Thursday, December 12, 2013

GCC Forms Unified Military Command

U.S. Lifts Veil on Major Military Center in Qatar

Leaders of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) on Wednesday announced the formation of a unified military command for the six-member countries. The decision was announced by the GCC secretariat at the end of the 34th Summit in Kuwait. (Defense News, 12 December)

“The declaration highlights the increasing construction of a regional security architecture which was started with the peninsula shield force and is an issue that is seen by outside observers to need more attention,” said Matthew Hedges, an analyst for the Institute of Near East and Gulf Military Analysis (INEGMA), a Dubai-based security think tank. (Defense News, 13 December)

The GCC also announced the establishment of the Gulf Academy for Strategic and Security Studies in the UAE.

The GCC statement also condemned Iran's continuation of the occupation of the Greater and Lesser Tunbs and Abu Musa islands.

“The GCC continues to support of the right of sovereignty of the UAE over the three islands and considers any actions or practices carried out by Iran on the islands null and void, as they do not change the historical facts and the legal rights and sovereignty of the UAE over the islands,” said GCC Secretary General Abdel Latif Al Zayani.

Iran controls the three islands at the mouth of the Persian Gulf, near the Strait of Hormuz. The Shah’s government occupied the islands as part of a deal with Britain hours before the departure of British forces from the Gulf in 1971. Iran dropped its historic claim over Bahrain as part of that deal. UAE, which was formed after the British departure, does not recognize the agreement and considers the island as part of its territory.

Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel during a visit to Qatar on Wednesday, lifted veil of secrecy on the Combined Air and Space Operations Center, until now a classified U.S. facility at an air base near Doha.

The air operations hub at the center, known as CAOC, is what Hagel described as “one of the most impressive facilities we have.” (The New York Times, 12 December)
In Qatar, Mr. Hagel and his counterpart signed a new Defense Cooperation Agreement that includes joint training and exercises and other unspecified cooperative military actions.
Photo credit: GCC Summit in Kuwait. 11 December 2013 (Al Arabiya)


Anonymous said...

Under the Shah, Iran ruled the middle east. Under these terrorist thieving scum spawns of satan, like the scumbag Khamenei, Iran can't even rule over the UAE.

Anonymous said...

Yeah right! They set up this so called military collaboration after the start of the Iran-Iran war but did not go very far. Actually they did not go anywhere. They just don't have infra-structure for anything of that magnitude!

Anonymous said...

You mean the war in which saddam brought Khomeini to his knees and forced him to sink the poison chalice as he said?

Anonymous said...

No,the one in which saddam despite having the support of the west,the soviets and most of the arabs failed miserably and did not achieve a single one of his military goals,he was extremely fortunate to survive,he bankrupted his own country and in desperation turned on one of his former allies,and the rest as they say is history.The iri is still here and your good friend saddam is long gone courtesy of his own former allies.I dont think the arabs would be so stupid to ever pick a fight with iran,indeed I think this "unified command" is just more evidence of their fear and paranoia in the wake of the arab spring,the toppling of mubarak,their failures in syria,irans deal with the west and the continuing growth of iranian power both hard and soft

Anonymous said...

"Under the Shah, Iran ruled the middle east"

An exaggeration at best, delusion at worst. There is no reason to hate the Islamic Republic and love the Shah. Take into consideration the following cases:

1. Horrendous economic inequality, corruption, inflation (particularly in the 70's), illiteracy, and poverty brought on by rapid and wide-scale urbanization.
2. Making Iran's military almost 100% reliant on America and Britain.
3. Continuation of authoritarianism, going so far as to force Iranians to join Rastakhiz party.

Hell, Iran's influence in the Middle East didn't even extend past the Persian Gulf and Shah ended up giving Bahrain to Arabs! What kind of king who supposedly ruled the Middle East would do that?

Basrawi said...

Anon 10:17PM

It's worth remembering that Iraq had a weapons embargo imposed on it as a result of invading Iran, as a form of punishment. That's why Saddam's ordered a withdrawal from places in Iran that still were in Iraqi possession in 1982. He hadn't foreseen such an action from his main arms suppliers. His losses mounted and with no way to replace lost equipment he realized that his plan of conquest had been derailed. The weapons embargo was removed after the Iraqi troops had evacuated Iranian land and just before Iran launched its first military offensive into Iraqi territory. Iran then became the aggressor in the June of 82 and Iraq was almost exclusively on the defensive up unil the last year of the war (except for counter-attacks withing their own territory). In 88 Iraq launched major offensives that drove out all Iranians in southern Iraq. It was due to the aforementioned reason that Iraq got help in form of financial aid from the GCC. The assistance was fully comprehensible at the time in light of Iran's invasion. Iraq used chemical weapons for the first time in the defense of Basra, when Iran attacked in the summer of 82. It was just non-lethal tear gas. Later on they decided to utilize lethal chemical agents inside Iraqi territory to fend off incoming enemy assaults. Infact people seem to ignore the fact that Iran used chemical weapons too, but on a much smaller scale. Iran used chemical mortar rounds against Iraqi troops when they re-captured Mehran in 85, which Iraq had taken with the purpose of swapping it for the occupied town of Faw in Iraq. The only regrettable thing is that chemicals were used by Saddam against civilians in both countries, which was absolutely wrong.

