West Asia News and Discussions (YEMEN, gulf)

SBajwa · Post by **SBajwa** » 19 Sep 2014 20:47

Check the chronology of the events.

1. Founder dies at his youngest wife's house, without appointing a successor but giving all hints that his son-in-law (also Son of his uncle (i.e. younger brother of Mo's father i.e. Chacha) Ali is next.

2. Even before the burial, Abu Bakr the father-in-law of Mo convenes a meeting of all the people around them., i.e. Umar, Uthman and himself., Ali never shows up to this meeting (according to their tradition one has to bury the body before anything else (in This case the body was buried in the place where he died (Aisha's house) as his last wishes). The meeting declares Abu Bakr to be the first khalifa.

3. Then the next Umar is picked.
4. Then the next Uthman is picked.
5. Uthman is murdered and Aisha on this side picks up the Fight with Ali. and the famous battle of Camel is fought.
6. Ali is the 4th Khalifa.
7. The Khwarrij (Similar people to current ISIS, Wahabis, Tablighi, Salafi but the first) attacked Ali at Kuffa and murders him.
8. Muawiyah (The second of the ummayads first one being uthman) becomes the khalifa.
9. Muawiyah conspires to murder Ali's son Hasan (who has retired to Mecca without any wishes to be khalifa).
10. Hussain (the second son of Ali) now leads a charge against Muawiyah and is murdered at Battle of Karbala.

Thus... now you can see!! that there is no way Shia-Sunnis will unite., either one of them has to be "Very weak" to give up hope
BTW... fights between Shia and Sunni are called "Fitna" by both sides. Fitna according to Quran means "Sedition".

Anand K · Post by **Anand K** » 19 Sep 2014 21:09

Abu Ubeidah was the original choice for the third Caliph, i. e. Heir apparent to Omar .... He was apparently acceptable even to Ali who was expecting the post since Abu Bakr 's short reign. But then the Rashidun armies in Syria and Palestine were stricken by the plague. Abu Ubeidah fell to this plague as well. Then Osman prevailed and set the ball rolling.

Abu Ubeidah was also one of the wiser, mild mannered ones... He was actually offered the post of Caliph right after Muhammad's death by some accounts. Perhaps would have kept the flock in line with diplomacy when the cracks started to deepen. Well the Ridda wars were also over and they could show magnanimity from that position of strength...

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 19 Sep 2014 23:40

Paul · Post by **Paul** » 20 Sep 2014 23:49

Watch @ 0:55 The Islamist thug is partially covered by the car but still gets it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rl2oFbe-jTY

Paul · Post by **Paul** » 20 Sep 2014 23:55

I get the feeling a lot of the ISIS wave coming from Turkey comprise of Caucasians who are uprooted from Chechen-Inghushetia regions.

US may have an incentive to let the ISIS go if they can provide a base for the Chechens to forment trouble against the Russians in the Caucasus thus resurrecting the Chechen campaign.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 21 Sep 2014 05:19

The US's concentration camp routine under the Bush administration.Those responsible were guilty of war crimes and must be put on trial at the Hague.This is the official US Senate Intel Committ. report. Even the evidence that they would've been able to get their hands on would've been a fraction of the truth.

Al-Qaeda suspects were brought to the 'point of death' during 'real torture' by CIA
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world ... 17388.html

US Senate's forthcoming 'Torture Report' will 'deeply shock' people
Ian Johnston

Sunday 07 September 2014
At least two al-Qaeda suspects were brought to the “point of death” during “real torture” by CIA officials following the 9/11 attacks, a security source has claimed.

The insider said Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, allegedly the mastermind of the 9/11 attacks on the World Trade Centre and Pentagon, and at least one other person were not simply waterboarded, which is designed to simulate the sensation of drowning.

“They weren’t just pouring water over their heads or over a cloth,” the source told The Daily Telegraph.

“They were holding them under water until the point of death, with a doctor present to make sure they did not go too far. This was real torture.”

