Deputy PM: "If Barzani fails at Sinjar, TAF will do what is required"

[usernameless]

Didn't you all say how the TAF is vastly superior to any other regional force and that they would steam roll YPG, isis, iraq, syria? Of course countries that aren't actively at war believe it's easy until they do it, bad performance yes, nothing special.



Not comparable, Turkey has not gone through what Iraq went through, several wars that is. Turkey was also not attacked by any large force.

+

No one knows the future of anything, point is it turned out bad for Turkey, and Jordan as well.

Use some common sense. How can one expect Turkey to steamroll with a limited ground and air support approach? You can only say this when Turkey enters war with isis, pkk, Syria and Irak without limitations (politics, without much care for citizens etc.). Syria and Iraq, with all its military assets, have proven to be unable to capture large territory. Your (populastic) view that this operation represents Turkish armed forces' whole capability is wrong, and no one said there won't be casualties. What some chest beating folks say doesn't reflect the truth.

Yes, Turkey can still steamroll Iraq and Syria one vs one or even one vs two in a full blown war. Both countries have inferior equipment, inferior number of equipment, relatively no significant defense industry (that i know) compared to ours to last a long war to say the least.

 

[ULKU-1]

Use some common sense. How can one expect Turkey to steamroll with a limited ground and air support approach? You can only say this when Turkey enters war with isis, pkk, Syria and Irak without limitations (politics, without much care for citizens etc.). Syria and Iraq, with all its military assets, have proven to be unable to capture large territory.

Common sense i've been using all along, it's the people on this sub-forum who learn only after seeing the operation in Syria. There's no military operation without political limitations given that militaries are under the control of civillians, that was one of the reason for the isf collapse, the political sabotage behind it. Turkey isn't the only one that deals with political strings hindering their operational freedom etc.

isf captured a lot of territory so i guess that means they've proven able to capture large territory..

Your (populastic) view that this operation represents Turkish armed forces' whole capability is wrong, and no one said there won't be casualties. What some chest beating folks say doesn't reflect the truth.

The TAF involvement in the OP isn't as tiny as you're trying to make it sound, many tanks are involved and planning turned out to be real bad for an army people here deemed so superior.

Yes, Turkey can still steamroll Iraq and Syria one vs one or even one vs two in a full blown war. Both countries have inferior equipment, inferior number of equipment, relatively no significant defense industry (that i know) compared to ours to last a long war to say the least.

i see how that's going in Syria, no air power used after Syria warned not to. TAF lacks experience, overestimated their capabilities and underestimated isis, all that nationalistic nonsense won't help.

 

[blondeturkish]

Common sense i've been using all along, it's the people on this sub-forum who learn only after seeing the operation in Syria. There's no military operation without political limitations given that militaries are under the control of civillians, that was one of the reason for the isf collapse, the political sabotage behind it. Turkey isn't the only one that deals with political strings hindering their operational freedom etc.

isf captured a lot of territory so i guess that means they've proven able to capture large territory..


The TAF involvement in the OP isn't as tiny as you're trying to make it sound, many tanks are involved and planning turned out to be real bad for an army people here deemed so superior.


i see how that's going in Syria, no air power used after Syria warned not to. TAF lacks experience, overestimated their capabilities and underestimated isis, all that nationalistic nonsense won't help.

its tiny compared to russia and Iran involvment..

 

[usernameless]

Common sense i've been using all along, it's the people on this sub-forum who learn only after seeing the operation in Syria. There's no military operation without political limitations given that militaries are under the control of civillians, that was one of the reason for the isf collapse, the political sabotage behind it. Turkey isn't the only one that deals with political strings hindering their operational freedom etc.

isf captured a lot of territory so i guess that means they've proven able to capture large territory..


The TAF involvement in the OP isn't as tiny as you're trying to make it sound, many tanks are involved and planning turned out to be real bad for an army people here deemed so superior.


i see how that's going in Syria, no air power used after Syria warned not to. TAF lacks experience, overestimated their capabilities and underestimated isis, all that nationalistic nonsense won't help.

Obviously Turkey suffers more from politics than Iraq. Turkey can't operate and use its assets as freely as it would have due to problems with other govts that are present in Syria. In other words, while the Iraqi armed forces can use its whole assets on its operations without foreign govt interference at all, Turkey is obviously more limited.

Let's not beat around the bush. Clearly Iraqi and Syrian armed forces have not been able to protect their soil for years, let alone capturing it back. Only in the last year or so both countries are making a serious comeback. I try to imagine Turkish forces losing 50-75% of Turkish soil to pkk and isis for multiple years. Unthinkable, this is what i mean with incapable. Otherwise losing a few tanks, as stupid as the way they have lost them may be, doesn't mean the whole armed forces are incompetent. Until the recent losses i didn't hear anything from foreigners on the competency of our armed forces (which have been successfull looking at the losses and the ground captured till al-Bab), but after these losses somehow that was when the benchmark was set, not surprised by the haters lol. The US and Russians have lost equipment to rebels/terrorists in the past too, let's label them as incompetent armed forces too then.

