The fight against ISIS

[sean miguel]

I know there's other threads where the subject has been discussed but this is beyond just going back into Iraq. This is Al-Qaeda on steroids and something we're going to be dealing with for the immediate future.

I have to give President Obama credit; even though his critics on both sides of the aisle say he's not doing enough and that he waited too long to do anything at all, I'm just thankful that he's doing as much as he's doing now. Like I said, this has ramifications far greater than just the fate of Iraq. There's no way around it - either ISIS is dealt with now or later after another mass casualty event in the U.S. or Europe. The western powers have a unique and opportune situation here where hardcore islamists around the world are flocking to Syria and Iraq to to fight under the ISIS banner to fulfill their dreams of jihad and martyrdom. Let's give it to them. And this isn't an insurgency we're dealing with that has majority support of the local populace. This is pretty much a regular military force sans air power who are fighting out in the open and are brutalizing the locals.

Obama has said that no U.S. combat troops would be on the ground fighting in Iraq. Fine, placate your base or whatever you need to do <nudge><wink>. But the fact is, these airstrikes against ISIS are not being directed by Kurdish or Iraqi forces. America's finest and it's allies are on the ground.


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...n-Iraq-Obama-said-no-combat-troops-fight.html


Just fucking kill them all.

 

[xfire]

One of my big problems with George W. Bush was that he wasn't willing to commit to total war against Al-Qaeda. When it came time to fucking annihilate the terror threat he pulled back because the poll numbers started sinking when the death toll started rising. If Obama decides to commit to fighting ISIS/ISIL, and let's face it that's pretty much a foregone conclusion, I'll hold him to the same standard. Polls be damned, if we're going to engage these fucking terrorists then it can't be done half-assed, like Mike Ehrmentraut told Walter White, "no more half measures", if we're serious about engaging the Islamic terror threat it's time for every citizen to have some skin in the game, not just our military.

 

[Straight Shooter]

One of my big problems with George W. Bush was that he wasn't willing to commit to total war against Al-Qaeda. When it came time to fucking annihilate the terror threat he pulled back because the poll numbers started sinking when the death toll started rising. If Obama decides to commit to fighting ISIS/ISIL, and let's face it that's pretty much a foregone conclusion, I'll hold him to the same standard. Polls be damned, if we're going to engage these fucking terrorists then it can't be done half-assed, like Mike Ehrmentraut told Walter White, "no more half measures", if we're serious about engaging the Islamic terror threat it's time for every citizen to have some skin in the game, not just our military.

Right now Obama is trying to put together a broad coalition to go after ISIL, one that will include Arab countries. What I'm sick and tired of is countries like Saudi Arabia always bitching to the U.S about problems in their region and demanding that we(U.S.) take care of it for them. God forbid if Saudi Arabia were to ever use the billions of dollars worth of military weapons that we sell to them

 

[xfire]

Right now Obama is trying to put together a broad coalition to go after ISIL, one that will include Arab countries. What I'm sick and tired of is countries like Saudi Arabia always bitching to the U.S about problems in their region and demanding that we(U.S.) take care of it for them. God forbid if Saudi Arabia were to ever use the billions of dollars worth of military weapons that we sell to them

I get what you're saying, but even with Bush being gay for Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah they wouldn't clean up their own neighborhood.

 

[Johan]

About a: year ago, most conservatives warmongers were excited about the idea of a possible US military intervention in Syria to help the rebels fighting against Bachar El-Assad. Now the very same people that were calling for such an intervention -wich, thank God, never happened otherwise Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi would most probably be the leader of Syria as we speak- want the US to bomb the very people the wanted to help a year ago and wich are fighting against the very same Bachar El-Assad that consevatives were considering as a enemyof the US and that they now see as a ossible ally...

In the 80', the US brough help to afghans fighting against the commis. 20 years later one of the very afgan that received training from the CIA send 2 planes on the WTC.
In 2003 the US went ot war in Iraq, they overthrowed Saddam Hussein and all his government. Now Iraq is a mess and the homeland of the most powerfull radical islamic organisation ever.

