Egypt closes schools in Sinai towns as area inches toward open war
Source: Reuters
Egypt has indefinitely shut schools in two border towns in northern Sinai as the army prepares to intensify a battle with Islamist militants that turned the daily trip to lessons into a "journey of death".
Local people say children's education has fallen victim while the military stages air strikes against jihadists, who are targeting soldiers and police, and have started beheading army informers.
"We are putting our lives at risk on a daily basis," said Mohamed, a teacher who lives in the town of Sheikh Zuweid. "Sometimes there is fire between gunmen and the armed forces and sometimes stray bullets hit some of us."
Militancy has surged in the Sinai Peninsula, which borders Israel, Gaza and the Suez Canal, since the army ousted an elected Islamist president last summer. At least 33 security personnel were killed last month and one Sinai-based group has pledged its loyalty to Islamic State, which has overrun large areas of Syria and Iraq.
Read more: http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/11/21/us-egypt-sinai-schools-idUSKCN0J50V320141121?feedType=RSS&feedName=worldNews
= new reply since forum marked as read
In cases where the enlisted ranks support the people they are being used to suppress, the effectiveness of the army declines rapidly. If they had been given a choice many of the enlisted ranks of the Egyptian Army would be with the rebels.
To get around that problem you use those units to hold areas where the troops can be kept contained but can do things like search vehicles and homes while on a short lease. In any real fight such soldiers tend to retreat or surrender (and the opposition knows this and takes them "Prisoner"
.
You also use what units you have that are reliable against the Rebels. These tend to be volunteer elite units, but by their nature very small in numbers compared to the regular army membership.
Remember Egypt has a draftee army, this most of their enlisted rank did NOT join the Army to suppress fellow Egyptians but to protect Egypt from Foreign invasion. If you get on right wing sites they like stating that Draftee Armies are inferior to All Volunteer Armies for the later want to serve in the Army while the typical Draftee does not. That is nonsense, if the people of the country producing the draftees support the war. On the other hand such draftee armies quickly reflects how the people as a whole view a war. i.e. if the people are AGAINST it, the Draftee Army becomes unreliable.
This can be seen in the US intervention in Vietnam. The US sent in a Draftee Army in 1965, it was extremely effective, many claim it was the best Army the US has ever fielded. Then the Country turned against the War in 1968. A clear Majority still supported the War even during the Tet Offensive in early 1968, but by June that had dropped for the first time, below 50% of the population. The US Army then went into rapid deterioration. It was so fast and quick that by 1969 the North Vietnamese were telling their troops NOT to engage US Troops unless the US troops made a move first. This was because may units after 1968 when they went into the field picked a spot and sat down till it was time to return to base. Search and Destroy had become Search for a Spot that prevented headquarters from finding you and then destroy the ammunition you had by firing it and radioing in to Headquarters that you where engaged with the Viet Cong.
Now, the units that tended to have volunteers (Airborne, Air Mobile, Rangers, Special Forces etc) did not do the above, thus the North Vietnamese Order did say defend yourself from any attacks from American Units. Many of the regular Infantry units also did not do the above for their officers were able to keep the men on the move and willing to take on the Viet Cong (and such officers were the officers that tended to be "Fraged" .
Notice the difference. Draftee Armies tend to be as good and at times better (do to the better quality of the pool of draftees you are pulling from as compared to the pull of being in the Army and the pay such service provides which are the two reasons people enlist into a Volunteer Army). The problem is draftee armies are USELESS against an enemy the people at home do not see as an enemy (or used in a war, the people at home viewed as wrong or lost). On the other hand Volunteer units tend to stay together even as the Nation they are fighting for come to oppose what they are fighting for. In Vietnam you saw this with the Draftee Army, as long as the people of the US supported that war, so did the Draftees, but when the people came to oppose the war so did the draftees.
One of the reason the US Army was able to stay in Afghanistan and Iraq longer then in Vietnam was that the US Army could still operate as an Army do to its All Volunteer Nature long after the majority of Americans came to oppose both wars (The War with Iraq NEVER had Majority Support, Afghanistan lost its majority support once the Taliban were driven out of Afghanistan). If the US Army had been the Draftee Army of WWII to Vietnam, the Army would have deteriorated rapidly after we took both countries. The reason being lack of support at home (NOT lack of support for the Soldiers but for the war itself, during Vietnam they was support for the Soldiers but not for the war and the Right Wing did it best, and continued to do its best to say opposing the war was the same as opposing the Troops, which was a lie during Vietnam and it is a lie today).
