Du Military folks-why would a unit suddenly deploy to Egypt?

[w8liftinglady]

One of my co-workers' spouses suddenly was deployed to egypt 2 weeks ago(for a year,she tells us).He is hard-core ex-DI,but says all they are doing is watching oil rigs go up and down.He is very demoralized(third deployment to region),according to her,and warned her that "some shit is going down soon".Do you think Iraq?

[Skittles]

1. they're already in Egypt

I've sent care packages

[achtung_circus]

2. What kind of unit?

It makes a difference whether they are leg infantry or Intel or armor as to what purposes they might be used for.

[w8liftinglady]

22. Signal Corp

[FormerRepublican]

3. Someone just died of bird flu in Egypt - confirmed by the US military.

I guess they did the testing at a US military facility, which is kind of odd.

WRT what Bush has up his insane dictator sleeve...

:scared:

[pacco]

4. This is why

http://www.uruknet.info/?p=m21643&hd=0&size=1&l=e

[Drum]

5. Rook takes the corner. nt

[aquart]

6. Lookee! Israel has ceased to exist on that map.

But what has that to do with our troops being in Egypt?

[pacco]

7. oil?

water?

[haele]

19. The Suez Canal comes to mind.

Also a build up to possibly add "security" for various eastern Mediterranean port o' call sites. Especially if they want to add a western ME logistics outpost off, say, the more friendlier countries of Cyprus, Jordan, or even Egypt instead of being stuck with a limited flight corridor over Turkey or any number of the 'stans.

The military also runs lots of exercises through Egypt and Turkey. Could be just another exercise pre-deployment in an unstable area for a few months. I've seen that happen before.

Haele

[Marie26]

10. Access to Iran. nt

[Richard D]

13. Why Iran?

Egypt is a long ways from Iran. Israel would be a better staging point. Maybe something is going to happen in Sudan?

[Marie26]

15. Why not?

But we don't care about the Sudan. That's the cold, honest truth. We wouldn't be amassing troops because of that, I think. Isreal is a good staging point for land troops, but not Naval. In order to reach Iran from Isreal, they'd have to send ships around Africa or through the Suez canal bottleneck. If the Navy is stationed in Egypt, it's much easier to simply go around the Arabian peninsula into Iran. Right now, we've got almost zero troops to spare, so the rumors are that Bush'll use targeted air strikes. So, they'll have to move aircraft carriers into position near Iran for planes & Cruise missiles. Egypt's a convenient launching site from a maritime standpoint. Plus, if we do attack Iran, there's the danger of a Muslim counterattack against Isreal, so we need to have US troops right next door to protect Isreal. This is just speculation, I'm no military expert, but it seems to make sense.


This map shows the whole Middle East a little better:

[Richard D]

18. Ah, thanks

Not much of a military stratigist here. I didn't even think about the sea connection. That said, why not India? Certainly a lot closer to Iran than Egypt.

[Marie26]

21. No bases in India

Right now, we don't have any bases or troops stationed in India. But the Defense Dept. is trying very hard to change that; in fact, I think the push for bases is probably why we just agreed to share nuclear technology with India. If we're really thinking long-term about occupying Iran, we'll eventually need launching sites in India as well. But we don't have them now; so, Egypt is the next best option. Because of their rivalry w/Libya, Egypt will tolerate our troops being stationed there long-term, & they will be positioned to quickly move into the Persian Gulf against Iran.

This is a tangent, but I think that Bush's recent trip to India is proof that they're planning to invade Iran. In that trip, the US promised to allow India to build nuclear weapons. Why would they do such a thing, unless the US got something in return? We've been asking for bases in India for awhile; & I think this trip was an attempt to get India on board before the attack against Iran. If we really do want to invade Iran, we'll eventually need India as a strategic partner. Why was Bush so eager toa allow the UAE to buy our ports, despite popular opposition? Look at the map - the UAE is also an important staging point for an Iranian invasion & they've allowed US bases. We need to keep our allies happy & giving the US permission to use their countries as launching points for another Mideast War.

Here's an article about India-US relations:
"This article is the second of a six-part special series on Indo-US military relations. The first part dealt with the US attempts to gain access to Indian military bases and establish USAF airbases on Indian soil...If the Americans were to enjoy access to Indian military bases, what will India expect in return? "Indo-US Military Relations: Expectations and Perceptions", a classified US defence department document in rediff.com's possession, states that India would consider technology transfer as an 'important component' for a robust military relationship between the two countries.

