Islamic State Crisis Megathread (ISIS/ISIL/IS)

[Saiwania]

If there's one thing that all this middle-east bullshit has taught me it's that the enemy of my enemy is not always my friend. Or in this case in particular, the fact that my new enemy is the enemy of my old enemy doesn't make my old enemy any better. Besides, supporting Assad means squishing the FSA, and we like those guys.

The Free Syrian Army can be Islamic fundamentalists for all we know, and shouldn't blindly be trusted. At least Assad is a despot who has been around for a long time and we have an idea of what his regime continuing will mean for Syria, which is keeping it and the surrounding region relatively stable.

If Obama could just drop his dislike for Assad, maybe the US could more quickly put down the Islamic State by joining Russia in helping Syria's military take back their lost territory and ditch trying to prop up a single Iraqi state so materiel and support can be thrown behind Kurdistan and a separate Shia state in Iraq's south to isolate the territory IS holds into a pocket that can be crushed between many salients on all sides.

[Organized States]

Limborg, I apologize that I cannot reply to your earlier statement directly (I'm on my phone), but your comment "How many terror groups were defeated by SOF", there were actually a few that have been destroyed or severally weakened. For example,
1. AQ (severely weakened by the death of OBL, and the senior leadership through Special Forces and Drone Strikes)
2. ABS (AQ-linked group in the Philippines, which has lost quite a bit of its senior leadership and materials following the actions of American and Filiphino Special Forces)
There's a few others I can bring up later.

Both are not taken out or have been severely weakened by the SOF on its own. In both of them regular forces did most of the work eventually. Besides that, Al-Qaeda has been weakened by many factors, not just military actions, and on that note aswell. They still exist and they are still a very serious threat.

The ABS, has been severely weakened, just by the actions of the SOF, they've lost almost all of their operational capacity from the raids by the US and the Filiphino SOF, while their ground punks eat fire from the Filiphino Marines. ABS, is literally nothing like its original state 10 years ago (seriously, they're down to only 300 members, which is huge, considering their strength ten years ago was believed to range into the thousands).

Your reasoning that regular ground pounders are needed is exactly what is getting our NATO boys and girls killed in Afghanistan. The Special Forces are made to fight Asymmetric warfare, and we need to sick them along with airstrikes against ISIS.

[Thanatttynia]

UK Home Office has just said that the threat of a terrorist attack is 'severe'.
BBC.
Apparently that means that an attack is highly likely. Eesh.

[Papait]

ISIS has executed 250 Syrian soldiers, who were captured by them.
They humiliated and tortured them before driving them in their underwear into the desert like cattle where they were executed.

This has gone far enough, it is time action is taken, the international community must finally say that it has gone too far.
While the russian seperatists get heavily criticised for parading POWs through town, while these thugs have broken almost every rule that was made according to the Geneva Convention.

The prisoners did not get treated with respect,
they were not allowed to write to their family,
they were not evacuated from the war zone,
they were held captive by those who captured them,
they were denied food and hygiene,
they were executed without trial and while the conflict was still raging,
they were afterwards not properly buried,
and they were not given death certificates after dying in captivity

this needs to be avenged, and even if it may seem hypocrite, I think we should start giving permission to Iran, Syria, Iraq and Hezbollah to execute any captured ISIS insurgent, and hand over any returning Jihadists that are caught within europe or the americas to Iraq and Syria, who may execute them.
This may seem hypocrite but it isnt.
ISIS is not an army nor are they civillian contractors of the army, and neither are they innocent civillians.
They are terrorists/insurgents/civillians participating in battle, and are therefore not enjoying the protection soldiers have.
If ISIS thinks it okay to avenge actions from the US and Hezbollah, then we must return the favor.

I think Hezbollah is already killing them off and i wouldn't be suprised if Iraqi soldiers and Syrian soldiers do the very same. ISIS are the worst of the worst, everybody knows it and yet there's almost nobody that is actually taking steps in stopping them.