The US Senate is planning to publish a 3,600-page document – dubbed the Torture Report – spelling out what happened to al-Qaeda suspects in US custody. Another source said the report would “deeply shock” people in the US.

Dianne Feinstein, who chairs the Senate Intelligence Committee, has said the report will reveal “brutality that stands in stark contrast to our values as a nation”.

A third source told the Telegraph that tactics used during questioning were more savage than had been admitted to date, saying “they got medieval on his ass” about the treatment of Mohammed and another detainee.

Amrit Singh, a lawyer and author of Administration of Torture, which details the George W Bush administration’s torture policy, said: “Given the lengths that Bush-era CIA officials went to cover up the truth, including destroying videotapes depicting waterboarding of prisoners, it comes as no surprise that the torture was more brutal than previously revealed.

“It is, however, something that the American public has a right to know about, and an obligation to reckon with, and these revelations only underscore the urgent need for release of the Senate intelligence committee report.”

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 21 Sep 2014 09:42

Saudi acquiring IRBM from China via CIA

Looks like the new Solid Fuel IRBM from China/CIA coupled with Nuke from Pakistan would be Saudis counter to Iran Nuke.

China Secretly Sold Saudi Arabia DF-21 Missiles With CIA Approval

When India acquired Cryo engine in 1993 when neither Russia nor India was part of MTCR we were immediately placed under MTCR Cat 2 sanction , for this deal US should place Saudi and China in MTCR Cat 1 sanction for supplying entire missile.......so much for Proliferation and Missile Control Regiems

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 21 Sep 2014 16:01

Intresting, so DF21 Warhead is connected like A-II and A-II interstages. Didn't know it was used other than the Agnis.

vishvak · Post by **vishvak** » 21 Sep 2014 22:15

So pakis and Chinese sold nukes and delivery missiles to Saudi & no one said a word?

Notice how they are all secular. Silence of moal keepers & watchdogs is defeaning. In India people are alarmed about nuke power plant but international moral keepers are silent about nuclear weapons changing hands!

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 21 Sep 2014 23:19

NSFW warning. Saudi Kill one Indian in most brutal way right there in Public

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jH9YK3sgGQk#t=18

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 22 Sep 2014 04:04

Jhujar wrote:NSFW warning. Saudi Kill one Indian in most brutal way right there in Public

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jH9YK3sgGQk#t=18

That was truly barbaric. The guy came back a second time and appeared the hammer the dead guy again, but it seems he was only gesturing. What the hell is that about. Disgusting.

IndraD · Post by **IndraD** » 23 Sep 2014 15:35

From what is understood, KSA is another rogue nation now, only diff being Unkil is on their side

In other news Unkil & desert gang is claiming they have launched attack on IS, sky full of B52, drone etc etc

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... Syria.html

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 23 Sep 2014 16:41

Oh, cool! Boeing and Raytheon stock should be going up. JDAMs, Hellfires...coffee-pots and Pakistan Chair covers for the B-42s...

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 23 Sep 2014 17:48

Finally,US/coalition strikes in Syria against a rabid mutant ISIS which openly declared war upon the US and the West.But air strikes aren't enough.Strikes should be made against ISIS's oil installations which fund it,if ground troops cannot build upon the air strikes and air superiority that the coalition is able to bring to the battlefield.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/s ... s-in-syria
US confirms 14 air strikes against Isis in Syria

US and allies have deployed jets and missiles against militants
Isis stronghold of Raqqa is among targets, says US official
‘Dozens’ of fighters are killed, says monitoring group
Bahrain, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, UAE and Jordan involved
Syria air strikes: latest developments

Martin Chulov in Beirut, Spencer Ackerman in New York and Dan Roberts in Washington
theguardian.com, Tuesday 23 September 2014
Amateur footage purports to show the first US air strikes against Isis in Syria

The most intensive barrage of air strikes launched against Islamic State (Isis) since the US fight against the terror group began last month thundered into northern Syria until after dawn on Tuesday, heralding a new phase of a war that Sunni regional powers have vowed to help lead.