Now, US warmongers just have to realise one thing : Their worst case scenario, the one they will never tell about, the one in wich everything goes wrong, is what is most likely to happen. And it's very possible that things will go even worse than that...

 

[MustBeGood]

It was this order by Paul Bremer on May 12, 2003 with orders from W's administration:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De-Ba'athification

Iraqi ex-mayor: US & Iraq govt mistakes alienated people, paved way for ISIS

http://rt.com/shows/sophieco/170824-army-us-isis-iraq/

 

[tvstrip]

Can someone please explain what ISIS/ISIL thought they'd gain by publicly beheading, not one, but 2 Americans?
Al-Qaeda distanced themselves saying they were too extremist, Muslims hate them because they're giving Allah a bad name (and Muslims are being killed by them too); they have no allies, political or religious, and now they want to antagonize the US? What am I missing here?

 

[sean miguel]

About a: year ago, most conservatives warmongers were excited about the idea of a possible US military intervention in Syria to help the rebels fighting against Bachar El-Assad. Now the very same people that were calling for such an intervention -wich, thank God, never happened otherwise Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi would most probably be the leader of Syria as we speak- want the US to bomb the very people the wanted to help a year ago and wich are fighting against the very same Bachar El-Assad that consevatives were considering as a enemyof the US and that they now see as a ossible ally...

In the 80', the US brough help to afghans fighting against the commis. 20 years later one of the very afgan that received training from the CIA send 2 planes on the WTC.
In 2003 the US went ot war in Iraq, they overthrowed Saddam Hussein and all his government. Now Iraq is a mess and the homeland of the most powerfull radical islamic organisation ever.

You can add the overthrow of Gaddafi facilitated by U.S. airpower to that list. Libya is now another terrorist playground and is being run by islamic militias. And those missing Libyan airliners? Coming to a city near you.

This whole arab spring thing did not work out in U.S. interests. The Muslim Brotherhood (Al-Qaeda's forerunner) was elected in Egypt until, thankfully, the egyptian military said "enough of this shit." Then of course, there's Syria.

 

[horn_dog]

There's a place for the Geneva convention and all the human rights stuff. But when you're dealing with a death cult, you have to realize that those things only matter to you. And as long as you hang on to them, the sooner you'll die. Nuclear weapons haven't been used sine Nagasaki, because of the fear of mutual destruction. Newsflash, ISIS doesn't care if they live or die. And as their power continues to grow and money keeps flowing(was $2 billion a week ago), sooner or later they will get their hands on some WMDs.

We have thousands of NBC weapons just lying around. It's time to use them on the ONLY so called people who deserve them. Time to nip this in the bud.

 

[MustBeGood]

There's a place for the Geneva convention and all the human rights stuff. But when you're dealing with a death cult, you have to realize that those things only matter to you. And as long as you hang on to them, the sooner you'll die. Nuclear weapons haven't been used sine Nagasaki, because of the fear of mutual destruction. Newsflash, ISIS doesn't care if they live or die. And as their power continues to grow and money keeps flowing(was $2 billion a week ago), sooner or later they will get their hands on some WMDs.

We have thousands of NBC weapons just lying around. It's time to use them on the ONLY so called people who deserve them. Time to nip this in the bud.

Most likely will be in the form of a dirty bomb that will have to be transported to a Western power door steps.

Unless they can gain some influence in Pakistan government and pull off a coup. But Pakistan's nukes don't have the range to hit the United States.

 

[horn_dog]

Most likely will be in the form of a dirty bomb that will have to be transported to a Western power door steps.

Unless they can gain some influence in Pakistan government and pull off a coup. But Pakistan's nukes don't have the range to hit the United States.

Don't forget other WMDs. And maybe there is a soviet nuclear suitcase bomb somewhere out there, who knows.

 

[sean miguel]

Can someone please explain what ISIS/ISIL thought they'd gain by publicly beheading, not one, but 2 Americans?
Al-Qaeda distanced themselves saying they were too extremist, Muslims hate them because they're giving Allah a bad name (and Muslims are being killed by them too); they have no allies, political or religious, and now they want to antagonize the US? What am I missing here?