I agree that those captured in western nations should be send to Syria and/or Iraq, but that counts for all nations that manage to capture these scumbags. And not only those that have been on Jihad with ISIS but also those that openly support ISIS. Oh and while everybody should do that, they should also send a bullet or a piece of rope with every single IS man/woman.

It's al-Nusra apparently.

Officially its Jabhat al-Nusra

Well Hezbollah is suspected to be holding captured Insurgents in Alepppo, instead of executing them( most likely for public opinion purposes)
they off course capture little ISIS insurgents, as the fanataics don't let themselves get captured easily, and Hezbollah is mainly busy defending locations, and not attacking ISIS.
The Syrian government and Iraq both still hold many captive, as executing those ISIS rats would be seen as war crimes by the hypocrites in the west.

Also, we can not give a good reason within law to send the captured promotes to the Syrian governemtn, however we can send back returning jihadists, as they would have commited crimes in Syria and Iraq.

[Papait]

Ah, once again (like Always) there's so much reason to be ashamed of my own country...
Netherlands sends no arms nor soldiers to Iraq, at most they send some bulletproof vests, helmets and other stuff that doesn't change much to the Kurds

And look, we send more..
Netherlands sends 1,5 million to Kurds to clear mines

In the meanwhile: Iran sends weapons to Kurds, Foxnews fails to see that the Kurds aren't US allies, and if they are, then Iran would be allied to them aswell

One thing is sure, Iran will be the real victorious side on this whole ISIS situation. Its clear that the Gulf nations (Qatar, Bahrain, Saudi-Arabia) played their last card in the games of both Syria and Iraq.
http://www.newsweek.com/iraq-calls-international-war-against-islamic-state-iran-vows-solidarity-266475
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2014/08/iran-soldiers-iraq-islamic-state-2014823161322258630.html

Lebanon calls for support against IS http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2014/08/28/376912/lebanon-calls-for-support-to-fight-isil/

Just like the UK, US and Germany, France also joined the side of ignorant countries, refusing to combat IS effectively http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2014/08/28/376909/assad-no-ally-in-fight-against-isil/

The Kurdish dissapointment was their own fault, they could have known that 1000 helmets just meant 1000 helmets, maybe they can be thankfull, ditch the stupid caps and wear the helmets and send us a thank you note once it stops a bullet.

Iran and Lebanon will be likely to win most of it, as they are the parties most actively aiding in the Area, they will also be likely to receive most recognition, they may even be able to annex territories.
Kurdistan may also be a winner in the end, as they seem closer to independence now than ever

[The Lone Alliance]

Ah, once again (like Always) there's so much reason to be ashamed of my own country...
Netherlands sends no arms nor soldiers to Iraq, at most they send some bulletproof vests, helmets and other stuff that doesn't change much to the Kurds

And look, we send more..
Netherlands sends 1,5 million to Kurds to clear mines

In the meanwhile: Iran sends weapons to Kurds, Foxnews fails to see that the Kurds aren't US allies, and if they are, then Iran would be allied to them aswell

I see no problem with Iran being allied with them, the entire reason Iran even remained an enemy to the west is solely the fault of the US.

Iran attempted reconciliation after 9/11 and was shunned and stuck on the "Axis of Evil" despite helping the US liberate Afghanistan. Talk about a backstab.

One thing is sure, Iran will be the real victorious side on this whole ISIS situation. Its clear that the Gulf nations (Qatar, Bahrain, Saudi-Arabia) played their last card in the games of both Syria and Iraq.

This is a monster that they partly created. The blowback is severe now.

Lebanon calls for support against IS

Of course, IS has attacked them personally also.

Just like the UK, US and Germany, France also joined the side of ignorant countries, refusing to combat IS effectively

France is most likely going back to Libya soon at this rate, they're not going to commit in Iraq.

[Padnak]

It seems to me that ISIS doesn't have much of a support base outside of the area's it directly controls and it seems to fight like a conventional army, so why can't we just bomb the ever living shit out of it to give the Kurds, Iraqis and Syrians a chance to gain ground

[Germanic Templars]

Well it seems like Obama doesn't have a strategy for dealing with ISIS, but hey screw them lets go to a few fundraisers and a wedding and push it off to the side.

