Is it really a good idea for UK to train Kurdish soldiers

The media storm over Isis makes it difficult to find accurate information. However, assuming some tiny shred of truth to the stories that UK has accepted boots on the ground are necessary and is considering two different strategies.

One: UK military is to go in boots on ground and (according to the Express) close Isis down in 14 days. Optimistic even by Express standards.

Two: UK sends very large teams of trainers in to train Kurdish fighters and then let them get on with it.

I did have friends who undertook this training mission elsewhere. God rest their souls, they were shot by locals whom they had been training.

I am wondering how good an idea it is to continue training locals to fight as UK fights and arming them and so on, considering the theories that the current Isis team were trained by Western forces and armed by the West through a combination including donated weaponry and weaponry acquired from Western trained forces who allegedly ran away when confronted with action and left the weapons to be collected and used by Isis.

Viv said:

The media storm over Isis makes it difficult to find accurate information. However, assuming some tiny shred of truth to the stories that UK has accepted boots on the ground are necessary and is considering two different strategies.

One: UK military is to go in boots on ground and (according to the Express) close Isis down in 14 days. Optimistic even by Express standards.

Two: UK sends very large teams of trainers in to train Kurdish fighters and then let them get on with it.

I did have friends who undertook this training mission elsewhere. God rest their souls, they were shot by locals whom they had been training.

I am wondering how good an idea it is to continue training locals to fight as UK fights and arming them and so on, considering the theories that the current Isis team were trained by Western forces and armed by the West through a combination including donated weaponry and weaponry acquired from Western trained forces who allegedly ran away when confronted with action and left the weapons to be collected and used by Isis.

Click to expand...

Yes, it is.

The odd thing with this is of all the groups over there and even though they also are not "moderates" either, the Kurds happen to be the *one* group that just wants to be left alone.

Viv said:

The media storm over Isis makes it difficult to find accurate information. However, assuming some tiny shred of truth to the stories that UK has accepted boots on the ground are necessary and is considering two different strategies.

One: UK military is to go in boots on ground and (according to the Express) close Isis down in 14 days. Optimistic even by Express standards.

Two: UK sends very large teams of trainers in to train Kurdish fighters and then let them get on with it.

I did have friends who undertook this training mission elsewhere. God rest their souls, they were shot by locals whom they had been training.

I am wondering how good an idea it is to continue training locals to fight as UK fights and arming them and so on, considering the theories that the current Isis team were trained by Western forces and armed by the West through a combination including donated weaponry and weaponry acquired from Western trained forces who allegedly ran away when confronted with action and left the weapons to be collected and used by Isis.

Click to expand...

Hi Viv,

With regard acquiring accurate information, I trust his link helps given that its is to government site: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/...k-funded-training-to-support-kurdish-fighters

Regards.

Appendage:

This one is more recent with more information: House of Commons Hansard Debates for 16 Oct 2014 (pt 0002)

It is heavy reading, and there are others you could access on same site. The government policy is well spelt out, and one must remember they cannot give all the details due to security issues involved. The main one being the safety and welfare of those going.

Viv said:

~ I did have friends who undertook this training mission elsewhere. God rest their souls, they were shot by locals whom they had been training ~

Click to expand...

Sorry for your loss, we lost some good men when those they were training turned out to be working for our enemies.

I don't see UK boots on the ground; what would make sense and possibly open a new door to dealing with Russia is to accept Russia's overtures to France in the wake of mutual concerns.

Russians inscribe 'For Paris' on bombs destined for Syria | Reuters

Diesel the Paris police dog: Russian police offer to replace dog that died in Saint-Denis raid | Europe | News | The Independent

From this, we could coordinate international action against ISIS from a range of quarters - Russia has its own problems with some 5000 citizens having gone to join ISIS.

I would rather we all supported the kurds and yeah, it would mean the creation of Kurdistan but it is a solution that should have gone ahead when Iraq first started internecine killings. We resisted the idea of splitting Iraq in 3 and the power hungry coalition that came into power also wanted to maintain control of all of Iraq. Shouldn't have happened at all - the North could have become the basis for a Kurdistan which would also develop and be a balance to shia and sunni fanaticism in the South.