The US Army is NOT the only example of this. The Russian Army of 1917 had come to oppose WWI for the people of Russia had come to oppose WWI. The reasons the Communists finally took over was no one else wanted to end the war. During the 1917-1918 period Germany finally agreed to surrender, more do to a growing opposition to WWI tied in with the loses on the battlefields and the deteriorating situation at home. England and France also agree to the Armistice for the same pressure on Russia and Germany were hitting both countries, growing massive opposition to the war (This was so massive Winston Churchill in the 1930s told a reporter that had Wilson NOT gone to War in April 1917, a negotiated settlement would have been made by the end of 1917, US Troops and US supplies made the difference).
Please note at the end of WWI, even with US support, the Western Allies agreed to an Armistice rather then march into Germany for they needed to war to end to reduce domestic tensions in their own countries. Not only did Germany have a Marxist Revolt, so did Germany, Hungary and several countries of Eastern Europe, all but the Russia Communist Revolt was suppressed. Troops sent to Russia to support the opposition to the Communists had a habit of embracing the Communists (and for that reason the US and the other Western Countries withdrew their troops, the enlisted ranks were identifying with the Communists to much).
Thus the extent the enlisted ranks support the war reflects the extent the rest of the people of Egypt has for the war. In that regard it appears the Majority of Egyptians support the rebellion or at least oppose suppressing it. Thus most of the Troops of Egypt are useless. In fact Sisi has instated the Egyptian Police so he could use them to suppress not only Morsi Supporters but these rebels. The Egyptian Police was a Volunteer units who tend to be loyal to their Paymasters not the people (Morsi did not need them so he abolished them, Sisi needs them so he reinstated the Police).
I bring up the above for the number of Military Units Sisi can rely on against these rebels is probably very small. If Sisi would attack Israel, I suspect he could use his whole army, for the polls of Egyptians show a massive opposition to Israel and thus such an attack would have popular support among the people and thus also among the draftees.
The problem is Sisi wants peace with Israel and thus he will NOT attack Israel. On the other hand he has limited number of troops he can use effectively against the Rebels. Sisi can send draftee Tanks units and have them blow things up, but if they face ANY opposition, they will tend to clam up inside their tanks and retreat. The same with his Mechanised Infantry. Such Infantry will NOT dismount and take the battle to the enemy (or if they do dismount, they will stay close to their Transport, which tend to be US M113 Armored Personal Carriers, abbreviated as "APC" .
Sisi is caught between a Rock and a Hard Place. He can NOT order an attack that would be effective for he does NOT have enough "Volunteers" to do such an attack. His Draftee enlisted ranks do not have it in them to actually destroy these rebels. The troops Sisi can rely on to do that level of attack he needs to keep close to himself to prevent a counter coup and to keep the opposition down, thus the troops Sisi has to actually destroy these rebels is quite small. Thus given this restriction Sisi has to move carefully and he appears to have done so, but Sisi has to do something for his only other option is to withdraw and that is a show of weakness that only a person with a strong support among the people of Egypt could do (i.e. Morsi could withdraw, Sisi can NOT).
Side note: When enlisted ranks oppose a war, they rarely revolt or join the opposition. The whole military structure prevents such acts UNLESS the Officer Corp agree with the Enlisted ranks. In Egypt the Officer Ranks are tied in with the Generals and the ruling elite so such a military revolt is NOT probable. On the other hand the enlisted ranks can go through the motions of doing what they are ordered to do, thus avoid court martial, but do NOT do the little things that makes an Army truly effective. That is what the Egyptian Army is doing, and what happened to the US Army 1969-1972.
I love this guy
yeah....those liberals are called dhimmis.
this guy always shows up with the same sign..
So clearly the only way to re-establish law and order was to gun down a thousand civilians in the streets and torture thousands more in black prisons for months on end. Makes perfect sense 