Really? Now if there is anything that rustles my jimmies is piss poor leadership in the face of adversity.

To make things worse, ISIS also has some plans to making biological weapons.

Now ladies and gentlemen let me just say this... Now we must all fear evil men, but there is another kind of evil that we must fear most. And that evil is the indifference of good men. Enough could be done in the Middle East to stop this threat from plaguing the world. However, the only way to stop this coming plague is to band together and fight for a common cause. Am I saying that old enemies should become friends? Yes. If only for a moment.

[Murkwood]

UK Home Office has just said that the threat of a terrorist attack is 'severe'.
BBC.
Apparently that means that an attack is highly likely. Eesh.

That's not good. At all. Just goes to show the importance of stopping ISIS.

[Limborg]

Just like the UK, US and Germany, France also joined the side of ignorant countries, refusing to combat IS effectively http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2014/08/28/376909/assad-no-ally-in-fight-against-isil/

If there's one thing that all this middle-east bullshit has taught me it's that the enemy of my enemy is not always my friend.
Or in this case in particular, the fact that my new enemy is the enemy of my old enemy doesn't make my old enemy any better.
Besides, supporting Assad means squishing the FSA, and we like those guys.

True, but 1.Assad is a thousend times better then IS, 2.The FSA is doomed already, 3.Saying that IS should be stopped while not wanting to cooperate with Syria is the same as saying that IS shouldn't be stopped.

Both are not taken out or have been severely weakened by the SOF on its own. In both of them regular forces did most of the work eventually. Besides that, Al-Qaeda has been weakened by many factors, not just military actions, and on that note aswell. They still exist and they are still a very serious threat.

The ABS, has been severely weakened, just by the actions of the SOF, they've lost almost all of their operational capacity from the raids by the US and the Filiphino SOF, while their ground punks eat fire from the Filiphino Marines. ABS, is literally nothing like its original state 10 years ago (seriously, they're down to only 300 members, which is huge, considering their strength ten years ago was believed to range into the thousands).

Your reasoning that regular ground pounders are needed is exactly what is getting our NATO boys and girls killed in Afghanistan. The Special Forces are made to fight Asymmetric warfare, and we need to sick them along with airstrikes against ISIS.

So you're claiming that a small band of special forces would be capable to defeat IS on their own? That would really be redicilous. Sure Special forces can do something, but the real challenge lies with the regular military who has to force terrorist scum out of cities and villages back into the holes where they came from, and that is something special forces cannot do, not with a group that numbers from 50 to 100 thousend armed "soldiers".

I think Hezbollah is already killing them off and i wouldn't be suprised if Iraqi soldiers and Syrian soldiers do the very same. ISIS are the worst of the worst, everybody knows it and yet there's almost nobody that is actually taking steps in stopping them.

I agree that those captured in western nations should be send to Syria and/or Iraq, but that counts for all nations that manage to capture these scumbags. And not only those that have been on Jihad with ISIS but also those that openly support ISIS. Oh and while everybody should do that, they should also send a bullet or a piece of rope with every single IS man/woman.



Officially its Jabhat al-Nusra

Well Hezbollah is suspected to be holding captured Insurgents in Alepppo, instead of executing them( most likely for public opinion purposes)
they off course capture little ISIS insurgents, as the fanataics don't let themselves get captured easily, and Hezbollah is mainly busy defending locations, and not attacking ISIS.
The Syrian government and Iraq both still hold many captive, as executing those ISIS rats would be seen as war crimes by the hypocrites in the west.

Also, we can not give a good reason within law to send the captured promotes to the Syrian governemtn, however we can send back returning jihadists, as they would have commited crimes in Syria and Iraq.

We cannot know for sure, and ofcourse it wouldn't happen on large scale, but i wouldn't be suprised at all that at least some Iraqi/Syrian/Hezbollah ect ect. soldiers are just executing IS members on the scene.

Sad but true, at days like these i would wish that laws where more open for such stuff...

