Posted on 04/12/2016 3:48:30 PM PDT by Eleutheria5
The Pentagon has confirmed reports it plans to cut the number of US peacekeeping troops in Egypt's Sinai Peninsula, partly because of the growing threat from the Islamic State group, an official said Tuesday.
About 700 US troops participate in a UN operation established after Israel and Egypt signed a 1979 peace deal and agreed for a Multinational Force and Observers (MFO) mission to monitor compliance.
The mission has historically been somewhat low-key, but in recent months attacks from IS jihadists have put forces on a state of constant high alert.
In September for instance, a roadside bombing injured six peacekeepers including four Americans.
Pentagon spokesman Navy Captain Jeff Davis said the Pentagon remains "fully committed" to the MFO mission but wants to use drones and other high-tech tools to assume some of the riskier work.
"I don't think anyone is talking about a wholesale withdrawal, I think we are just going to look at the number of people we have there and see if there are functions that can be automated," Davis said.
.....
(Excerpt) Read more at israelnationalnews.com ...
The Four Laws of Caliphate Robotics 1. A robot must obey unquestioningly the orders of his superior, whether human or robotic. 2. A robot must destroy any infidel human being, and may destroy any believing human being or spare any infidel human being when ordered to pursuant to the First Law. 3. A robot must honor and revere all believing human beings, as long as such reverence does not conflict with the First or Second Law. 4. A robot must protect its own existence, as long as such protection does not conflict with the First, Second or Third Laws.
“Peace Keepers”???
There must first be a peace in order to keep it.
“...because of the growing threat from the Islamic State group, an official said Tuesday.”
How’s that Arab Spring working out for you Mr. President (and Hillary)?
Hardly - This is Ibama violating the terms of the 1979 agreement and leaving Israel open to attack.
All part of the plan.
The Arab Spring is working g out for Obama and Hillary just wonderfully. Their invasions, subversions, weapons smuggling, and illegal carpet bombing have vastly increased the scope and strength of the islamonazi enemy in Asia, Africa, and now going into Europe, U.K., USA , and Canada.
We’re hardly open to attack just because some “peacekeepers” have scarpered and left us to watch our own backs. On the eve of Egyptian attack in ‘67, the peacekeepers did the same, and yet we managed to rout superior Egyptian forces. Now Egypt is acting as an ally and we are partners in routing out ISIS. How long that will last, who can say. But in the interim, Egyptian assault is the very last of our worries.
This is a good decision regardless of who made it or why. U.S. forces are lightning rods and are not appropriate for “peacekeeping” missions. Only truly neutral countries are suitable for such roles, because there is no incentive to gain revenge or “street credibility” by attacking them. Because we are targets, American troops must always be ready to fight, and therefore must never be deployed in the relatively defenseless postures that are inherent to “peacekeeping” missions. We are a superpower and we always have a motive.
I’m not in the least disturbed by it. Didn’t even know there were any peacekeepers in Sinai. What intrigues me is having robocops there, or flight drones, and how being in a military position would have effected Asimov’s Three Laws of robotics. So I redid them for Islamic Jihad Drones, and started a story.
Well, then Israel will just have to annex Sinai if attacked from it. Push all the hostile Arabs right across the canal and call it a border.
See my #6 above.
Just remember how easy it was for O to spring the MB terror gang out of prison and into control of the Egyptian govt. something like that could happen again. This is why I both appreciate the current E govt policies to the extent they’re helpful — and expect someday Israel will need to take Sinai back. We will see what the future course of events is. So far Egypt isn’t as wonderful a neighbor as we’d love so much to see. The river / canal make for a good enough border in that they’re easier to watch
If you'd like to be on or off, please FR mail me.
..................
No disrespect to those who have served there, I know there are a couple Freepers who may wish to weigh in, but subsequent to the initial withdrawl, I'm not sure there's been much to do there. Confronting ISIS in the Sinai is probably better done by Israel and Egypt than the US.
However, this is not a UN mission.
The force was requested at the behest of the signatories. Of the Israel-Egypt Peace Treaty. All three of them. Israel, Egypt and the United States. We're a signatory, the treaty is US law.
Initially US troops monitored the withdrawl. The UN refused to provide a force, so after over two years of inaction the parties, Israel, Egypt and the US agreed to attempt to create a force outside the auspices of the UN. Got it put together after a year or so, and the Multinational Force was set up with about a dozen nations participating.
Not a UN mission, and one set up at the behest of the US, Egypt and Israel as part of their treaty obligations.
Personally, I don't think this does credit to the US as a party to agreements. Though it's the least of our insults to allies the last 7 years. But it doesn't look particularly good. And even if we're going to withdraw troops, why do we announce it's because of the threat of ISIS?
You might note my post 12. This was never a UN mission. Any was initially a US mission, as a treaty signatory, till we could pass it off to a non UN force. As I noted I’m not sure there was much to do there the last few years anyway, but imo it doesn’t look good backing down on a treaty obligation stating publically it’s because of ISIS. Egypt and Israel seem to be cooperating fighting terror in the Sinai since al Sisi arrived, my guess the multinational force is likely in the way anyway, why not quietly move them out of the way.
I think IRobot clearly demonstrated that the laws do not work and will ultimately end in the loss of human freedom.
I know. Ultimately, two robots in one of the stories are given the higher function of judging which humans are more worthy of obeying over the orders of others, based on intelligence, and they conclude that they are the most intelligent humans, so they are to be preferred over other humans, both under the first and second laws.
I think the laws are naive, because there is no way they will not be used in war, and therefore the First Law will be completely discarded.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.