Large explosions were reported in the group’s stronghold of Raqqa, in eastern Syria, as well as in Idlib province. There were unconfirmed reports that attacks had also taken place near Deir Azzor and western Aleppo.

A Pentagon statement said the 14 strikes against Isis targets were carried out with Bahrain, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Qatar. Jordan confirmed it its airforce had “destroyed a number of targets that belong to some terrorist groups that sought to commit terror acts inside Jordan” without making explicit reference to Syria.

The Syrian foreign ministry said on Tuesday that the US informed its UN envoy before launching the strikes. The US denied the claim.

Raqqa was among the targets of the operation, which began in the early hours of Tuesday morning local time. The head of the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, Rami Abdulrahman, told Reuters by telephone in Beirut that the air strikes hit checkpoints in Raqqa city and surrounding areas. Dozens of Isis fighters were killed or wounded in the attacks, he said.

Buildings that had been used openly as Isis command centres in Raqqa were destroyed. However, they had long been evacuated as momentum built towards the attacks, and their occupants had melted into the streets of the city, which the middle of last year became the first Syrian city to fall completely outside the control of the regime.

Fighter jets, bomber aircraft, drones and Tomahawk missiles were used in an operation the Pentagon press secretary, Rear Admiral John Kirby, described as “ongoing”. The US military’s Central Command in Tampa, Florida, said 47 missiles were fired from the USS Arleigh Burke and USS Philippine Sea operating from international waters. It said all aircraft returned safely.

At least eight explosions targeted a second group, known as Khorasan, near Idlib, which US officials described as “a network of seasoned al-Qaida veterans” plotting against US and western interests from inside Syria.

Khorasan has its origins in the mountains of Pakistan and Afghanistan and is little known in northern Syria, where the Isis leadership, drawn mainly from Iraq, has increasingly held sway over the past year.

The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights claimed that a third group, the al-Nusra front, an al-Qaida branch that has fought Isis, was also hit. This has not been confirmed by the US.

The president of the Syrian Opposition Coalition, Hadi al Bahra, said the strikes were necessary. “We have called for air strikes such as those that commenced tonight with a heavy heart and deep concern, as these strikes begin in our own homeland. We insist that utmost care is taken to avoid civilian casualties. Our people have been suffering at the hands of Isis for over a year.”

Kirby said the strikes were ordered by army general Lloyd Austin, the commander of US forces in the Middle East and South Asia, “under authorisation granted to him by the commander in chief”.

The US military said it also conducted strikes against Isis south-west of Kirkuk, bringing the total number of attacks against Isis targets in Iraqi territory to 194.

The White House has been under mounting pressure in recent days to show other countries, particularly in the Arab world, are willing to take an active military role in its coalition against Isis.

Last week, the secretary of state, John Kerry, promised sceptical lawmakers in a series of briefings on Capitol Hill that he would be in a position to name the unspecified active partners before the end of the week.

But it was the upcoming UN general assembly in New York, at which Obama will chair a meeting of the security council, that the politics of having countries such as Saudi Arabia, Jordan and the United Arab Emirates will be crucial for the US.

Obama is hoping to use the special session to secure international backing for a tough resolution against Isis, including an international travel ban on foreign fighters travelling from other countries.

The strikes come months in advance of any support on the ground. With Obama ruling out US combat troops for now, there is no capable ground force in eastern Syria to capitalise on the air strikes by seizing territory back from Isis.

The US plan is to train a force of Syrian rebels for that purpose in Saudi Arabia, but the training has not begun yet. The Pentagon estimates that it will take at least eight months for the first units to be ready.

Asked on Friday by the Guardian what an air campaign in Syria could accomplish without a ground component, Kirby said: “What air strikes would enable us to do is to continue to put pressure on them, particularly the safe havens and sanctuaries that they enjoy in Syria.”