A war against Assad right now would complicate matters with 3rd parties that are active in Syria as well. Hence my 'one vs one' emphasis.
Does the Iraqi army have a guerilla style doctrine like isis? No, then conventional military vs military wise Turkey will eventually overcome Iraq. No need to feel ashamed or offended, has nothing to do with nationalism or warmongering. Brag all you want about your army, but just know that Iraq has been sent who knows how many more years into the past development wise, and even after isis who knows what will follow next. Iraqi forces will be the elite of the elite, but at what extreme costs?

 

[ULKU-1]

Obviously Turkey suffers more from politics than Iraq.

Turkey can't operate and use its assets as freely as it would have due to problems with other govts that are present in Syria. In other words, while the Iraqi armed forces can use its whole assets on its operations without foreign govt interference at all, Turkey is obviously more limited.

That is correct only in today's situation(post June 2014), not pre June 2014 before the global powers put their weight behind that war against IS. Pre June 2014 the army went through sabotage by politicians who caused the collapse, one has to look at the 2013 protests which were IS infiltrated and untouched by security forces as they had their hands tied, any move would be labeled sectarian by politicians/media.

Let's not beat around the bush. Clearly Iraqi and Syrian armed forces have not been able to protect their soil for years, let alone capturing it back. Only in the last year or so both countries are making a serious comeback. I try to imagine Turkish forces losing 50-75% of Turkish soil to pkk and isis for multiple years. Unthinkable, this is what i mean with incapable. Otherwise losing a few tanks, as stupid as the way they have lost them may be, doesn't mean the whole armed forces are incompetent. Until the recent losses i didn't hear anything from foreigners on the competency of our armed forces (which have been successfull looking at the losses and the ground captured till al-Bab), but after these losses somehow that was when the benchmark was set, not surprised by the haters lol. The US and Russians have lost equipment to rebels/terrorists in the past too, let's label them as incompetent armed forces too then.

You aren't differentiating between a political collapse of the military and a military OP failure.

The loss of land in mid 2014 was more of a political collapse. If you want an example of the TAF partially collapsing due to politics you can look at the attempted coup. But the major difference in Turkey is that the void was filled by the police and other citizens who overpowered soldiers and took over tanks in the streets. The difference in Iraq is that the void was filled by an armed terror group.

Syria is more complicated they had a civil war which IS made use of to expand.

A war against Assad right now would complicate matters with 3rd parties that are active in Syria as well. Hence my 'one vs one' emphasis.

Does the Iraqi army have a guerilla style doctrine like isis? No, then conventional military vs military wise Turkey will eventually overcome Iraq. No need to feel ashamed or offended, has nothing to do with nationalism or warmongering. Brag all you want about your army, but just know that Iraq has been sent who knows how many more years into the past development wise, and even after isis who knows what will follow next. Iraqi forces will be the elite of the elite, but at what extreme costs?

I'm not the one bragging on PDF. All i've been doing is saying that neither TAF, nor Iran, nor Pakistan would do the job so much better, the belief of some individuals here that they would is solely based on their nationalism. That counts for the GCC as well, a force with loads of equipment yet their performance in Yemen is a joke.

I don't doubt that many Pakistani and Iranian members on this forum believe their military would steamroll IS, just like many Turks here used to say, it's simply wrong whether you deploy 10K or 100K troops. There will be many casualties.

The type of conventional war you're talking about which would take place in the skies / open desert whilst you are correct TAF has the big edge in that given their equipment, that is very unlikely to take place, not what I was referring about either. I was talking about by Erdogan suggested OPS to intervene in Sinjar/Tal Afar/Mosul etc. as if it is easy to deal with so many different units, it isn't.

 

[usernameless]

That is correct only in today's situation(post June 2014), not pre June 2014 before the global powers put their weight behind that war against IS. Pre June 2014 the army went through sabotage by politicians who caused the collapse, one has to look at the 2013 protests which were IS infiltrated and untouched by security forces as they had their hands tied, any move would be labeled sectarian by politicians/media.

You aren't differentiating between a political collapse of the military and a military OP failure.

The loss of land in mid 2014 was more of a political collapse. If you want an example of the TAF partially collapsing due to politics you can look at the attempted coup. But the major difference in Turkey is that the void was filled by the police and other citizens who overpowered soldiers and took over tanks in the streets. The difference in Iraq is that the void was filled by an armed terror group.

Fair enough, it's true that the rapid collapse of Iraq in 2014 was not that military related, but i'm not really convinced that militarily it had to take this long to come to the current situation, unless that was also politically related.

All i've been doing is saying that neither TAF, nor Iran, nor Pakistan would do the job so much better, the belief of some individuals here that they would is solely based on their nationalism. That counts for the GCC as well, a force with loads of equipment yet their performance in Yemen is a joke.

Nevermind those loud chest beaters, ironically it was some of these people who were nowhere to be seen after those casualties. To be frank, isis is of a whole other level, no matter how much anti-terrorism experience a country may have, these bastards are something else. This is what misled some people on isis; expecting it would be like going against the pkk.
Am not following Yemen at all, but isn't KSA slowly winning? Their performance may be poor after all that time, but we should not forget that aside from the US there are not many countries with much modern combat experience. As long as KSA is getting its objectives done with screw ups here and there, then it'd be strange to question their competency, I'd rather call it clumsy.