Anonymous said...

The British pressured him into giving up Bahrain, and he wasn't as strong as England, but he didn't need to worry about the UAE. He invaded and took those three islands and the UAE couldn't do crap.

The UAE could f*ck the terrorist thieving mullahs though. Their 5 squadrons of F16s would destroy Iran's (shah era) air force.

Basrawi (former Mirage F1 pilot) said...


Anonymous said...

BasrawiDecember 13, 2013 at 12:39 AM
"Iran then became the aggressor" It was the iraqis that started the war,they were the aggressor,I suppose you think that the allies in ww2 were the aggressors when they invaded germany to put an end to fascism.When you start a war and then lose it you should expect that the victims of your aggression will turn around and attack and invade your country to make sure you can never do it again,that doesnt make them the aggressor,its funny how many people like yourself try to justify saddams aggression or paint him as a victim,why dont you justify his aggression against kuwait or condemmn the coalitions "aggression" against him when they threw him out of kuwait,
"Iran used chemical mortar rounds against Iraqi troops" theres never been any proof that the iranians used chemical weapons,this was something that the iraqis alone resorted to

Anonymous said...

AnonymousDecember 13, 2013 at 1:15 AM
"Their 5 squadrons of F16s would destroy Iran's (shah era) air force."
And irans ballistic and cruise missile forces could easily destroy the uaes,and the rest of the gulf states,entire airforce on the ground,the uae is well within range of irans short range weapons as are all the gulf states,they have no strategic depth,I also wouldnt discount irans air defences or its air force,the f14s are still a formidable opponent,not to mention that the ability of the gulf states to operate and maintain their militaries without a great deal of western help is rather questionable,all in all I dont see the arabs ever being very keen on picking a fight with iran,the last arab who did that ended up regretting it

Anonymous said...

Iraq couldn't handle the us but he beat the s out of Iran and khomeini. In 1988 iran conceded every demand he asked for.

Remember that beating next time you delude yourself

Anonymous said...

Anonymous 1:15 AM, you mean the UK, of which England is just one part.

Iran's air force is not just of the shah era. You should find out about something first, before trying to talk about it.

Anonymous said...

"And irans ballistic and cruise missile forces could easily destroy the uaes,and the rest of the gulf states,entire airforce on the ground"

Right, and the terrorist thief Khamenei will use his divine powers to cause a ww2 era ballistic pos missile to be that accurate, and powerful (to penetrate heavy concrete covers).

Why not just go for the entire thing and delude yourself into thinking you can wipe out America's airplanes stationed in Qatar as well? If we're going to be insane just go all out.

Anonymous said...

AnonymousDecember 13, 2013 at 7:02 AM,

totally agree. Any sane individual would find it ludicrous to speak of an initial aggressor as the "oppressed", let alone labeling a country defending itself as the "aggressor", no matter the developments that ensue its initial invasion effort on another country, you don't swap roles and guilt just like that, contrary to Basrawi's biased testimony. It applies to any belligerent, era or wars, and not exclusively to the Imposed War. In fact it's almost a question of basic logic and intellectual honesty. Whatever happened to Saddam after his forces failed in their objectives, he brought it on itself entirely. We can call Khomeini many things, including vicious and opportunistic in his reaction after 82 based on his own agenda, but there is no way on earth anyone can call Iran the aggressor, no matter the angle from which you perceive it, short of a willingness to forgive or support Saddam's behavior of course.

AnonymousDecember 13, 2013 at 8:17 AM

Speaking about being delusional, you should definitely check out Operation Morvarid that in late 1980 destroyed 80% of the Iraqi navy in a single operation. Add this to a reduction in 55% of the IQAF's efficiency after the massive IRIAF counterstrike during operation Kaman 99 performed on the onset of Iraqi aggresion, 24 hours after to be precise, involving 60 F-14s and close to 200 F-4s, badling damanging Iraqi airbases in reach of Iran in a coordinated strike, and playing a great role in stopping the initial momentum of the Iraqi invasion effort.


