'It's not a funky chicken jive out there' - SA army chief slams budget cuts as 'dangerous'

GhostSixFour

Mafia Addict
Joined
Nov 9, 2009
Messages
11,493
#21
Isn't Spetsnaz part of the military? If it is, then I'd say anti-terrorism is a military function in some countries. I don't know.
Are you talking about own soil anti-terrorism campaigns? Spetznaz does it, the SAS have done it, and in the U.S. the only unit authorized to conduct such operations AFAIK is the old Delta.

The thing that is in question here, is whether or not it is allowed by SA legislation. I think in SA it is handled purely by police task force.
 

ForceFate

Honorary Master
Joined
May 18, 2009
Messages
11,650
#22
Are you talking about own soil anti-terrorism campaigns? Spetznaz does it, the SAS have done it, and in the U.S. the only unit authorized to conduct such operations AFAIK is the old Delta.

The thing that is in question here, is whether or not it is allowed by SA legislation. I think in SA it is handled purely by police task force.
Thanks. I wasn't sure.
 

ponder

Honorary Master
Joined
Jan 22, 2005
Messages
71,501
#23
Isn't Spetsnaz part of the military? If it is, then I'd say anti-terrorism is a military function in some countries. I don't know.
Spetsnaz is an umbrella term for special forces, those special forces can be law enforcement or military. In Russia most domestic (and sometimes foreign) issues are dealt with by specialist FSB units, sometime with the assistance of the MVD which also does law enforcement. Military spetsnaz units are mostly deployed in war zones or conflict areas outside of the country.
 

ForceFate

Honorary Master
Joined
May 18, 2009
Messages
11,650
#24
Yes, but why not force them to sign over some assets while we're at it? May as well help ourselves on the way out.

After all, the army's already there. They can't exactly say no.
They probably do, to the benefit of politicians.
 

ForceFate

Honorary Master
Joined
May 18, 2009
Messages
11,650
#25
Spetsnaz is an umbrella term for special forces, those special forces can be law enforcement or military. In Russia most domestic (and sometimes foreign) issues are dealt with by specialist FSB units, sometime with the assistance of the MVD which also does law enforcement. Military spetsnaz units are mostly deployed in war zones or conflict areas outside of the country.
I was referring specifically to GRU's Spetsnaz
 

ForceFate

Honorary Master
Joined
May 18, 2009
Messages
11,650
#28
Then you should have said so. Either way they don't deal with anti-terrorism incidents within Russia, that's mostly the domain of FSB Spetsgruppa "A".
I was under the impression Spetsnaz is specific to GRU and doesn't exist outside the agency.

Learned something. Thanks.
 

ForceFate

Honorary Master
Joined
May 18, 2009
Messages
11,650
#29
That ship sailed long ago, when last was there proper training? Doesn't seem to be a money problem ...


Actually a fair number of our military consists of terrorists ... MK anyone?
Terrorists fighting other terrorists I suppose? I know someone who bears he scars of terrorism. Either way, would it then be called counter-terrorism? Why did you even mention MK?
 

ponder

Honorary Master
Joined
Jan 22, 2005
Messages
71,501
#30
I was under the impression Spetsnaz is specific to GRU and doesn't exist outside the agency.
FSB runs Spetsgruppa "A" & Spetsgruppa "V", MVD runs SOBR, then the different military divisions all have their own spetsnaz units. There's a schitelload of them. Several post soviet countries also have their own spetsnaz units.
 

daveza

Honorary Master
Joined
Apr 5, 2004
Messages
33,071
#31
We keep getting told the army is not trained for riots, gangland schyte etc - I very much doubt they are trained for anti-terrorism.
 

NarrowBandFtw

Honorary Master
Joined
Feb 1, 2008
Messages
13,088
#33
Why did you even mention MK?
Why not?

- MK "vets" hold high positions in the SANDF these days
- SANDF is moaning about budget, which we all now is just gravy for the pigs trough, and fearmongering with the word terrorist
- MK deliberately attacked civilians with pipe bombs in shopping malls and beaches and what-not back in the day, this is the very definition of a terrorist strategy i.e. they were officially terrorists

Perfectly normal then to point out the organization using the terrorist label for fearmongering in order to pour more gravy into the pigs trough happens to CONTAIN terrorists.
 

