[THREAD] On the recent ISIS Sinai video.

This is done with help from @war_noir, go follow.

As the ISIS insurgency in the Sinai continues, this video shows a very interesting mix of SALW, with some usual suspects appearing, but also more interesting things...

1/

First, the most prominent feature of the video is (as always), large IEDs blowing up army vehicles, with varied effectiveness. This has been a constant for years by now.

IS Sinai retain substantial IED expertise, with these...

2/
Also being laid in an anti personnel manner. Multiple targets are seen hit. Conventional close-range attacks are seen also.

3/
Now, let's turn to small arms. As usual, we see a mix of typical AKs, FALs, etc.

These include Type 56-1 and 2, FN FAL 50.00, FAL Para, AKM variants, and the ever present Libyan AK-103-2 (See thread here). We also see AMD-65.

https://t.co/CLIyU64RUD

4/
When it comes to heavier weapons, the commonly seen DShK/M and Type 54 are seen. These are common.

It is notable that IS Sinai have the operational freedom to use these on Technicals, despite the presence of the Egyptian Air Force. Oh, and 81/2mm mortar (Helwan M-69?)

5/

More from War

You May Also Like

This is a pretty valiant attempt to defend the "Feminist Glaciology" article, which says conventional wisdom is wrong, and this is a solid piece of scholarship. I'll beg to differ, because I think Jeffery, here, is confusing scholarship with "saying things that seem right".


The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.


Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)


There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.


At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?