Islamic State Crisis Megathread (ISIS/ISIL/IS)

[Geilinor]

They aren't fascists.

They are pretty much fascists.

No, they're theocrats.

[Ganos Lao]

DNA Tests Confirm Lebanon Is Holding ISIS Leader’s Child.

The woman also detained is believed to be al-Baghdadi's ex-wife

DNA tests have confirmed that the child held by Lebanese authorities is the daughter of the Islamic State of Iraq and Greater Syria (ISIS) leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi.

Lebanon’s Interior Minister Nohad Machnouk told domestic television channel MTV that the child’s mother is believed to have married to al-Baghdadi six years ago for a period of three months, the BBC reports.

The Iraqi government had said she was not married to the Islamist leader.

The woman, identified as Saja al-Dulaimi, tried to enter Lebanon over a week ago accompanied by two sons and a daughter when she was detained by border guards.

Machnouk claims al-Dulaimi is pregnant but the child is not al-Baghdadi’s.

“We conducted DNA tests on her and the daughter, which showed she was the mother of the girl, and that the girl is [al-Baghdadi’s] daughter, based on DNA from Baghdadi from Iraq,” Machnouk told MTV.

Machnouk said the children were staying at a care center while al-Dulaimi was being interrogated.

Right… I don't really know what to think on the situation anymore. First the Lebanese waiting 10 days before reporting that they had Baghdadi's wife and son, then the Iraqis saying that it isn't Baghdadi's wife, and then the Lebanese saying that it's Baghdadi's ex-wife and confirming it's his son via DNA testing.

It's not really going to hurt him. He probably treats wives and offspring as Doritos; Crunch All You Want We'll Make More.

He's probably got a stable of nymphets attending to him anyway.

[The Seleucids (Ancient)]

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/dec/05/iran-conducts-air-strikes-against-isis-exremists-iraq
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/02/21/us-syria-crisis-iran-idUSBREA1K09U20140221
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/iran-to-send-4000-troops-to-aid-president-assad-forces-in-syria-8660358.html
http://www.worldtribune.com/2014/08/26/kurds-say-iran-sent-combat-units-tanks-northern-iraq/
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jun/14/iran-iraq-isis-fight-militants-nouri-maliki
Need more?

Anyhow, i really don't understand how you cannot believe this.
Iran has far more reason then any other middle-eastern or western nation to get involved in the action against IS. First of all IS is attacking Iran's two most important allies in the region and is threatening a third one. Then there's the fact that Iran is like the "capital" of Shia Islam, which is being threatened by IS. Not to forget that IS has come very close to Iran's borders.
I guess you're just biased on the whole matter, but Iran has far more reason to get involved then any of the nations named in your source, but hey, they are already involved, so your biased view can fade away now.

Cute. However, we seen what they can do: Jack shit. Obviously.

Plus two of those sources are against Syrian rebels in general (mainly because they are from 2013 and Feb 2014 [before Daesh were around]).

And even then the earliest they were to do anything they still sucked at it.

You can say they contributed the most, but they didn't move much without NATO and Kurds. Hell the last source only talks about how Iran only sent 2,000 or so troops but later talks about how the Peshmerga has been helping out the Iraqi forces.

And take note that the earliest they have been able to help out with airstrikes was recently.

I will take note of the military movement from Iran, but how does that stack up against humanitarian aid dropped to Iraqi and Kurds, let alone the bombing runs we (Coalition) have done to the Daesh and the support we gave to Iraqi and Kurds to help push them back from Mosul dam as well as the ongoing defense of Kobane.

Sorry to break your heart, sweety, but Iran, even with a lot of effort, isn't quite doing as much as they should. And that is sadly with their units helping out since 2013.

Once again, they are doing the most over there. The Kurds are still part of Iraq if you didn't notice.
The west is the one doing jack shit about it and yet you seem to cheer for that.
Aside from that, you do know that there wasn't much to do before 2013 right?

Once again you're biased views seem to get the upper hand, please get a neutral view at the conflict, once you can have one we'll talk again.

[Sebastianbourg]

It's not really going to hurt him. He probably treats wives and offspring as Doritos; Crunch All You Want We'll Make More.

He's probably got a stable of nymphets attending to him anyway.

Have you read Nabokov's Lolita?

[The Lone Alliance]

Cute. However, we seen what they can do: Jack shit. Obviously.

Shows how little you know about this then.

l
You can say they contributed the most, but they didn't move much without NATO and Kurds. Hell the last source only talks about how Iran only sent 2,000 or so troops but later talks about how the Peshmerga has been helping out the Iraqi forces.

Wow a western source reporting more on what Western backed groups are doing over a nation that's considered an enemy?

And take note that the earliest they have been able to help out with airstrikes was recently.

Actually that's not even certain, there were some airstrikes very early on that weren't carried out by the US or the Iraqi Air force, people originally suspected that they were Russian but Iran was another suspect.

And after the Coalition began operating, flying into Iraq without Coalition permission would risk getting whatever sent over shot down.

I will take note of the military movement from Iran, but how does that stack up against humanitarian aid dropped to Iraqi and Kurds,

See above, like the US would allow Iran to fly transport planes over Iraq to deliver humanitarian aid even if Iran had the capability. Which they don't.

let alone the bombing runs we (Coalition) have done to the Daesh and the support we gave to Iraqi and Kurds to help push them back from Mosul dam

Your biggest thing to brag about is helping to take back a dam.

Meanwhile Iran helped break a siege over 15,000 people trapped in a town in Eastern Iraq without food or water.

Worked with the Iraqi Shia militias to take back a city a mere 50 miles south of Baghdad.