ForceFate

Honorary Master
Joined
May 18, 2009
Messages
11,650
#34
Why not?

- MK "vets" hold high positions in the SANDF these days
- SANDF is moaning about budget, which we all now is just gravy for the pigs trough, and fearmongering with the word terrorist
- MK deliberately attacked civilians with pipe bombs in shopping malls and beaches and what-not back in the day, this is the very definition of a terrorist strategy i.e. they were officially terrorists

Perfectly normal then to point out the organization using the terrorist label for fearmongering in order to pour more gravy into the pigs trough happens to CONTAIN terrorists.
Every (para)military is a terrorist group depending on which side you're on. France in Libya, Libya in CAR and Kenya, Russia in Crimea and Georgia, Israel in Palestine and Palestine in Israel, US pretty where there's traces of crude oil and military is a pushover, SADF to black South Africans and MK to white South Africans?

It's just how it is.
 

NarrowBandFtw

Honorary Master
Joined
Feb 1, 2008
Messages
13,088
#35
SADF to black South Africans and MK to white South Africans?
SADF was still the official, government sanctioned military. MK just plain terrorists.

While both performed despicable acts I don't recall the SADF detonating bombs in shopping malls or beaches when there was zero chance of killing anyone except innocent civilians.

But I digress, if both SADF and MK are terrorists then even doubly so: the SANDF is made up of terrorists and should kindly stfu about the threat of terrorism while begging for more gravy.
 

Fro

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2014
Messages
780
#36
We have a Defense Intelligence (DI) division in the SANDF. It's sort of on its own, definitely not part of the Army like some of you are suggesting.

The defense force's budget has severely been cut recently which is not a good thing, obviously. How do you expect the same (or an improvement) of service when you cut funding while everything is more expensive. I know that basic things like food is very scarce in the Navy. There is almost no money anymore. Just look at the decrease in people being accepted for basic training. That being said, theft is still rife from top to bottom.
 

ForceFate

Honorary Master
Joined
May 18, 2009
Messages
11,650
#37
SADF was still the official, government sanctioned military. MK just plain terrorists.

While both performed despicable acts I don't recall the SADF detonating bombs in shopping malls or beaches when there was zero chance of killing anyone except innocent civilians.

But I digress, if both SADF and MK are terrorists then even doubly so: the SANDF is made up of terrorists and should kindly stfu about the threat of terrorism while begging for more gravy.
It's as if you wilfully ignore other parts of our history. Communities were terrorised and civilians maimed/killed for "spreading communism/communist ideas". Yes, civilians were targeted.

Yes, MK did terrorise some communities but so did the SADF.
 

NarrowBandFtw

Honorary Master
Joined
Feb 1, 2008
Messages
13,088
#38
theft is still rife from top to bottom.
ding ding ding!

Until we plug the holes in the bucket we should stop pouring more water into it. Same goes for guavamint spending in general, the sheer gall of these shameless motherfkrs even raising VAT and the fuel levies, hitting the poorest of the poor, while the money is just wasted.

Words cannot express how that angers me.
 

ponder

Honorary Master
Joined
Jan 22, 2005
Messages
71,501
#39
Every (para)military is a terrorist group depending on which side you're on. France in Libya, Libya in CAR and Kenya, Russia in Crimea and Georgia, Israel in Palestine and Palestine in Israel, US pretty where there's traces of crude oil and military is a pushover, SADF to black South Africans and MK to white South Africans?

It's just how it is.
Imho opinion there's a big difference between actively targeting civilians and having civilian collateral damage. You would probably disagree.
 

KhoisanX

Expert Member
Joined
Jul 20, 2009
Messages
1,264
#40
I have always wondered since Trump mentioned it.

Why do nations who use their armies for peace keeping missions, not get paid for it? As an example: SA in DRC, why do we as the tax payers need to fund the efforts in DRC. Why doesn't the DRC fund these troops and the costs associated with it?
Operations in the DRC are funded by the UN, but the money doesn't go directly to the military.
 
Top