Middle East conflict

[Marty_d]

Hang on a minute.

Since WW2 have the Yanks put boots on the ground on the request of any European country?

 

[Jerry_Atrick]

I didn't say European, I said northern hemisphere. 

 

And the support of America does not necessarily mean boots on teh ground, does it? Haven't seen US boots on the ground in Iran yet.

 

But since you ask, European, none. But no European nation can air to air refuel without the USA. 

 

Most of the weapons systems.. provided by the USA (though that is now changing). 

 

Where would NATO be, and the defence against the cold war without the USA? You could argue with the USA bases through Europe, there were boots on the ground to prevent a real war. No?

 

And here are a few that may be unpalatable, but were at the bequest of the respective government, as I understand. Happy to be proven wrong:

• Korean war - at the request of the South Korea
• Vietnam War - at the request of the South Vietnam
• Gulf War - at the request of the Kuwaitis.
• Syrian civil war - not by Syria of course, but by those that were part of Operation Inherent Resolve
• Although no boots on the ground, Ukraine - which is part of Europe (and now being criticsed for saying its a European thing to solve - and of course, appeasing if not siding with Pootin)

Outside the northern hemisphere, Taiwan relies heavily on USA for its sovereignty. Australia relies heavily on US miltirary equipment (can we air to air refuel??). And AUKUS is payback, I guess. 

 

 

 

 

Edited 5 hours ago by Jerry_Atrick

[Litespeed]

Jerry,

 

WTF are you talking about?

 

Yes , we can refuel as we have the highly effective Airbus refueling aircraft, as do European countries who are getting from under the USA for equipment. 

 

The same USA that effectively vetoes any use of equipment countries buy off them to help neighbours in trouble, Ukraine been a perfect example. The USA refused to allow the transfer of jets, tanks,missiles etc to Ukraine.

 

 

 

 

[Jerry_Atrick]

WTF am I talking about? Well, yeah, I got the Airbus thing wrong as before them, Europe relied on the US (and lately, I see US tankers refuelling European aircraft.. so not sure why).

 

But the rest? Are you saying that is all BS?

 

Yeah, Biden, who did live up to his nickname of sleeepy Joe when it came to Ukraine vetoed jets and other equipment. But Ukraine. a European country, still did ask for help - and still got over $20Bn of direct support from the USA. And finally, but too late, did get some old jets allowed to be transferred to them. Or did that minor fact  - and the rest of the post get missed?

 

 

 

Edited 4 hours ago by Jerry_Atrick

[red750]

59 minutes ago, Jerry_Atrick said:

(can we air to air refuel??)

Yes we can.

 

     RAAF KC-30A Multi Role Transport

          Based on the Airbus A330

      Doubles as Albo's Air Force One

 

 

[Litespeed]

Jerry,

That would be the same Ukraine that the USA promised protection from Russia, if it gave Russia it's nukes back.

 

The same USA that has ensured Europe pays inflated prices with restrictions on its military. The same that uses its bases in  foreign countries to use military and economic power to force countries into unfavourable trade deals.

 

The same country that has forced coups, overthrown elected governments and destroyed countries to suit their particular whim.

 

The USA is a militaristic predator not a benevolent friend.

 

 

 

 

[willedoo]

I think only Noddy and Big Ears would believe the world could happily tick along without major power dominance. Back to what I said earlier, the three choices to be dominated by are Russia, China and the U.S. Every power has it's pros and cons, but I'd still prefer to be under the domination of the U.S. than the other two. The Americans have their faults, but Putin and Xi don't really demonstrate any sort of society I'd like to live under. The Europeans will never get their act together to compete with the top three for power, not in your dreams.

[onetrack]

Quote

• Korean war - at the request of the South Korea

South Korea actually appealed directly to the U.N., when NK troops invaded on June 25, 1950. The U.N. passed a resolution two days later (Resolution 83), recommending that Allied nations come to SK's aid with military forces to repel the NK troops.

U.N. Resolution on July 7, 1950, saw a unified U.N. Command structure formed from 16 nations. The U.S. took operational command of Allied troops in the action and they provided 90% of the troops in the Korean War, all under the command of Gen Douglas MacArthur.

The war ended at a stalemate because Douglas MacArthur pushed into Nth Korea, and NK and China overwhelmed the Allied troops with sheer numbers, and MacArthur was forced to retreat.

He reportedly requested military leaders for 30 to 50 nuclear weapons to use against the Chinese and Nth Koreans - and he also petitioned Congress directly, complaining about the Administrations war policies. Truman found out MacArthur had "gone over his head", and dismissed MacArthur, and the war ended with a truce - and the demarcation line at the 38th parallel, was then set in stone.

Quote

• Vietnam War - at the request of the South Vietnamese

After the Viet Minh defeated the French soundly at the Battle of Điện Biên Phủ in mid-1954, the Geneva Accord produced a Vietnam divided into two - the Communist North and the non-Communist South. The Americans supported the South, and provided 700 "military advisors" from 1955. The South was ruled by the totally corrupt and totally decadent, President Ngo Dinh Diem.

Diem was a Catholic and repressed the Buddhists like Hitler did with the Jews. The situation got so bad, the Buddhist monks started regular self-immolation, and after Diem refused to step down, he was assassinated in a CIA-led coup on 2nd Nov 1963, just 20 days before Kennedys assassination.

Meantimes, President Kennedy, himself a Catholic, had increased the American "advisor" presence in Vietnam from 700 in the mid 1950's to 16,000 by the time Kennedy was assassinated.

As the Communist troops from the North made ever-increasing territorial gains on the South, the fluffed-up "Gulf of Tonkin" incident was enough reason for Lyndon B Johnson to escalate the war, with a huge level of bombings of the North, and ever-increasing U.S. troops on the ground. The requests from the South for military help were continuous, from the time the Communists aggressively invaded South Vietnam, in Jan 1959.

Quote

• Gulf War - at the request of the Kuwaitis.

The Gulf War began after Iraq, led by Saddam Hussein, invaded and occupied Kuwait on August 2, 1990, following disputes over debt and oil. In response to the invasion, the U. N. Security Council passed resolutions condemning the act, and demanding immediate withdrawal.

A US-led international coalition of 35 nations was formed to liberate Kuwait. Following the failure of diplomatic efforts, and the passing of a UN-authorised deadline, the coalition launched Operation Desert Storm on January 17, 1991, successfully driving Iraqi forces out of Kuwait by February 28, 1991.

Quote

• Syrian civil war - not by Syria of course, but by those that were part of Operation Inherent Resolve

Iraq initially requested assistance in the first place to beat back ISIS. The result was Operation Inherent Resolve. It was a military coalition operation, involving 80 countries, put together by the U.S. to defeat ISIS. But it became messy, because the Syrian Assad regime did not request military assistance to defeat ISIS, and ISIS had large number of fighters in Syria. The U.S. decided to move into Syria, regardless, supporting local military groups that looked useful to them.

The U.S. nearly always declines to accept "requests for military assistance" from foreign countries, because that then makes the U.S. actions dependent on those requests - and if the country decides to revoke its request, the U.S must withdraw.

[onetrack]

Wars anywhere, have to be run on a legal framework, otherwise leaders can be listed and charged and tried as war criminals. 196 countries have signed the Geneva Convention, which outlines what combatants must not do. However, there are plenty of countries and armed groups in the world who have never signed the GC, and who fail to observe any of the Geneva Conventions.

 

https://www.icrc.org/en/document/what-are-rules-of-war-Geneva-Conventions

[red750]

[red750]

https://www.trtworld.com/article/35eac28b7995