes down to the demise of the US in this region. Obama's unclear foreign policy brought this entire region (mainly the Saudis and Jordanians) into the current situation. The Saudis were dependent of the US and while they see the Iranians enjoying the backing of the emerging Russian empire, the American presidents mumbles and letting this mayhem go on uninterrupted. Unless Obama foresaw this and made his decisions while taking such outcome as a realistic option, I can't really understand what's going on. The Russian influence will become stronger with time, taking this region back to the good old 70's... Dictatorships don't do too well with unstable times and this is just that. Unlike democracies (such as ours), dictators tend to take crazy steps when times become crazy. Still, I can't see a full scale war between the Saudis and the Iranians (especially due to the fact US will block it), but instability is bound to be a part of the life in the Persian gulf and its surroundings for the years to come. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awol Posted January 6, 2016 Share Posted January 6, 2016 5 hours ago, villakram said: As long as the 5th fleet w/ it's aircraft carrier lives in Bahrain then Saudi vs Iran will remain relatively cold, but the US did leave the gulf w/o an aircraft carrier for the first time in ages earlier this year. Nominally, this was to support work in Syria or some such but I'm sure this was also intended to send a msg to the Saudi's. I'd love to know what type of catastrophe Bandar is scheming these days... Bandar was sacked when King Salman came to the throne last year as part of a wider reshuffle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maqroll Posted January 6, 2016 Share Posted January 6, 2016 WW3, are you all ready for it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wainy316 Posted January 6, 2016 Share Posted January 6, 2016 WW3, are you all ready for it? Forget the Arab world the North Koreans are back in the picture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eames Posted January 6, 2016 Share Posted January 6, 2016 19 minutes ago, Wainy316 said: Forget the Arab world the North Koreans are back in the picture. Nah. If they too feisty Beijing will bitch slap them back into place. They might me nutters - but they know what they can/can't get away with. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villakram Posted January 6, 2016 Share Posted January 6, 2016 15 hours ago, Awol said: Bandar was sacked when King Salman came to the throne last year as part of a wider reshuffle. He's been "sacked" numerous times, and given his history I expect he is involved in the "dark" part of Saudi foreign policy, plausible deniability and all that or he's just free-lancing a little. That he's not in the news is interesting (and I'm not coming from conspiracy land here!). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KHV Posted January 6, 2016 Share Posted January 6, 2016 33 minutes ago, villakram said: He's been "sacked" numerous times, and given his history I expect he is involved in the "dark" part of Saudi foreign policy, plausible deniability and all that or he's just free-lancing a little. That he's not in the news is interesting (and I'm not coming from conspiracy land here!). Does his wife still give money to terrorists? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted January 6, 2016 Share Posted January 6, 2016 8 hours ago, Wainy316 said: Forget the Arab world the North Koreans are back in the picture. I don't see them as being a threat to "us" (as in the rest of the world) their ambitions are probably just over the 38th parallel rather than on a global scale my friend who is quite well connected in North and South Korea told me that the North believe they could take Seoul ( the internet will tell you that they can't due to America's superior forces !!) , ..indeed a few DPRK generals argue that they should take Seoul and then sue for peace and that China and America would probably accept it .. that bit I'm not so sure about , but the North have more than enough SAM's and home defence to see off any attack on Pyongyang so the best the US could do is drive them out of the South and hope a defeat brings about internal unrest and regime change Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted January 6, 2016 Share Posted January 6, 2016 From a position of ignorance here, but is the fear less about little Kim firing his nukes at Japan and Seoul and more about them deciding one random day 'yeah, **** it, let's sell one to ISIS for a million dollars and see what happens'? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted January 6, 2016 Share Posted January 6, 2016 25 minutes ago, chrisp65 said: From a position of ignorance here, but is the fear less about little Kim firing his nukes at Japan and Seoul and more about them deciding one random day 'yeah, **** it, let's sell one to ISIS for a million dollars and see what happens'? Isn't it more about the delivery system as much as the actual nuke ? So Isis would need a submarine ( any surface launcher presumably would be blown to smitherines long before Isis got it functioning currently conventional wisdom is that the DPRK aren't capable of producing a submarine sized nuke , they did claim a launch but experts decided the photos were faked , something about the hand pushing the launch button had too many digits 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted January 6, 2016 VT Supporter Share Posted January 6, 2016 The vaguely realistic military concern with North Korea is them marching on Seoul and sparking up the guns aimed directly for it. Them having a nuke is dangerous and potentially adds an awful strategic wrinkle to the relationships there, to say the least. But it's not the foremost concern. Were they to develop a nuclear weapon, them then selling to sometime like ISIS is nonsensical. Why waste the (considerable) money and effort to develop a weapon for sale? Nukes aren't cost effective weaponry if you're effectively going from scratch so to sell one after the cost and effort is daft. If you do sell it, you've effectively just potentially given a catastrophic weapon to someone who might use it against you. Particularly concerning when it's a non state entity that arguably answers to no master. And more over, from a practical point of view, what would ISIS actually do with it? You can't just light the end and watch what happens, you need infrastructure around a nuke to have it do anything. How would they transport it? Where do they store it? They can't launch it unless North Korea is providing a full service and chucking more money away building and staffing the necessary infrastructure to use it. Unless we're talking something like the Davy Crockett nuclear cannon, which whilst easy to use and move would also require ISIS to move around a small nuclear warhead and is the least practical weapon ever developed, and probably the only viable format currently for a non-state actor to attain. Or make a dirty bomb, which isn't really a nuclear weapon at all, closer to a chemical weapon really, and whilst horrendous, isn't a city destroying weapon. Which they could probably make far more easily without having to beg off North Korea. North Korea knows what's good for it, and that's play up every now and then to get attention, stroke their ego and hope it encourages China to hush them with more cash. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rugeley Villa Posted January 8, 2016 Share Posted January 8, 2016 isis attack hotel in egypt and wave the black isis flag from the roof top, reports of two dead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xann Posted March 28, 2016 Share Posted March 28, 2016 The Russians and Syrians recaptured Palmyra over the weekend. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ikantcpell Posted April 5, 2016 Share Posted April 5, 2016 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rugeley Villa Posted April 5, 2016 Share Posted April 5, 2016 spot on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts