The fight against ISIS

Following ISIS to the gates of Hell is a very bad idea 'cause in the end, you find yourself at the gates of Hell, which is not a very pleasant place to be. But it is the place where ISIs want america to be, where they wanna drag as much US citizens as possible

They've created a Hell of their own ? Fine, let them there don't even put a foot in that Hell.
This is a new Vietnam, a new Afghanistan, a new Iraq ? Are you sure you wanna start a new war in wich you'll be stuck for over 10 years and in the end you won't even win ?


Making sure, from outside this Hell, that these people won't get out of it, won't come in our world, would be a much better idea.
 
Following ISIS to the gates of Hell is a very bad idea 'cause in the end, you find yourself at the gates of Hell, which is not a very pleasant place to be. But it is the place where ISIs want america to be, where they wanna drag as much US citizens as possible

They've created a Hell of their own ? Fine, let them there don't even put a foot in that Hell.
This is a new Vietnam, a new Afghanistan, a new Iraq ? Are you sure you wanna start a new war in wich you'll be stuck for over 10 years and in the end you won't even win ?


Making sure, from outside this Hell, that these people won't get out of it, won't come in our world, would be a much better idea.
Cannot allow this kind of infection to linger.
 
Then why don't you intervene in North Korea ?
 
Iraq's Shi'ite militia, Kurds use U.S. air strikes to further own agendas


A small group of people pick through putrefying human remains laid out on plastic sheets by the side of a road in northern Iraq, searching for any trace of missing friends and relatives.

Some had brought spades to help dig up the mass grave near Suleiman Beg after the town was retaken from Sunni Islamic State militants who held the area until last week.

"They (Islamic State) slaughtered him simply because he was Shi'ite," said Jomaa Jabratollah, hauling the remnants of his friend, a truck driver, into a coffin, having identified him from the lighter in his breast pocket. "We must take revenge".

Helped by the United States and Iran, Kurdish forces and Shi’ite militia are finally beating back Islamic State militants who overran most Sunni Arab areas in northern and central Iraq nearly three months ago.

But the aftermath illustrates the unintended consequences of the U.S. air campaign against Islamic State.

Kurdish and Shi'ite fighters have regained ground, but Sunni Muslims who fled the violence are being prevented from returning home and some have had their houses pillaged and torched.

Rather than help keep the nation together, the air strikes risk being used by different factions for their own advantage in Iraq's sectarian and ethnic conflicts.

The fallout also risks worsening grievances that helped Islamic State find support amongst Iraq's Sunnis, and allows the militant group to portray the U.S. strikes as targeting their minority sect. That may make it more difficult to bring Sunnis on side and convince them to fight the militants.


"NO WAY BACK"

The unlikely coalition of Kurdish peshmerga fighters, Shi'ite militias and the U.S. air force won a major victory when it broke a siege of the Shi’ite Turkman town of Amerli last week and drove Islamic State from 25 nearby Sunni towns and villages.

But the aftermath is far from what the Americans envisioned. Smoke now rises from those Sunni villages, where some houses have been torched by Shi'ite militia. Others are abandoned, the walls daubed with sectarian slogans.

“There is no way back for them: we will raze their homes to the ground,” said Abu Abdullah, a commander of the Shi’ite Kataib Hizbollah militia in Amerli.

The area is now held by Kurdish peshmerga and Shi’ite militia, who have become the most powerful forces on the ground, rather than the Iraqi army, whose northern divisions collapsed this summer when Islamic State attacked.

By the time IS was expelled from around Amerli, many Sunni civilians had fled, fearing for their lives. They have few places to go and are too frightened to return.

"If a regular army were holding the area we could return, but as long as the militias are there we cannot,” said a 30-year-old displaced Sunni resident of one village near Amerli, who asked to remain unnamed. "They would slaughter us on the spot."

He admitted some villagers had supported IS, but said it was only one or two for every 70 to 80 households, and that the rest were innocent civilians who were too scared to stand against the militants or had nowhere else to go.

Sunni Turkman al-Muradli and his family left Suleiman Beg the day after it fell to Islamic State in June and moved to a Kurdish-controlled town nearby. A month later, their 21-year-old son was abducted.

The next time they saw him was in a video on the internet captioned "arrest of an Islamic State member", which appears to show their son being beheaded by Shi'ite militia fighters.

His weeping mother insisted he was an innocent student and said her son's killers had phoned her demanding $2,000 to return the corpse without a head, which the caller claimed to have taken to Baghdad as a trophy.

"We cannot return. Even if the Shi'ite army and militia withdraw, Islamic State will come back and the same will happen all over again," said the mother.

The mayor of Tuz Khurmato confirmed the account and said at least four other Sunnis had been abducted in the area in recent weeks, presumably by Shi'ite militia. At least one other video has circulated online of Shi'ite militiamen brandishing the heads of alleged Islamic State fighters.

Pictures online, also allegedly from Amerli, show two militia fighters posing with a pair of charred corpses.

A 42-year-old Shi'ite volunteer said it would eventually be safe for Sunnis to return and that no more than ten houses of known Islamic State members had been deliberately destroyed.

"The Sunnis will come back to their villages but not now: after a few months," he said.

"Since there is no confidence between Sunni and Shi’ite any more, they need guarantees from a third party, maybe the Kurds, then we can live peacefully together again, as we were."


ETHNIC TENSIONS

Sunni Arabs are also feeling a backlash in villages where they used to live alongside Kurds, who accuse them of collaborating with Islamic State.

Kurds, who are also mostly Sunni but identify first and foremost with their ethnicity, have taken back at least 127 villages since the start of the U.S. air campaign, some of which were home to Arabs too.

In one such village, returning Kurds have sprayed over the word "apostate" on the walls of houses and written "Kurdish home" instead. Arab households remain empty.

Kurds in the Makhmour area, from which IS was pushed out in August, say they no longer trust Arabs enough to live with them.

"All my neighbors were Arabs. Now most of them are with Islamic State," said Abdul Rahman Ahmed Abdullah, a member of the Kurdish security services from the village of Baqirta, south of Arbil. "We cannot be mixed together. The only solution is for them to leave."


SOLIDARITY SHORT-LIVED

During the operation to reach Amerli, Kurds gave passage to Shi'ite militia through territory they control and allowed them to use their bases, where they fired artillery at IS positions side by side in an unusual show of solidarity.

"Amerli united Iraqis," said Taleb Jaafar Mohammed, a Shi'ite Turkman teacher, holding a pistol in one hand and a string of prayer beads in the other.

But even during the operation, there were cracks in the coalition: Shi'ite militia and Kurdish forces fought under their own banners and the least visible flag was that of Iraq.

Now that the common enemy has been pushed back, the alliance is unraveling. Kataib Hizbollah, which controls access to Amerli, is denying Kurds entry to the town and one peshmerga commander described the militia as the "Shi'ite IS".

The tensions reflect a struggle for territory which the Shi'ite-led government in Baghdad claims, but the Kurds want as part of their autonomous region in the north of the country.

"This land is ours: they are an occupying force," said Sirwan, a Kurdish fighter, when asked about the Shi'ite militia presence. "There will be bigger problems than Islamic State in this area."
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/09/09/us-iraq-security-consequences-idUSKBN0H40B820140909

Bombing ISIS may end their reign of terror but in the end, another group will impose its own reign of terror...
 
Joe Biden proposed a partitioning of Iraq along sectarian lines during his presidential bid in 2008. There are problems with that of course like Turkey not wanting an independent Kurdish state on it's border but I think that's the inevitable outcome.
 
Western countries partitioning states in that region of the globe didn't went very well since 1947...
 

SabrinaDeep

Official Checked Star Member
I'm surprised that nobody ever mention the following:

-) Mubarak fall in Egypt
-) Ghaddafi fall in Lybia
-) Saddam fall in Irak
-) The attempt to let Assad fall in Syria

All first three have been wiped by US and EU armies in the name of Democracy. The fourth one still resists and luckily for us i would add. The removal of those three laic dictators have led to the current situation, producing everything but democracy at all, in those States, where now are in place radical muslim dictatorships. The rest is all bullshit.
You can go and bomb ISIS, but after ISIS there will be something else worse than ISIS. This is a religious war in being, not a war to a bunch of bad guys. Until the politically correctness cancer will keep obfuscating the minds of people in the West, there will not be victory, but only an escalation of violence on large scale which will be soon knocking at our doors.
With the elimination of Ghaddafi in Lybia, we are having thousands and thousands of terrorists coming to Europe from the Italian coasts every day as "refugees" and spreading all over Europe first, and from there soon hitting North America too. It's a religious war and we are losing it. The only way to win a religious war is to limit control and contain religious freedom in our laic countries. If the so-called "soft muslims" have a problem with it, that they started openly fighting radical muslims with protests on the streets, with keeping radical preachers out of their mosquee, with releasing critical interviews to the media with taking a constant and clear position against radical muslims. I don't see ANY of that. Fighting radical muslims at their home while we keep being politically correct at our homes won't produce anything but more fanatics at our doorsteps. Because this is not a war against terrorism: this is a religious war and for the muslims it is a global one.
 
I'm surprised that nobody ever mention the following:

-) Mubarak fall in Egypt
-) Ghaddafi fall in Lybia
-) Saddam fall in Irak
-) The attempt to let Assad fall in Syria

I did.

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.

And as I've said before, we are better off with secular dictators running things in the middle east. Start with the Shah of Iran. Yeah, a dictator and totally distasteful to Jimma Carter but what took his place after he was allowed to fall and got this whole ball rolling?

These jihadist types have used the west's strive for multiculturalism and tolerance to their advantage. But I think the tide is turning. Look at the measures the UK is proposing as far as revoking the passports and citizenships of those traveling to Syria and Iraq who are even suspected of joining ISIS.

I think ISIS has made some serious miscalculations and are in a perfect spot to be decimated. That is if the U.S. and it's allies don't screw it up.


