Connaugh

A23, please

From today's AD-HOC: CHAOS IN THE CHOUF-MOUNTAIN WAR IN LEBANON 1983 by Connaugh The Mountain War or Guerre de la Montagne in French, was a subconflict within the 1982-89 phase of the Lebanese Civil War, which occurred at the mountainous Chouf District located south-east of the Lebanese Capital Beirut. It pitted the Christian Lebanese Forces militia (LF) and the official Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) against a coalition of anti-government Muslim leftist militias led by the Druze Progressive Socialist Party (PSP), backed by the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) and Syria. Hostilities began when the LF and the LAF entered the predominantly Druze Chouf district to bring back the region under government control, only to be met with fierce resistance from local Druze militias and their allies. In the wake of the June 1982 Israeli invasion of Lebanon, the main Maronite Christian ally of Israel, the Lebanese Forces (LF) militia of the Kataeb Party commanded by Bashir Gemayel sought to expand its area of influence in Lebanon. The LF tried to take advantage of Israel Defense Forces (IDF) advances to begin deploying troops in areas where they had not been present before. This territorial expansion policy was focused on regions known to harbor a large Christian rural population, such as the mountainous Chouf District, located south-east of Beirut. By early 1983, the Lebanese Forces' managed to establish garrisons at a number of key towns in the Chouf, namely Aley, Deir el-Qamar, Souk El Gharb, Kfar Matta, Bhamdoun, Kabr Chmoun and others. However, this brought them into confrontation with the local Druze community, who viewed the LF as intruders on their territory. SITUATION: As soon as the last Israeli units left the Chouf, the Druze launched a full-scale offensive on Lebanese Forces positions at villages throughout the Chouf. MISSION: Lebanese Forces, comprised of the Christian militias of: Phalangists, Marada, Tigers, and the Guardians of the Cedars of Lebanon, are to advance into the Chouf and recapture the lost villages. EXECUTION: Task Force: Tiger objectives are Alayn and Bhamdoun. Task Force: Phalange objectives are Bemkkine and Souk El Gharb. Task Force: Marada objectives are Kafoun and Besrine. Task Force: Cedar Guards objectives are Qabr Chmoun, Deir Mar Maroun,and Deir El Qamar FORCE COMPOSITION: Lebanese Forces: Phalange 1 x T-55A Tank Platoon, 1 x BTR-80 PC Platoon Marada 1 x T-55A Tank Platoon, 1 x BTR-80 PC Platoon Tiger 1 x T-55A Tank Platoon, 1 x BTR-80 PC Platoon Cedar Guards 1 x T-55A Tank Platoon, 1 x BTR-80 PC Platoon Each Task Force has: CSS of Repair, Medic, and Supply Truck Mortar Platoon 1 x M1025 HMMWV Recon Artillery: 2 Batteries x 2 tubes Druze: T-55A Tanks. Infantry with Anti-tank weapons Message will be generated when objectives are captured. Marada advancing Phalangist eliminating Druze Infantry in Bemkine Clearing Druze Infantry at Souk El Gharb Kill at Besrine Cedar Guards clearing Qabr Chmoun Taking losses at Deir Mar Maroun Druze counterattack at Qabr Chmoun Phalangist Recon killed at Souk El Gharb Knife-fight at Deir Mar Maroun At Besrine Druze counterattack at Alayh

I will be there. I have a scenario that we can play: CHAOS IN THE CHOUF-MOUNTAIN WAR IN LEBANON 1983 I have three versions to accommodate the number of players that we have. Conn

A13, please

From todays Kanium Mission THE TOYOTA WAR: CHAD-LIBYA 1987

B13, please.

32B, please Connaught

A23, please. Conn

A32, please. Conn

A33, please Conn

A33, please Conn

H23, please. Conn

World court sinks Bolivia bid for sea access The International Court of Justice on Monday ruled against landlocked Bolivia in a row with Chile over access to the Pacific Ocean that dates back to the 19th century. Bolivia lost its prized route to the sea in a 1879-1883 war with Chile, and Santiago has rejected every attempt since then by its smaller and poorer neighbour to win back its coastline. La Paz took Santiago to the top UN court in The Hague in 2013 to try to force it to the negotiating table over the maritime spat, a long-running strain on relations between the two South American countries. "The court by 12 votes to three finds that the Republic of Chile did not undertake a legal obligation to negotiate a sovereign access for the... state of Bolivia," judge Abdulqawi Ahmed Yusuf said at the end of a judgement that took an hour and 20 minutes to read out. The judge said, however, he hoped that "with willingness on the part of both parties meaningful negotiations can be undertaken". Bolivia's leftist President Evo Morales -- who has used the issue to boost support at home as he seeks a fourth term in office -- attended the court in person for the verdict. "Bolivia will never give up" its claim, Morales told reporters afterwards. "The people of the world know that Bolivia had an invasion and we had our sovereign access to the Pacific Ocean taken away from us." - 'False expectations' - The ICJ was set up after World War II to rule in disputes between UN member states. The court's findings are binding and cannot be appealed, although it has no real power to enforce them. Chile and Bolivia have had no diplomatic relations since 1978 when Bolivia's last major attempt to negotiate a passage to the Pacific broke down in acrimony. The War of the Pacific pitted Bolivia and Peru on one side against Chile on the other, and saw battles fought in the Pacific Ocean, the Andes mountains and even in the Atacama Desert, the driest desert in the world. Decades of post-independence border tensions in South America were finally ignited by a dispute over Bolivian attempts to tax a Chilean company mining saltpetre, a mineral used in fertilizer that was at the time replacing the traditional use of guano, the excrement of seabirds and bats. Chilean President Sebastian Pinera lashed out at his Bolivian counterpart as he hailed the ICJ's decision. "President Evo Morales of Bolivia has created false expectations in his own people, and has created great frustration in his own people," he said in a statement. "We have lost five valuable years of the healthy and necessary relationship that Chile needs with all neighbouring countries, including Bolivia." - 'The struggle continues!' - Morales has weaponised the dispute to boost his popularity at home where the importance of the issue is underscored by the fact that Bolivia still has a navy despite lack of access to the sea. A small crowd of Bolivian protesters waved flags, played pan pipes and banged drums outside the Peace Palace for the verdict, shouting "The struggle continues!" "Of course we are sad about the decision. We’re a small country, but we’re not Switzerland or Luxembourg. We need access to export and import our goods,” said Gabriella Telleria, 50, one of the protesters. “We asked for justice and we didn’t get it,” she told AFP. Bolivia says regaining the 400 kilometres (260 miles) of coastline along the northern tip of Chile that it lost in the war would stimulate growth and development in South America's poorest country. Bolivian activists said the loss of the Chuquicamata mine, the world's largest open-pit copper mine which is situated in the disputed area, has also badly hit the country's indigenous peoples. For its part, Santiago says the border is based on a 1904 peace treaty signed with Bolivia in the wake of the War of the Pacific and therefore must be respected. Meanwhile, Chile has opened its own case against Bolivia over the Silala waterway, which flows into the Atacama desert and which La Paz has threatened to divert. I thought that this recent decision by the World Court relates well with my mission in the Downloads section: THE WAR OF THE PACIFIC - PART TWO: BOLIVIA - CHILE Connaugh

A14, please Conn