That may gain them some recruits from the homicidal maniac types but you're right, if anything, this just galvanizes those who would be against any military action to wipe them out.

 

[Johan]

ISIS is even more extrem than Al-Qaeda, they outnumber Al-Qaeda, and, most important, they are much richer than Al-Qaeda : In addition to the money they raise by ransoming the populations, they receive money from outside, not from states like Saudi Arabia or Qatar but by rich people from these states. Also, when they took mosul, they looted the banks and gained about 700 millions of $.
They also control a few oil wells in northern Syria.

Their war chest is estimated of about 1.5 billions of $. According ot the Council on Foreign Relations, at its peak (before 9/11) Al-Qaeda's war chest was about 30 millions of $, raised mostly through donations
http://www.cfr.org/terrorist-organizations-and-networks/al-qaedas-financial-pressures/p21347#p1

 

[tvstrip]

That may gain them some recruits from the homicidal maniac types but you're right, if anything, this just galvanizes those who would be against any military action to wipe them out.

That's a good point; showing that they're the biggest dog in the yard would be a useful recruiting tool. If you're a jihadist looking to die, I can see why you'd want to join the most notorious group. Kinda like how a young punk joins a gang. I mean, it's in the news that many CANADIANS have joined them; that's pretty telling. It was also reported that ISIS's media team is better than Al-Qaeda; instead of the grainy webcam-quality videos, they have professional quality videos, and even use facebook, twitter and other social media.

Their war chest is estimated of about 1.5 billions of $. According ot the Council on Foreign Relations, at its peak (before 9/11) Al-Qaeda's war chest was about 30 millions of $, raised mostly through donations
http://www.cfr.org/terrorist-organizations-and-networks/al-qaedas-financial-pressures/p21347#p1

Where are you getting $1.5 billion? You link only shows Al-Qaeda figures. Even with the Mosul banks, that seems like an exaggeration.

 

[Johan]

Where are you getting $1.5 billion? You link only shows Al-Qaeda figures. Even with the Mosul banks, that seems like an exaggeration.

Actually, 1.5 billion is not the correct number. According to The Guardian, their war chest is about 2 billions
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jun/15/iraq-isis-arrest-jihadists-wealth-power

 

[tvstrip]

Actually, 1.5 billion is not the correct number. According to The Guardian, their war chest is about 2 billions
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jun/15/iraq-isis-arrest-jihadists-wealth-power

That clears things up a bit. It's not just donations. They're fencing stolen artifacts, ransoming oilfields back to governments and bootlegging raw materials, all in addition to robbing cities.

Scary thing is, with that much money and weapons, they can now hire professional mercenaries instead of relying on recruit Jihadists.

 

[MustBeGood]

Taking out this idiot ISIS leader Ali Whatever and his Cronies is easy.

Might mean sacrifice by spies, but many Westerners joining and we need the CIA to infiltrate this group and start picking these uncivilized asshole leaders off with lying recruits that talk their talk.

 

[Little Red Wagon Repairman]

If there are not supposed to be any boots on the ground then what the heck did Joe Biden say besides nothing? Musta been looking for a Harrumph!

 

[tvstrip]

Looks like the West won't need to put boots on the ground since they already have enough groups that hate ISIS.

...Because of its radical, Sunni-focused interpretation of Islam and persecution of minorities, ISIS has come into conflict with Shiites — who comprise the religious majority in Iraq — moderate Sunnis, Christians and Yazidis, as well as the Kurds in the north...

... ISIS may even produce the previously unthinkable: co-operation between Iran and Saudi Arabia...

...ISIS has been forced to fight a battle on multiple fronts — against the Turkish and Syrian militaries near the Turkey-Syria border, the Kurdish peshmerga in Iraq's north, the Iraqi military and Shia militia throughout Iraq and U.S. airstrikes from above...

http://news.yahoo.com/why-isis-may-not-powerful-090000700.html

 

[xfire]

Hopefully Obama won't screw the pooch in the Middle East the way Bush did, Bush's pooch screwing is why there are still problems for the U.S. in that region.