The air strikes are a long-telegraphed move by the Pentagon, albeit a reluctant one for many senior military officers and the White House. In June, after Isis overran the Iraqi city of Mosul, US defence officials speculated that an American reprisal would likely need to target the group in Syria as well as Iraq, in order to inflict lasting damage.

Obama said in a televised address on 10 September that he would expand the US war against Isis into Syria, reversing a longstanding caution against involving the US in the bloody confusion of Syria’s civil war. Political and media pressure on Obama to launch air strikes against Isis and then expand the war into Syria has been intense, despite much scepticism on Capitol Hill of Obama’s war strategy.

The escalation of the war into Syria comes without explicit congressional authorisation. Last week, Congress agreed to provide $500m requested by Obama for training Syrian rebels, but deferred a vote specifically on the war against Isis until after November’s legislative elections. Obama has asserted that the 2001 Authorisation to Use Military Force against al-Qaida provides him with sufficient legal authority, something few legal scholars have embraced, owing to al-Qaida’s public rejection of Isis earlier this year.

The US has denied speculation that it will work with the government of Bashar al-Assad against Isis, a common enemy. Syria’s use of chemical weapons in its protracted civil war had earlier led Obama to consider strikes against the Assad regime. Now, the US finds itself in the position of conducting an operation that could potentially deliver strategic benefits to Assad.

General Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the US joint chiefs of staff, has warned that Assad’s air defences – mostly configured on Syria’s western coast, far from land held by Isis – are formidable, yet there is no indication that US and allied planes were under attack from Assad in the latest operation.

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 23 Sep 2014 18:43

PhilipJi, don't tell me you are taking this crap seriously. I did notice last night while flipping through useless US channels, as also in this morning's newspapers, some target practice is going on. And mouthpieces giving running commentary. How often have been seeing this garbage being played out? Meanwhile the real terrorist are flourishing in Rawalpindi. Please see Karzai's last speech.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 23 Sep 2014 19:07

Looks like brutus fulmen. All sound and fury.

IndraD · Post by **IndraD** » 23 Sep 2014 19:29

Bahrain, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, UAE fighitng war on terror ha ha....

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 23 Sep 2014 23:10

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morn ... mic-state/

Targeted by U.S. airstrikes: The secretive al-Qaeda cell was plotting an ‘imminent attack’

In addition to a broader campaign of airstrikes against Islamic State targets across Syria on Monday night, the United States also pounded a little-known but well-resourced al-Qaeda cell that some American officials fear could pose a direct threat to the United States.

The Pentagon said in a statement early Tuesday that the United States conducted eight strikes west of Aleppo against the cell, called the Khorasan Group, targeting its “training camps, an explosives and munitions production facility, a communications building and command and control facilities.”

Army Lt. Gen. William C. Mayville Jr., director of operations for the Joint Chiefs of Staff, later told reporters that the group was in the “final stages of plans to execute major attacks against Western targets and potentially the U.S. homeland.” He added, “We believe the Khorasan Group was nearing the execution phase of an attack either in Europe” or the United States, having attempted to recruit Westerners who can more easily enter the target countries.

vishvak · Post by **vishvak** » 24 Sep 2014 02:24

Meanwhile, this is what happened in Turkey, a NATO member country.
ISIS Draws a Steady Stream of Recruits From Turkey

..
Turkey has been criticized at home and abroad for an open border policy in the early days of the Syrian uprising.
..
“It began when a stranger with a long, coarse beard started showing up in the neighborhood,” recalled Arif Akbas, the neighborhood’s elected headman of 30 years, who oversees local affairs. “The next thing we knew, all the drug addicts started going to the mosque.”
..
it appealed to disadvantaged youth in less prosperous parts of Turkey. “When you fight, they offer $150 a day. Then everything else is free,” he said. “Even the shopkeepers give you free products out of fear.”
..
“There are clearly recruitment centers being set up in Ankara and elsewhere in Turkey, but the government doesn’t seem to care,”
..