Ah, once again (like Always) there's so much reason to be ashamed of my own country...
Netherlands sends no arms nor soldiers to Iraq, at most they send some bulletproof vests, helmets and other stuff that doesn't change much to the Kurds

And look, we send more..
Netherlands sends 1,5 million to Kurds to clear mines

In the meanwhile: Iran sends weapons to Kurds, Foxnews fails to see that the Kurds aren't US allies, and if they are, then Iran would be allied to them aswell

One thing is sure, Iran will be the real victorious side on this whole ISIS situation. Its clear that the Gulf nations (Qatar, Bahrain, Saudi-Arabia) played their last card in the games of both Syria and Iraq.
http://www.newsweek.com/iraq-calls-international-war-against-islamic-state-iran-vows-solidarity-266475
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2014/08/iran-soldiers-iraq-islamic-state-2014823161322258630.html

Lebanon calls for support against IS http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2014/08/28/376912/lebanon-calls-for-support-to-fight-isil/

Just like the UK, US and Germany, France also joined the side of ignorant countries, refusing to combat IS effectively http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2014/08/28/376909/assad-no-ally-in-fight-against-isil/

The Kurdish dissapointment was their own fault, they could have known that 1000 helmets just meant 1000 helmets, maybe they can be thankfull, ditch the stupid caps and wear the helmets and send us a thank you note once it stops a bullet.

Iran and Lebanon will be likely to win most of it, as they are the parties most actively aiding in the Area, they will also be likely to receive most recognition, they may even be able to annex territories.
Kurdistan may also be a winner in the end, as they seem closer to independence now than ever

True, but in the end the Netherlands could send better stuff, wich some politicians actually want. Helmets and such aren't really on the list with stuff the Kurds need, and ofcourse it helps a bit, but its still little to nothing, especially compared to other countries like Iran who reportedly sended tanks, missile systems and other heavy equipment to Iraqi Kurdistan.

I don't think any territory will be annexed, but the end result, without a doubt will be that Iran and Lebanon (mostly Hezbollah) get a very strong influence over both Syria, Iraq and even Iraqi Kurdistan. The Saudi's and other Wahabbi gulf scum nations have played their last cards, they are basicly out of the game as we speak. Kurdistan can be a winner aswell yes, but it very much depends on what they do with it and how others reply on it. The Kurds could in fact force the Iraqi government to give towns and cities to Kurdistan that Kurdistan claims. I know that alot of Shia groups in Iraq support these claims on the matter that Shia´s are protected under the Kurds better then under Iraq. This is something that could get support from Tehran aswell.
However the Kurds could also go for independence, and while this isn´t very likely, i don´t think they would get much support for that, just becouse its to much and the region wouldn´t be able to controll such changes and all at this very moment.
The best thing Kurdistan could do is the first option, finalizing its claims on the villages and cities. A last thing they could do with success is to get some kind of Kurdish region in Syria. This may be difficult, but if they can steer Iran into the direction of getting Assad on the table with the Kurds i´m sure its possible. In the end Assad also needs more allies and the Kurds have proven themselves well enough to be reliable.

Anyhow, those are things we have to wait and see.

Ah, once again (like Always) there's so much reason to be ashamed of my own country...
Netherlands sends no arms nor soldiers to Iraq, at most they send some bulletproof vests, helmets and other stuff that doesn't change much to the Kurds

And look, we send more..
Netherlands sends 1,5 million to Kurds to clear mines

In the meanwhile: Iran sends weapons to Kurds, Foxnews fails to see that the Kurds aren't US allies, and if they are, then Iran would be allied to them aswell

I see no problem with Iran being allied with them, the entire reason Iran even remained an enemy to the west is solely the fault of the US.

Iran attempted reconciliation after 9/11 and was shunned and stuck on the "Axis of Evil" despite helping the US liberate Afghanistan. Talk about a backstab.

One thing is sure, Iran will be the real victorious side on this whole ISIS situation. Its clear that the Gulf nations (Qatar, Bahrain, Saudi-Arabia) played their last card in the games of both Syria and Iraq.