(All very simply but would have taken lives to achieve)

Infinite Chaos said:

Sorry for your loss, we lost some good men when those they were training turned out to be working for our enemies.

I don't see UK boots on the ground; what would make sense and possibly open a new door to dealing with Russia is to accept Russia's overtures to France in the wake of mutual concerns.

Russians inscribe 'For Paris' on bombs destined for Syria | Reuters

Diesel the Paris police dog: Russian police offer to replace dog that died in Saint-Denis raid | Europe | News | The Independent

From this, we could coordinate international action against ISIS from a range of quarters - Russia has its own problems with some 5000 citizens having gone to join ISIS.

I would rather we all supported the kurds and yeah, it would mean the creation of Kurdistan but it is a solution that should have gone ahead when Iraq first started internecine killings. We resisted the idea of splitting Iraq in 3 and the power hungry coalition that came into power also wanted to maintain control of all of Iraq. Shouldn't have happened at all - the North could have become the basis for a Kurdistan which would also develop and be a balance to shia and sunni fanaticism in the South.

(All very simply but would have taken lives to achieve)

Click to expand...

You DO realize that a Kurdistan as envisaged by all Kurds would encompass sizeable chunks of Iran, Syria and Turkey as well?

Chagos said:

You DO realize that a Kurdistan as envisaged by all Kurds would encompass sizeable chunks of Iran, Syria and Turkey as well?

Click to expand...

Northern Iraq has become pretty much a Kurdish region, as for Syria I don't see how Assad or Russia can enforce rule over the Kurds in the north. I don't see Turkey or Iran giving up ground anytime soon but the two regions mentioned can become a self governing heartland and in time, a state.

Viv said:

The media storm over Isis makes it difficult to find accurate information. However, assuming some tiny shred of truth to the stories that UK has accepted boots on the ground are necessary and is considering two different strategies.

One: UK military is to go in boots on ground and (according to the Express) close Isis down in 14 days. Optimistic even by Express standards.

Two: UK sends very large teams of trainers in to train Kurdish fighters and then let them get on with it.

I did have friends who undertook this training mission elsewhere. God rest their souls, they were shot by locals whom they had been training.

I am wondering how good an idea it is to continue training locals to fight as UK fights and arming them and so on, considering the theories that the current Isis team were trained by Western forces and armed by the West through a combination including donated weaponry and weaponry acquired from Western trained forces who allegedly ran away when confronted with action and left the weapons to be collected and used by Isis.

Click to expand...

The Kurds will probably be given northeast Iraq as their own sovereign nation.

Naturally they will need a regular armed force of infantry to guard and defend it.

And ISIS and Al Qaeda is not going away anytime soon so those rats need to be kept at bay.

Good idea -- yes -- definitely.

It may also be possible to get the Kurds to evacuate Turkey as well, like the Greeks and Turks split up after WW1 as well.

As it turns out, the burning question from today's debate in Parliament is whether to farm our "responsibilities" out to others, or stand up to them ourselves.

Be it Kurds, Iraq, Syria, Mali or wherever, I don't think other forces are as effective. The risk of split loyalties, inexperience and weaponry being commandeered by the people we want to defeat is real and has far reaching consequences.

Old Jeremy has today come out firmly against acting in Syria, he has even written it down. No fear of being retrospectively charged with war crimes in his case. But they are saying his action is causing a backlash and more Labour MPs are likely to vote in favour of UK joining the air strikes in Syria as a result.

I'm not sure I want to be represented by people who would vote on such a serious issue on a kneejerk basis. They should keep their Party leader issues within the Party. Hopefully the media are wrong and they will vote for the right reasons.

OrphanSlug said:

The odd thing with this is of all the groups over there and even though they also are not "moderates" either, the Kurds happen to be the *one* group that just wants to be left alone.

Click to expand...

Yeah, the PKK just wants to be left alone.

Viv said:

The media storm over Isis makes it difficult to find accurate information. However, assuming some tiny shred of truth to the stories that UK has accepted boots on the ground are necessary and is considering two different strategies.

One: UK military is to go in boots on ground and (according to the Express) close Isis down in 14 days. Optimistic even by Express standards.