And whoever wants to take ISIS' place can get some too.


I read something awhile back in regards to the culture in the islamic world. That being soundly defeated is evidence that your cause wasn't just and that you're just a crazy, or something to that effect. But a spectacular success (like 9/11) has the opposite effect and is the greatest recruiting tool.

And you're right, this is a religious war and not an overseas contingency or workplace violence.
 
I'm surprised that nobody ever mention the following:

-) Mubarak fall in Egypt
-) Ghaddafi fall in Lybia
-) Saddam fall in Irak
-) The attempt to let Assad fall in Syria

I've mentioned this a number of times too. These men were secular dictators but didn't tolerate Al-Qaeda types and brought way more stability to their countries than there is today. Assad is still alive and in power. I'd rather work with him and the Iranians too and get after IS. I wonder what influence King Abdullah had on Obama when they spoke yesterday morning.
http://news.yahoo.com/obama-speaks-saudi-king-abdullah-speech-official-153212374.html

2014-09-10T192038Z_40361691_GM1EA9A1TCW01_RTRMADP_3_IRAQ-CRISIS-OBAMA-SAUDI.JPG


obama-bows-to-the-king-of-saudi-arabia.jpg
 
I like the approach Obama is taking here - letting the locals fight on the ground with the assistance of U.S. special forces and air support. If that works out, it's the best option long term. Syria's Assad, who Obama was committed to overthrow, turns out will be our most effective ally.

And when this is all over, the Kurds deserve some major kickbacks from Washington. Other than little satan (Israel), they've been our most staunchest ally in the region.
 
funny-sign-religion-killing-for.jpg


The creep begins.
 
Maybe but what's the alternative?

I've stopped kidding myself that I had answers long ago. The selfish delusional assholes in this world create more problems that I could ever try and solve.
It is easy to look at the people who are killing people in the name of religion. Look at us. We have too many people in the US that believe "My side is right and Your side is wrong" by definition.
I can go on...
 
Looks like France is the only country so far that will participate in air strikes with the U.S. Germany and Turkey said they wont be participating in any air strikes. That's cool, we'll remember when you said no. But the next time the Germans or Turks need our help for something, I'd tell them they can just go fuck themselves.
 

SabrinaDeep

Official Checked Star Member
I like the approach Obama is taking here - letting the locals fight on the ground with the assistance of U.S. special forces and air support. If that works out, it's the best option long term. Syria's Assad, who Obama was committed to overthrow, turns out will be our most effective ally.

And when this is all over, the Kurds deserve some major kickbacks from Washington. Other than little satan (Israel), they've been our most staunchest ally in the region.

I'm sorry, i disagree with you there, Animus. Best ally against radical muslims right now is V. PUTIN. And it doesn't seem to me that Mr. Nobel Price is any keen about it.
 
Looks like France is the only country so far that will participate in air strikes with the U.S. Germany and Turkey said they wont be participating in any air strikes. That's cool, we'll remember when you said no. But the next time the Germans or Turks need our help for something, I'd tell them they can just go fuck themselves.
We are the only country that has a presient stupid enough not to understand going at war against ISIS is a terrible mistake, that, once more, Western civilisation are gonna mess things up and that innocent people are gonna pay for our stupidity, just like in 1991 and 2003




The creep is your neighbour. And their name is Mohamed. Any muslim in this forum please call me racist, so i can say a few words to you.
It's not racism, it's islamophobia.
In case you don't know, not all "arabic" people are muslims and not all muslims are "arabic". Indeed the contry that has the most muslims is Indonesia. Indonesia + Pakistan + India + Bangladesh = half of the world's muslim population.

I'm not muslim, I consider myself an atheist.
 
The creep is your neighbour. And their name is Mohamed. Any muslim in this forum please call me racist, so i can say a few words to you.

The creep I meant was the creep in scope in fighting ISIS or ISIL or whatever they are. Perhaps it would be best if the need to refer to them as anything would be eliminated. (Maybe if they could all find another club to join the world would be a better place). The "no boots on the ground", I believe is misleading from the start. I don't believe that applies to intelligence (feel free to mock that term) or Special Forces (I wouldn't mock that one). It could easily creep into more troops. I suspect there are a good number of boots on the ground that for good reason or not are not part of Obama's summary.

Re: Calling you a racist. I could understand how that handle could apply to those words. Dialing back a bit, I'm finding my tolerance for any religion to be zero. I don't care what religion you are, harm is done in the name of religion. So, unless you are doing some humanitarian good, my reaction to any religion-speak is negative. "It is your thing, don't involve me". If religion is involved in anything other than humanitarian works, then they are political. Politics of any kind are fair game.

So, you want to take the PC gloves off for Muslims. Go ahead. Do it for Catholics too or any other religion.

However, if calling you a racist would put me in a situation where you would have words to say to me and while you say those words I would get to stare into those eyes of your and watch your mouth. Well, then the Male Chauvinist Pig in me says, "Racist"
 
Top