This is a monster that they partly created. The blowback is severe now.

Lebanon calls for support against IS

Of course, IS has attacked them personally also.

Just like the UK, US and Germany, France also joined the side of ignorant countries, refusing to combat IS effectively

France is most likely going back to Libya soon at this rate, they're not going to commit in Iraq.

1. At this moment i even believe that the Kurds consider Iran as a better Ally then the US in the first place. Sure the two had their problems with Iranian Kurdistan, but in history they also fought many times alongside eachother, mainly in the Iraq wars.

I agree, the US should let go of their 1979 trauma, its outdated and really childish. Iran has proven itself to be one of the most reliable partners in the region. It doesn´t backstab its allies, it attempts to make things right with countries like the US (see Iraq and Afghanistan). Anyhow, as far as it goes for me, the US would need Iran more then Iran needs the US. So the whole loser of this childish game that is played by the US would be the US itself. Iran has only increased its influence, it has been improving its relations with many countries on the same speed as the US is losing its allies (Wich is damn fast if you ask me) and it has been growing over the years even though sanctions are in place.

2. Yup, and secretly i hope that ISIS is actually going to attack Saudi-Arabia.

3. Indeed, its not unlikely, in the end Lebanon is very unstable while very stable at the same time. Either nothing happens or a civil war breaks out. The last thing is something they want to avoid ofcourse. A good thing however is that (as far as i know) little to no Sunni groups in Lebanon actually support IS. What got me the most on that article is that they usually go to France for help, but it seems that they kinda dropped France, wich in my opinion is a great thing.

4. Yeah, France seems to have more of a fetish towards Africa then to the Middle-East. Anyhow, i doubt they will achieve anything in Libya.. Libya has turned into a new Somalia sadly...

[Pope Joan]

Weren't the sheep of the West very recently saying that the only force of evil was Assad (friend of Christians and Shiites)?
His opponents were all underarmed citizens and Arab Spring democrats who needed out support, right? Surely that has been the consistent position of the UK, France (timidly), and US State under Hillary and ?

And even now we try to convince everyone that Assad is really one of them! A supporter of the very jihadists who are ravaging his country.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/08/ ... LL20140828


So, we foolishly rule out cooperation with Assad against Islamic State. Because when all is said and done, we cannot get over our hypnotically memorized line: "ASSAD BAAAD!!"

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/nat ... story.html

Kerry wants to focus instead on Iran! Why? Perhaps because it supports Hezbollah which has refused to buckle under to Israel.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wor ... g-in-iran/

[Limborg]

Weren't the sheep of the West very recently saying that the only force of evil was Assad (friend of Christians and Shiites)?
His opponents were all underarmed citizens and Arab Spring democrats who needed out support, right? Surely that has been the consistent position of the UK, France (timidly), and US State under Hillary and ?

And even now we try to convince everyone that Assad is really one of them! A supporter of the very jihadists who are ravaging his country.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/08/ ... LL20140828


So, we foolishly rule out cooperation with Assad against Islamic State. Because when all is said and done, we cannot get over our hypnotically memorized line: "ASSAD BAAAD!!"

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/nat ... story.html

Kerry wants to focus instead on Iran! Why? Perhaps because it supports Hezbollah which has refused to buckle under to Israel.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wor ... g-in-iran/

Welcome to the western world, where we hate countries that refuse to bow down to our will...
I think everybody sees right through this nonsense coming from the great US and EU, it was already a bust at the moment the "Arab Spring" began, the moment that the US and EU couldn't stop talking about Egypt, Syria and Libya while totally ignoring Bahrain, Yemen and Saudi-Arabia.
Funny though, at the moment that the whole world stands behind Syria, Iran and Hezbollah, the US and EU need to complain about them. At the moment that the EU and US could get some from of relations with these countries and this Organization/Political Party/Militia, they fail to do so and continue their pathetic path on wich they have been walking for decades.

[Gauthier]

True, but 1.Assad is a thousend times better then IS, 2.The FSA is doomed already, 3.Saying that IS should be stopped while not wanting to cooperate with Syria is the same as saying that IS shouldn't be stopped.