"American military officers are candid in their plans to eventually seek access to Indian bases and military infrastructure. India's strategic location in the centre of Asia, astride the frequently traveled Sea Lanes of Communication (SLOC) linking the Middle East and East Asia, makes India particularly attractive to the US military," the report says."

http://www.rediff.com/news/2003/apr/21josy.htm
http://www.rediff.com/news/2003/apr/22josy.htm

[Richard D]

25. Thank you.

Makes perfect sense. Scary stuff indeed.

[Marie26]

28. Just a theory, though

Based on my extensive military knowledge from playing Risk. I'm no expert, & I really hope it's wrong.

[Trajan]

12. Hey ! ....

And WHAT HAPPENED TO TURKEY ! ????

They're GONE ! ....

[renate]

8. welcome to DU!

:hi:

[Trajan]

11. One fascinating fact about that map ....

SOME how ...

SOME way ...

Enough biological mass, in the form of whatever dinosaurs or whatnot lived in those epochs; ENOUGH laid down and died, and formed trillions of barrels of oil .... in so many neat, easy to tap pockets ....

One has to wonder how the extreme right wing theocratic oil baron nutcases reconcile their hatred for science with their knowledge of long term geopetrological development .... The time spans involved are enormous ....

What kind of lie do they live ? ...

A RICH, greedy lie ....

[soothsayer]

17. Do people still believe in 'fossil fuels'? I'm abiotic all the way,

baby! Well, not all the way. I believe there's both organic and inorganic creation of oil---and that it's still going on!

[kcass1954]

14. That link is rather interesting, and more than a little alarming.

The entire Middle East and Central Asia is referred to in military parlance as CENTCOM; the central battlefield in the global resource war.

<snip>

A careful look at the region illustrates the crucial importance of integrating Iran into the overall plan. American industry must dominate this area if it hopes to maintain its edge on competitors in China and Europe. Iran and Syria are the unfortunate obstacles to that plan. Most of the other countries are either clients of the United States or are willing to comply without major resistance. Sudan may be the exception to this rule, but a strategy is already materializing (pushed by Ambassador John Bolton) at the UN to send in "Peacekeepers" who will carry out Washington’s orders. This will place Sudan’s oil and natural gas reserves under western control and divide the resources among the former colonial powers.

<snip>

An attack on Iran involves great risk and there is the real prospect that escalation might lead to nuclear war. As the increasingly inflammatory rhetoric indicates, however, the plan is going forward and will not be derailed by the reluctance of Congress, the thousands of protestors on the streets, or the ineffective braying at United Nations.

Those who dismiss the likelihood of an attack on Iran as "madness", fail to appreciate the true nature of fanaticism. The Bush administration is less guided by reason than it is by moral rectitude; neither plays any role in their decision-making process.

[BrotherBuzz]

9. Same reason we deploy troops to Paraguary

Ask your co-worker how many ex-military civilians are connected in some way to his unit.

[HawkerHurricane]

16. Exercises...

Every year or two, we hold military exercises with Egypt, coincidentally near the border with Libya. So we ship troops and equipment to Egypt, it drives around in the desert for a while, then we ship it back... just to prove we could.

Egypt feels better defended against Libya, reduces the size of it's army, which makes it harder to attack or threaten Isreal, everyone's happy...
Except the U.S. soldiers who get to waste a bunch of time in a desert.

[donsu]

20. what do you mean when you say...

"Except the U.S. soldiers who get to waste a bunch of time in a desert."


you mean they would rather be in battle, killing and being killed, then wasting time in a desert?

[HawkerHurricane]

23. No...

they'd rather be at HOME than wasting time in a desert.

[donsu]

27. ok, got'cha :)

nt

[tabasco]

24. Possibly Joint Task Force Bravo

We have peacekeeping forces that rotate out of the border area between Israel and Egypt.

I think it's one infantry battalion at a time. Hang around at observation posts getting suntans primarily.

on edit: Btw - infantry task forces include supporting slices of other specialties like signal dudes/dudettes.

[Solly Mack]

26. a deployment to Egypt is not unusual

not unusual at all - we're there and have been there for quite some time now