Turkey, a NATO member, seems to be at forefront of helping 'rebels' whichever way it can.
twitter.com link- logistical support to ISIS in moving their tanks to the fronts

All satellites in the world fail to notice any of such things. No such images in search engine sites either!
Video - in this link too, CNN didn't authenticate the video but there are reports of ISIL using tanks to attack villages.

Another genocide and more than hundred thousand refugees reported from place called Kobani, near border of Turkey.
link
Read it all.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 24 Sep 2014 10:10

How do we know that Assad's forces are not getting hit by the Khan's. The second question is what happens to Syria's sovereignty & integrity as a result of this strikes. The 3rd question is, if the Syrians chose to go on the offensive against the rebels at this time. What will the Khan's do.

Bomb the Syrian's !!!.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 24 Sep 2014 10:34

Whatever the intensity of the strikes against ISIS,the fact that it has happened is ONLY because ISIS threatened the West as I noted.Nothing to do with its war against Assad,etc. The US/West should've actually bombed Qatar which like Pak has become the equivalent of the Gulf's rogue state.NATO member Turkey too,with grandiose dreams of the dawn of another Ottoman empire is playing the field,supporting any ungodly entity which furthers its interests. The Saudis and Emirate leadership were p*ssed off with Qatar for not playing in sync with them and removed their envoys not too long ago.

Sadly,Pandora's box was opened when Dubya Bush decided to invade Iraq,exterminate Saddam,grab Iraq's oil and used lies and chicanery to achieve his goal.But he and his coalition partners were unable to withstand the Iraqi resistance,Al Q and the emergence of entities like IS,strongly supported by the Sunni sheikdoms and kingdoms,wanting to prevent Iran from gaining the upper hand in the region.The US turned a blind eye to it all,and has now lost the plot.Perhaps the silver lining in the latest strikes is that aviation buffs will be happy to know that the F-22 has been used in combat for the first time,in the second wave of strikes.

IndraD · Post by **IndraD** » 24 Sep 2014 11:03

OT but recently had a chance to see F 35 and it is awesome

member_20292 · Post by **member_20292** » 24 Sep 2014 11:42

^^^ Arrey yaar, but it's American. And has a multitude of documented problems.

We can't say such positive things about American arms and ammo on this board, and support an Indian initiative to buy such things.

You are SUPPOSED to pull up some article which decries the F 35.

C'mon yaar.

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 24 Sep 2014 11:42

Pratyush wrote:How do we know that Assad's forces are not getting hit by the Khan's. The second question is what happens to Syria's sovereignty & integrity as a result of this strikes. The 3rd question is, if the Syrians chose to go on the offensive against the rebels at this time. What will the Khan's do.

Bomb the Syrian's !!!.

The answers are here
http://www.dnaindia.com/world/report-ba ... ef-2021133
Bashar al-Assad failed to wipe out terror havens: US defends Syria airstrikes in letter to UN chief

The United States told the United Nations on Tuesday it led airstrikes against Islamic State militants in Syria because President Bashar al-Assad's government had failed to wipe out safe havens used by the group to launch attacks on Iraq.

In a letter to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, US Ambassador to the United Nations Samantha Power wrote, "The Syrian regime has shown that it cannot and will not confront these safe havens effectively itself."

The strikes were needed to eliminate a threat to Iraq, the United States and its allies, she wrote, citing Article 51 of the UN Charter, which covers an individual or collective right to self-defense against armed attack.

"States must be able to defend themselves... when, as is the case here, the government of the state where the threat is located is unwilling or unable to prevent the use of its territory for such attacks," Power wrote in the letter obtained by Reuters.

"Accordingly, the United States has initiated necessary and proportionate military actions in Syria in order to eliminate the ongoing (Islamic State) threat to Iraq," she wrote, adding that action was taken also against al Qaeda elements in Syria known as Khorasan "to address terrorist threats that they pose to the United States and our partners and allies".

Ban circulated the letter to the UN Security Council, diplomats said. Under Article 51, the 15-member body must immediately be informed of any action that states take in self-defense against armed attack.