Assad's regime is also heavily backed by Russia and if we throw the FSA under the bus in favor of Assad, there's also an implied message sent that the world might be willing to let Russia do whatever the fuck it pleases with Ukraine in exchange for taking care of ISIS.

[Padnak]

Why don't we work with assad to crush ISIS

then we kill assad when we're done with ISIS

fucking solved two problems right there

[Yumyumsuppertime]

Yesterday, President Obama made a short speech in which he discussed both the economy and the current crisis with the Islamic State, making a now infamous gaffe by stating that "We don't have a strategy yet" when "We're adapting to a rapidly developing situation in partnership with our allies" would have said the same thing, only without a ready-made punchline. So what does Rep. Peter King have an issue with besides that line?

"There's no way any of us can excuse what the president did yesterday," King said on NewsMaxTV on Friday. The interview was flagged by Buzzfeed. "When you have the world watching … a week, two weeks of anticipation of what the United States is gonna do. For him to walk out —I'm not trying to be trivial here— in a light suit, light tan suit, saying that first he wants to talk about what most Americans care about the revision of second quarter numbers on the economy. This is a week after Jim Foley was beheaded and he's trying to act like real Americans care about the economy, not about ISIS and not about terrorism. And then he goes on to say he has no strategy."

Emphasis mine.

Now, I find the whole controversy to be unsuitable for a man of Rep. King's stature to be discussing, but perhaps I'm missing something. Did the tan suit make America appear weak in the eyes of the world? Would a charcoal gray have been more fitting? Or perhaps a dark blue? Do the President's fashion choices make him seem flippant? What say you all?

[Conserative Morality]

Looked a little Sunday morning, maybe, but a mediocre fashion choice doesn't really mean anything.

[Dyakovo]

Rep. King is an idiot.

[The Serbian Empire]

Just politics as usual. Obama not having a plan and Peter King's comments are both troubling to me.

[Ifreann]

It sure is kind of Representative King to distract from Obama's fuck up like this.



Though, I will say that I don't like that suit on Obama. Shit, I must be turning conservative in my old age...

[Dyakovo]

Just politics as usual. Obama not having a plan and Peter King's comments are both troubling to me.

Why would not having a plan before consulting with our allies that we'd be working with be troubling?

[Yumyumsuppertime]

Just politics as usual. Obama not having a plan and Peter King's comments are both troubling to me.

Why would not having a plan before consulting with our allies that we'd be working with be troubling?

That's what I'd like to know. He stated it poorly, but it makes sense.

[Avenio]

See, if Obama had shown up to the press conference in a Don Cherry special, I can see why people might think it was inappropriate. But I thought it was a nice suit, and it was certainly a welcome change from the usual suit that every politician to have drawn breath in the last 30 years has worn.

[Arkolon]

I have witnessed a fly trapped in a glass jar more newsworthy than this.

[The Serbian Empire]

Just politics as usual. Obama not having a plan and Peter King's comments are both troubling to me.

Why would not having a plan before consulting with our allies that we'd be working with be troubling?

No plan means there's no intention of stopping these genocidal figures from ISIS.

[Herskerstad]

Yeah, Obama has not exactly been decisive against IS. They had an insurgency, then conquered Mosul, went on a human-rights defying killing spree across the middle east, all marketed well in advice and then he thinks it's time to use drones some months later. Most likely he will try to get Germany involved, but Germany is notoriously non-interventionist on a larger scale and would probably be unwilling to pilot such. France is far more likely to join in and the UK will probably have to do something, but it is going to be a long-ass time of delegation before any coalition boots hits the ground. Then again, even Bush managed to get peoples ass into gear on such matters relatively quickly and I cannot say I have much faith that Obama will be able to do anything timely on this matter.

Much as I may enjoy saying it. This is one of those situations where it is better to have a pro-interventionist, be it a Reagan or a Clinton, than someone like Obama.

Edit: As for the suit. Don't like it. All he is missing is a Catalina seaplane to make him look like some snob from the Bahamas.