.....and that's a good thing???
-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
NEWS China's CV is getting real.
- Thread starter ChuckMK23
- Start date
to Egypt, yes.
to France, who was holding an unpaid bill, mostly yes.
to the Middle East, who knows... probably yes, if it means Egypt is now strong enough to repel the type of Islamist insurgency that recently toppled Yemen's U.S.-backed government.
See: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/23/world/middleeast/yemen-houthi-crisis-sana.html
Also: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/23/w...rs-seize-benghazi-branch-of-central-bank.html
Also: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/25/world/middleeast/egypt-north-sinai-car-bomb-hotel.html
I didn't realize Yemen was attacked from the sea. France was happy to unload those boats, and I wouldn't be surprised to see Russia winding up with them anyway.
Egypt has no need for them except to fight Israel and that's not going to work out for them.
Real big if. If you couldn't tell, I'm not a fan of Arab militaries.
Some vivid imaginations on display here. I don't think al Sisi has plans for adventuring in Israel, and they've been fairly aggressive at quelling a lot of the radical element in the Sinai - Russian plane notwithstanding. FWIW, if the U.S. hadn't been so sanctimonious when Sisi assumed control and restricted our FMS programs, the helos flying from those ships may have been U.S. made.
Of all the things I worry about in the Middle East, a strong Egyptian military isn't one of them.
Of all the things I worry about in the Middle East, a strong Egyptian military isn't one of them.
Egypt just purchased 46 Alligator naval attack helos from Russia for their carriers - good looking machine.
http://www.defensenews.com/story/de...ian-navy-with-46-ka-52k-helicopters/78182410/
I wonder how many can fit in a Mistral hangar, since that is where most of them will be.
It is a prestige purchase for the Egyptians with some messaging attached, expect to see them flown for show and maybe a few ops but not a whole lot more.
I'm with Brett. Egypt is not interested in a fight with Israel. In fact, they take lots of our money and equipment in a de facto "strategic understanding" with Israel so they can concentrate on other (read: internal) priorities. Like, for instance, a better way to deploy and project their forces into the Sinai to prevent crap like this from happening again too soon: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-33557180
Care to elaborate?
I didn't mean to imply that they want to fight Israel or that they bought those boats to do so. I just don't think they really needed them or have a lot of use for them. Sinai isn't exactly a far off land for them to reach.
Apparently, someone at the Egyptian MoD has a different perspective.
danpass
Well-Known Member
I was wondering the same. My vivid imagination can only see this as being some form of straw purchase.
Many reasons that I guess would be best summarized by John Keegan's and Victor Davis Hanson's conclusions that militaries that fight for a consensual governments are superior to those that don't.
Like Hezbollah?
I think many of Hanson's conclusions and assertions are too broad and he dismisses anything that doesn't fit his narrative. While Middle Eastern militaries are generally not very good at all some folks in the region certainly haven't been slouches when it comes to fighting us the past 15 or years, or the Israelis in '06. And the Israeli's also learned the hard way to not underestimate them in '73, it was a pretty close run thing for them in the first few days of the Yom Kippur War.
I imagine that the Egyptian Mistral LHD's will spend 98% of their time rusting at the pier and their new Ka-52's will likely have a horrible operational rate. Much like Thailand's carrier and Harrier fleet. Honestly, how many folks here knew they even had a carrier and Harriers, at least for a few years, to go along with it?
Do you consider Hezbollah an Arab military, or an Iranian sponsored terrorist/criminal organization?
Same point as above.
Agreed, but the (almost) exception to the conclusion, does not disprove the conclusion.
As for Hanson, I somewhat agree. He does make broad conclusions, but he writes about broad subjects. Dismissing dissenting arguments is a trapping of his profession.
It is both, alone among terrorist groups in the world today with only the LTTE being comparable.