Two: UK sends very large teams of trainers in to train Kurdish fighters and then let them get on with it.

I did have friends who undertook this training mission elsewhere. God rest their souls, they were shot by locals whom they had been training.

I am wondering how good an idea it is to continue training locals to fight as UK fights and arming them and so on, considering the theories that the current Isis team were trained by Western forces and armed by the West through a combination including donated weaponry and weaponry acquired from Western trained forces who allegedly ran away when confronted with action and left the weapons to be collected and used by Isis.

Click to expand...

Question you should be asking is... Would Turkey down a RAF plane at a later day? Turkey hates the Kurds and works against every country that supports them. Every wonder why ISIS survives? Turkey needs ISIS to fight the Kurds who are being trained by the West right now.

Viv said:

The media storm over Isis makes it difficult to find accurate information. However, assuming some tiny shred of truth to the stories that UK has accepted boots on the ground are necessary and is considering two different strategies.

One: UK military is to go in boots on ground and (according to the Express) close Isis down in 14 days. Optimistic even by Express standards.

Two: UK sends very large teams of trainers in to train Kurdish fighters and then let them get on with it.

I did have friends who undertook this training mission elsewhere. God rest their souls, they were shot by locals whom they had been training.

I am wondering how good an idea it is to continue training locals to fight as UK fights and arming them and so on, considering the theories that the current Isis team were trained by Western forces and armed by the West through a combination including donated weaponry and weaponry acquired from Western trained forces who allegedly ran away when confronted with action and left the weapons to be collected and used by Isis.

Click to expand...

The Kurdish armed forces are the solution to a greater autonomous Kurdish homeland NOT the problems in Syria and Iraq. Personally, I would not train or arm the Kurds; they are not as tame as they might appear.

austrianecon said:

Question you should be asking is... Would Turkey down a RAF plane at a later day? Turkey hates the Kurds and works against every country that supports them. Every wonder why ISIS survives? Turkey needs ISIS to fight the Kurds who are being trained by the West right now.

Click to expand...

I hope not, we've only got about 4 planes left and a grenade, after all the defence cutbacks that buffoon Cameron made.

Turkey will be busy then, working against all these western countries and Russia too. They may hate Kurds, but Turkey has been under Russia in the past and possibly not over keen on returning to that either.

I can't see Russia letting it slide with Turkey. Last time I was in Turkey it was absolutely hoaching with Russians on holiday. Some of them said they had been there 16 times, to the same hotel. The people won't like it if they have to start boycotting Turkey.:lol:

William Rea said:

The Kurdish armed forces are the solution to a greater autonomous Kurdish homeland NOT the problems in Syria and Iraq. Personally, I would not train or arm the Kurds; they are not as tame as they might appear.

Click to expand...

They surely must recognise that whoever they try to back as an alternative could turn out to be no more peaceable than Isis in the long run. Isis learned everything it knows from them. But they still seem to be considering it as a viable alternative to boots on the ground.

I am not keen on boots on the ground and I'm not keen on training a local force either I appreciate it's better to give people the tools to run their own establishment and it's more palatable to use your own military force only for defence these days. But training people seems a bit of a Trojan horse, giving away your own military strategies and giving them insight on how to defeat your own military seems a bit naive. I suppose it still comes down to the ability of the man behind the firearm, at the end of the day.

It looks like it will go to a vote soon, but they won't hold a vote until they are sure of the result. After last time, when people voted against air strikes in Syria.

OrphanSlug said:

The odd thing with this is of all the groups over there and even though they also are not "moderates" either, the Kurds happen to be the *one* group that just wants to be left alone.

Click to expand...

They are also actually the 'one' group that is willing to fight ISIS. And does it pretty well.

Turkey would want to fight Kurds more than throwing down Assad.

Coin said:

Turkey would want to fight Kurds more than throwing down Assad.

Click to expand...

I'm not familiar with the history between the different groups. But it seems everyone would rather fight anyone than throw down Assad. Why is that...

And we all should be making ourselves familiar with the history of the different groups by now, considering it's threatening world peace, so why is that we don't seem to be upskilling...

It's hard to effectively run "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" strategy when the history is so complicated nobody can be found to fill the position of next political puppet of the west.