The United States and Arab allies bombed Syria for the first time on Tuesday, killing scores of Islamic State fighters and members of a separate al Qaeda-linked group, opening a new front against militants by joining Syria's three-year-old civil war.

Syria's UN Ambassador Bashar Ja'afari told Reuters on Tuesday that Power informed him in person of imminent US and Arab airstrikes against Islamic State targets on Syrian territory on Monday hours beforehand.

Ja'afari said: "We're in close coordination with Iraq." The US mission confirmed that Power had informed Ja'afari.

Iraq notified the Security Council in a letter on Saturday of its request for the United States to lead efforts to strike Islamic State strongholds because, it said, a safe haven for the militants in Syria had made its border "impossible to defend."

In the letter, Iraqi Foreign Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari wrote that the safe haven for the radical Sunni Muslim group outside Iraq's borders was "a direct threat to the security of our people and territory." He did not identify Syria by name.

Power wrote in her letter to Ban on Tuesday that the Iraqi government asked the United States "to lead international efforts to strike (Islamic State) sites and military strongholds in Syria in order to end the continuing attacks on Iraq."

Ban told reporters on Tuesday that Islamic State militants pose a serious threat to international peace and security, echoing language that the UN Security Council has used in the past to greenlight military interventions. "I'm aware that today's strikes were not carried out at the direct request of the Syrian government but I note that the government was informed beforehand," he said.

"I also note that the strikes took place in areas no longer under the effective control of that government," Ban added. "It is undeniable and the subject of broad international consensus that these extremist groups pose an immediate threat to international peace and security."

1. Iraq complains of "a direct threat to the security of our people and territory" and asks US to help put down the threat.
2. US and Iraq invoke Article 51 of the UN Charter which covers an individual or collective right to self-defense against armed attack.
"States must be able to defend themselves... when, as is the case here, the government of the state where the threat is located is unwilling or unable to prevent the use of its territory for such attacks," Power wrote in the letter obtained by Reuters.
3. Syria has been informed so looks like in the short-term Bashar al-Assad controlled areas are not going to be attacked not that they could do anything to prevent it.
4. Immediately Islamic State militants becomes a serious threat to international peace and security per Ban. This provides the mission a sort of "UN endorsement" with Ban relying on language the UN Security Council has used in the past to greenlight military interventions. He goes on to add "I also note that the strikes took place in areas no longer under the effective control of that government. It is undeniable and the subject of broad international consensus that these extremist groups pose an immediate threat to international peace and security."

So the action is described as inline with "broad international consensus" not "international consensus" or agreement or UN SC resolution.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 24 Sep 2014 12:11

OK reading the above. In theory, under article 51 the action could easily spread to the areas controlled by Assad and no one can do any thing about it. As the rational would be. That the existence of this regime allowed for the ISIS to be created & strengthened. So we must deal with the root cause of the problem & that is Assad regime in Syria.

All in all very interesting state of affairs.

habal · Post by **habal** » 24 Sep 2014 12:42

3. Syria has been informed so looks like in the short-term Bashar al-Assad controlled areas are not going to be attacked not that they could do anything to prevent it.

Well, not really ! They can do a lot of things. You can read what Dempsey has said, about this. And there is Russian naval fleet in mediterranean also covering Syrian airspace by naval SAM. If these were not around the Amrikis, with their omnipresent bloodlust would already have gone haywire all over Syria by now, afterall they have their rat-faced allies (Saudis), and their small sultan wannabe (Turkey) and wannabe rats (pakis, bangla, qatari) to take care of apart from their military and missile making industries which constantly need human sacrifice and are on lookout for sacrificial offerings especially anywhere around middle-east.

And if the Amrikis try any hanky-panky in Syria, then this is the warning shot from across the warm mediterrean and from beyond the black sea from the icy north.

http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/isis-t ... rt-n208776

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 24 Sep 2014 13:40

>>How do we know that Assad's forces are not getting hit by the Khan's.

A deal has been done, be sure of it. Involving both Syria and Iran.