Saddam did not "concede" the territories it had conquered out of wisdom or external incentives, it was rather because he saw his forces being evicted while sustaining unacceptable losses on every critical invasion front, and acknowledging the total failure of their last major push against Iranian forces, dubbed Operation "al-Fawz al-'Azim", and soon afterwards, suffering another wave of decisive losses themselves in Operation "Fath-ol-Mobeen" that definitely changed the tide of the war in Iran's favor.
In that regard, operation Morvarid I mentioned earlier was also yet another glaring and unexpected victory for Iran's combined air and sea effort, securing both its own territory and scoring points on strategic Iraqi sectors and oil platforms
To finish off the last pockets of Iraqi invaders still stationed in Iranian territory and seal the fate of their ambition of conquest, Operation_Beit_ol-Moqaddas was launched and also succeeded.

The weapons embargo wasn't effectively enforced on Saddam when he started his surprise aggression war, every neighboring Arab power + the USSR/US/Europe aided him both logistically and in terms of strategic advice + financing (which resulted in Iraq owing an abysmal debt to Gulf monarchies and western countries after 88). Iran, in turn, was already suffering a de-facto total embargo before the war even started, resulting from an western and particularly American technological withdrawal from its essentially US-based military equipment, and most notably the F-14s, the most potent asset in its air fleet being sabotaged by fleeing Grumman personnel. Iranian prowess at reversing the damage, making the birds fly worthy again and tearing apart Iraqi Mig-21/23 squadrons for some time in every encounter surprised many observers.

Anonymous said...

By the statements of the Iranian DM Gen. Dehghan, precision of Iranian missiles reached 2 meters error margin.....


Anonymous said...

AnonymousDecember 13, 2013 at 1:09 PM
Iranian short ranged missiles have demonstrated an accuracy down to tens of feet,and thats certainly good enough to destroy your taxi ways and runways,and at that point your aircraft are effectively trapped in their shelters just waiting to be destroyed by air launched tv,laser and gps guided munitions,no "divine powers" necessary.The gulf states have no strategic depth,all of their military is within reach of irans weapons,most of it within range of irans short range arsenal
"Why not just go for the entire thing and delude yourself into thinking you can wipe out America's airplanes stationed in Qatar as well?"
There is nothing "deluded" about it if iran wanted to it could easily do that with its short ranged weapons,if it can destroy the qatari airforce on the ground then it can certainly do that to the us aircraft stationed there.There is no target in the gulf states that iran could not hit,they are all within reach of irans short and long range weapons.This is just basic common knowledge,I`m amazed you`re even trying to debate this,why do you think iran has invested so much in the development and production of guided missiles,you seem to think that irans missile forces are no different to saddams ie a few dozen missiles with a cep measured in kilometers,when in fact iran has the largest and most formidable ballistic missile arsenal in the middle east

Anonymous said...

AnonymousDecember 13, 2013 at 1:14 PM
Well said!

Gurney said...

For all the gullible people/Khomeini creeples in this forum who believe in the grandeur of the Iranian military and fantasizing of successes on the battlefield and thinking of spreading their sick Islamofascism far & wide, i only have one thing to offer you to wake you up from that dream world.

The GCC, with its superior technology/powerful hardware, alone can smash the antique Iranian navy and air force in the Arab gulf and can easily crush the hollow army of the Mullahs.

But check this out to be assured.

USA - global strike.

Gurney said...

US navy's warships (which is capable of eliminating the Mullah rust buckets in 24hrs after having destroyed them in every engagement). LOL

Basrawi (former Mirage F1 pilot) said...

Opinions is a piece of history i like to share about my favorite jet.

Anonymous said...

GurneyDecember 14, 2013 at 4:06 AM
Why dont you go back to strategypage
As for the gulf states military,can they even use the hardware they have?,they dont even seem to be able to maintain it with out a great deal of western help,nor do I see any of them being very keen on picking a fight with iran

Anonymous said...

Gurney December 14, 2013 at 4:06 AM
Gurney,the only ones spreading "sick Islamofascism far & wide" are your good friends and allies the saudis,they are the main exporters and supporters of wahabism and groups like al qaida,if you cant tell the difference between iranian shiaism and arab sunni wahabism then you really shouldnt be posting here,also you dont seem to realise that the us has several bases and thousands of personnel within easy reach of irans short range weapons,why do you think the us cut a deal with iran over its nuclear program if it would have been so easy for the us to just destroy it,why did the saudis not attack iran instead of urging the us to do it,especially if the saudis have such a huge advantage according to you

Anonymous said...

AnonymousDecember 13, 2013 at 8:17 AM
You do realise that saddam agreed to the peace terms years before after his attempt at conquering iranian territory was a miserable failure,I love the way you try and spin his survival,after a military failure that bankrupted his country and bleed it white,as some sort of great victory for iraq.When you consider what saddam was aiming for and what he finally ended up with the scale of his military failure becomes very clear,the war on iran was a disaster for iraq and led directly to the invasion of kuwait and the even bigger disaster that was the gulf war.The only one who appears to be "deluded" here is you,portraying the iran iraq war as some sort of iraqi victory