Viv said:

I'm not familiar with the history between the different groups. But it seems everyone would rather fight anyone than throw down Assad. Why is that...

And we all should be making ourselves familiar with the history of the different groups by now, considering it's threatening world peace, so why is that we don't seem to be upskilling...

It's hard to effectively run "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" strategy when the history is so complicated nobody can be found to fill the position of next political puppet of the west.

Click to expand...

The US, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar all want to regime change president Assad, just to name a few. That Russia and China have frustrated those plans doesn't make it not so.

Montecresto said:

The US, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar all want to regime change president Assad, just to name a few. That Russia and China have frustrated those plans doesn't make it not so.

Click to expand...

Do you think so...they have had some time to act on that if it is what they actually want?

Assad had stronger allies which allegedly deterred an attack, but if they really wanted him out there are some clever, devious people who might have orchestrated his downfall long before now.

Viv said:

The media storm over Isis makes it difficult to find accurate information. However, assuming some tiny shred of truth to the stories that UK has accepted boots on the ground are necessary and is considering two different strategies.

One: UK military is to go in boots on ground and (according to the Express) close Isis down in 14 days. Optimistic even by Express standards.

Two: UK sends very large teams of trainers in to train Kurdish fighters and then let them get on with it.

I did have friends who undertook this training mission elsewhere. God rest their souls, they were shot by locals whom they had been training.

I am wondering how good an idea it is to continue training locals to fight as UK fights and arming them and so on, considering the theories that the current Isis team were trained by Western forces and armed by the West through a combination including donated weaponry and weaponry acquired from Western trained forces who allegedly ran away when confronted with action and left the weapons to be collected and used by Isis.

Click to expand...

Sure it's a good idea. Hell, Canadian special forces have gone into action with the Kurds they're training.

Viv said:

Do you think so...they have had some time to act on that if it is what they actually want?

Assad had stronger allies which allegedly deterred an attack, but if they really wanted him out there are some clever, devious people who might have orchestrated his downfall long before now.

Click to expand...

Well considering the strategic/national security interests that Syria is to Russia, and the fact that Russia has been clear from day one that regime changing Assad is not going to happen, I don't see how. The world is a changing. Every way that they've tried to act, from attempting to secure a UNSCR to covert shipments of arms to rebels fighting against Assad, Russia has prevented regime change, for nearly five years.

Montecresto said:

Well considering the strategic/national security interests that Syria is to Russia, and the fact that Russia has been clear from day one that regime changing Assad is not going to happen, I don't see how. The world is a changing. Every way that they've tried to act, from attempting to secure a UNSCR to covert shipments of arms to rebels fighting against Assad, Russia has prevented regime change, for nearly five years.

Click to expand...

I think its certain that Russia has legitimate interests in the conflict (as well as plenty of illegitimate ones, for example is base in Tartus and its general propensity to throw its weight around) but whats debatable is whehter Assad is the best way of fufilling them, whether Russia has the right to make that decision on behalf of the Syrian people, and whether bombing them indescriminatly is the way to do it. As long of Assad attempts to cling to power there will be a vaccum of power, legitimacy and security for ISIS to fill, the sooner he is out of the picture the sooner something vaugely human can fill his place.

Red_Dave said:

I think its certain that Russia has legitimate interests in the conflict (as well as plenty of illegitimate ones, for example is base in Tartus and its general propensity to throw its weight around) but whats debatable is whehter Assad is the best way of fufilling them, whether Russia has the right to make that decision on behalf of the Syrian people, and whether bombing them indescriminatly is the way to do it. As long of Assad attempts to cling to power there will be a vaccum of power, legitimacy and security for ISIS to fill, the sooner he is out of the picture the sooner something vaugely human can fill his place.

Click to expand...

Yeah, that was said about A-Stan, Iraq and Libya too. No, Putin is less concerned about Assad than he is about Syria, but with Assad he's certain to maintain his warm water port, without him it's somewhat questionable. I can't know what all of Russia's motives are in Syria, but one certainly is that in a two year period, both of Russia's warm water ports were threatened by Western led/inspired/supported policies, and Russia is exceedingly determined to prevent them from falling from their control.