>>The second question is what happens to Syria's sovereignty & integrity as a result of this strikes.

It will not be worse than it was before the strikes. It may be better. But Syria will not be split, and Assad will stay in power (except in the unlikely event that an assassination attempt succeeds). There is a greater possibility of Iraq being partitioned. In short, life goes on. Almost certainly there will be ISIS blowback in the West, Gulf and Turkey in coming years. It will be manageable. But it will consolidate sentiment against Islam among non-Muslims in Europe and Asia. That, in turn, will increasingly constrain traditional parties that are elected into government towards increasingly centre-right to extreme-right positions, or risk losing their voter base. There's a nasty hairball rolling towards the MENA region, from the West and East. It won't be a pretty picture when it unravels in that part of the world.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 24 Sep 2014 14:15

More detail on Saudi China IRBM Deal

Saudi Arabia has acquired Chinese ballistic missiles DF-21

As reported by the web resource www.armyrecognition.com with reference to the Saudi newspaper "Okaz", a retired Saudi Major General Anwar Eski publicly confirmed that Saudi Arabia has acquired Chinese missile systems with medium-range ballistic missile DF-21.

"Saudi Arabia has acquired ballistic missiles DF - 21 in China to protect Mecca and Medina," - said during press conference, Dr Anwar Eski (Anvar Eshqi), retired Major-General and the Joint Military Advisor Council of Saudi Arabia.

"The Saudi military really got missiles DF - 21 from China, and the integration of missiles, including full maintenance and upgrading of infrastructure completed," - quoted Eski state newspaper "Okaz". In addition to protecting the two holy cities of Islam, DF - 21 also will be used to form a "defense umbrella" to protect allies Saudi Arabia in the Persian Gulf, he added, pointing out that the missiles are not intended to attack.

DF-21 missiles have a range of between 1000 - 1700 miles (1850 - 3150 km), and is believed to have a maximum speed of about 5 M. Saudi Arabia signed a contract with China for the purchase of DF -21 in 2007, but none of the parties has not publicly acknowledged in a Delco, as reported by the American magazine "Newsweek". Saudi Arabia, probably acquired these missiles, and now announced their acquisition, to deter Iran.

According to "Newsweek", C onnect States approved the acquisition of DF -21 Saudi Arabia, because she got a non-nuclear version of the missile. Eski, however, said that the acquired DF -21 can be equipped with a nuclear warhead. Decision of the government of Saudi Arabia to buy Chinese, not American missile system shows that Riyadh is moving away from Washington in its foreign policy towards Iran and Syria.

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 24 Sep 2014 14:35

So DF-21s with covert Chinese nuclear warheads under semi-overt "Pak warhead" label, completely denied by all... Sweet set-up.

member_20292 · Post by **member_20292** » 24 Sep 2014 15:01

and khan winking at all of this?

khan wants the cheap DF 12s for Saudi to attack Iran. It cant transfer it directly, so chinese maal it is.

Paks nukes are traded for their ijjjat and more.

The way Khan traps and puts pressure on its prey is a sight to behold.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 24 Sep 2014 19:36

This is the old US-PRC playbook of transferring WMD to munnas. This was done in the past wrt TSP.
First Chinese nukes to be delivered using non-nuclear US supplied F-16s which got the required upgrades from Turkey and later Chinese M-9- M11, North Korean NoDong etc.

End result will be Iran will go nuclear.

Only nukes deter nukes as Gen Sunderji said.

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 24 Sep 2014 23:26

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/09/ ... P520140924

Algerian militants behead kidnapped French tourist

Algerian militants have beheaded French tourist Herve Gourdel, who was kidnapped by gunmen on Sunday in what the group said was a response to France's action against Islamic State militants in Iraq.

In a video released by his captors, Gourdel, a 55-year-old from Nice, is seen kneeling with his arms tied behind his back before four masked militants who read out a statement in Arabic criticising France's intervention.

They then pushed him on his side and held him down. The video does not show the beheading, but a militant later holds the head up to the camera.

"This is why the Caliphate Soldiers in Algeria have decided to punish France, by executing this man, and to defend our beloved Islamic State," one of the militants says in the statement he read out.

France's President Francois Hollande confirmed the death of Gourdel, and vowed that French military operations against Islamic State would continue.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 24 Sep 2014 23:55

Looks like ISIS Modus operandi is being copy catted.

vivek.rao · Post by **vivek.rao** » 25 Sep 2014 02:02

Can we use Article 51 of UN charter to pound Shittistan terror camps since they are attacking us? Would unkil back us?

Y. Kanan · Post by **Y. Kanan** » 25 Sep 2014 02:09

habal wrote:And if the Amrikis try any hanky-panky in Syria, then this is the warning shot from across the warm mediterrean and from beyond the black sea from the icy north.
Putin Considers Throwing Russia Into ISIS Fight: Report
http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/isis-t ... rt-n208776

I have no doubt whatsoever the Americans will shift their bombing to Assad as soon as they've dropped enough bombs on empty buildings to convince everyone there was an actual effort to destroy ISIS. It's all for show, like the countless Paki "offensives" that have been launched against the Taliban over the years.

America is determined to advance Sunni interests in the Middle East, not just to please its main terrorist allies (Saudi, Qatar, Pakistan, etc) but also because its good for business. And by "business" I mean the US military industrial complex and oil sector. Runaway Sunni militancy creates endless chaos and destruction throughout the entire region and hopefully (from US POV) even extending into the Caucuses and Russia itself.

Russia must quickly deploy forces to Syria and start carrying out its own military strikes against ISIS. The presence of Russian military personnel in Syria would likely dissuade the Americans from attacking Assad's forces. The US may be a war mongering nation but they're also a nation of cowards. The war mongering is reserved for small, helpless countries with no ability to strike back. They have no interest in directly fighting Russia.

Putin's going to have to get over his inherent indecisiveness; there's no time to dally for months as he did in Ukraine.

Muppalla · Post by **Muppalla** » 25 Sep 2014 02:34

From a India point of view fall of Assad is not bad. More Sunni power and clashes between them beyond Iraq is good.

Dipanker · Post by **Dipanker** » 25 Sep 2014 16:50

Looks like the bombing is serving the intended purpose, make ISIS fight ASAD!

Islamist fighters advance in Syria despite U.S. strikes

member_20317 · Post by **member_20317** » 25 Sep 2014 17:25

ramana wrote:This is the old US-PRC playbook of transferring WMD to munnas. This was done in the past wrt TSP.
First Chinese nukes to be delivered using non-nuclear US supplied F-16s which got the required upgrades from Turkey and later Chinese M-9- M11, North Korean NoDong etc.

End result will be Iran will go nuclear.

Only nukes deter nukes as Gen Sunderji said.

Interventionism using the bahana of ISIS will surely convince Iran and Putin to do exactly that. In which case we Indians should also have our TN tested in Iran. Unfortunately this route will again force us to go in for a small boom. Iran can off course cross in style with multiple tests.

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 25 Sep 2014 19:40

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-09-2 ... rikes.html

Islamic State Oil Refineries in Syria Hit in Airstrikes

“These small-scale refineries provided fuel to run ISIL operations, money to finance their continued attacks throughout Iraq and Syria and an economic asset to support their future operations,” the command said in the statement, using an acronym for another name for the militant group.

Islamic State may have been raising more than $2 million a day from oil sales in Iraq and Syria, paid either in cash or bartered goods, according to Luay al-Khatteeb, a visiting fellow at the Brookings Institution’s Doha Center in Qatar.

abhik · Post by **abhik** » 25 Sep 2014 19:59

Muppalla wrote:From a India point of view fall of Assad is not bad. More Sunni power and clashes between them beyond Iraq is good.

The clashes are between the Sunnis and the Shi'as. The current balance of power is already heavily in favour of the Sunnis, Assad failing will make it even worse. We should be looking to even out the sides.