And helped to take back the city of Baiji which is located deep within ISIS territory and while taking back Iraq's largest Oil refinery which most of Iraq depends on . While doing so they also cut off the direct route from Mosul to Tikrit while leaving a finger sticking out deep within ISIS territory following the Tigris river.

as well as the ongoing defense of Kobane.

In Syria, which Iran can't do anything in.

l
Sorry to break your heart, sweety, but Iran, even with a lot of effort, isn't quite doing as much as they should. And that is sadly with their units helping out since 2013.

Sorry to break your delusion but it looks like they're doing better than expected.

[Socialist Czechia]

OMG, can these silly islamist rebels finally stop?

Putin should send Assad many thermobaric bombs and tons of shrapnel shells to exterminate them finally. Legitimate government must focus on ISIL.

At any cost.

[Socialist Czechia]

Poor Israelis. If Assad will won, regime will have more than solid ground, very good war machine included, after years of war. Nothing is better than actual field practice.
If ISIL will won, they must plan full scale invasion.

Only if silly islamist rebels won, Israel can be happy: it means another Somali-like chaotic state, no threat to them. So I am not surprised from their support.

[Pope Joan]

Islamic State is successfully attacking Muslim tribes in Northwestern Iraq.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-12- ... gains.html

[Socialist Czechia]

Iraq doesn't exist already. What's left is mostly 'rump state' with limited powers over portion of territory.

[The Nuclear Fist]

Poor Israelis. If Assad will won, regime will have more than solid ground, very good war machine included, after years of war. Nothing is better than actual field practice.
If ISIL will won, they must plan full scale invasion.

Only if silly islamist rebels won, Israel can be happy: it means another Somali-like chaotic state, no threat to them. So I am not surprised from their support.

A post civil war Syria will be even less of a threat to Israel than a pre-civil war Syria. Devastated and in shambles from years of conflict ensure that Syria remains at worst a peripheral annoyance.

[Baltenstein]

(Image)

OMG, can these silly islamist rebels finally stop?

Putin should send Assad many thermobaric bombs and tons of shrapnel shells to exterminate them finally. Legitimate government must focus on ISIL.

At any cost.

You know that the Syrian government tolerated and covertly supported ISIS for quite some time, allowing them to decimate the moderate rebel forces and now - in a classic, completely predictable Sorcerer's Apprentice turn of events - ISIS has grown beyond their control?

[Papait]

(Image)

OMG, can these silly islamist rebels finally stop?

Putin should send Assad many thermobaric bombs and tons of shrapnel shells to exterminate them finally. Legitimate government must focus on ISIL.

At any cost.

You know that the Syrian government tolerated and covertly supported ISIS for quite some time, allowing them to decimate the moderate rebel forces and now - in a classic, completely predictable Sorcerer's Apprentice turn of events - ISIS has grown beyond their control?

Source that?

[The Seleucids (Ancient)]

You know that the Syrian government tolerated and covertly supported ISIS for quite some time, allowing them to decimate the moderate rebel forces and now - in a classic, completely predictable Sorcerer's Apprentice turn of events - ISIS has grown beyond their control?

Source that?

Its a common fact, though its just a matter of warfare. Any other nation would have done the same. By leaving IS alone they had more forces to attack these "rebels" that recieve foreign support. Once Assad gets rid of these "rebels" he can establish himself again as the sole legitimate ruler of Syria, which would grant him more support against IS. Its about using your enemies against your enemies. Common logic.

[Empire of Vlissingen]

The west should have supported Assad.

[The Seleucids (Ancient)]

The west should have supported Assad.

I agree. The west Always talks about democracy, well NATO itself admitted that some 70% of the Syrian people supported Assad back in 2013, but still they are staying naive and continue with their foolish plan of supporting these "rebels" who have only proven themselves to be worthless on all grounds.

[Pope Joan]

(Image)

OMG, can these silly islamist rebels finally stop?

Putin should send Assad many thermobaric bombs and tons of shrapnel shells to exterminate them finally. Legitimate government must focus on ISIL.

At any cost.

You know that the Syrian government tolerated and covertly supported ISIS for quite some time, allowing them to decimate the moderate rebel forces and now - in a classic, completely predictable Sorcerer's Apprentice turn of events - ISIS has grown beyond their control?

Whoa, what a spin job. The West messed up totally and now tries to point the finger at bad old Assad?

"Isis could not have emerged without support from western powers and their regional allies. These facilitated the travel of jihadis from 80 countries into Syria, funded them, and then trained and armed them."
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... l-solution

http://fpif.org/western-aid-bungled-syr ... -way-isis/

http://www.commondreams.org/views/2014/ ... eated-west

[Greater Weselton]

They are pretty much fascists.

Not really, no.

They act like the Nazis.

[Sebastianbourg]

The west should have supported Assad.

I agree. The west Always talks about democracy, well NATO itself admitted that some 70% of the Syrian people supported Assad back in 2013, but still they are staying naive and continue with their foolish plan of supporting these "rebels" who have only proven themselves to be worthless on all grounds.

I third (?) this.

[The Greater Lebanon]

The west should have supported Assad.

When? When the revolution was happening on the streets? That would have been completely contrary to American foreign policy. And after the rise of Daesh there was no way the U.S. could just remove its support for the other rebels and after it said Assad should step down. Assad needs to go and answer from his crimes against humanity., Syrian people aren't naturally Islamists and radicals therefore they dont need a minority leader ruling them in the name of "stability" and "secularism" who tries to expand his influence throughout the region, and is used as a puppet for the terrorists sponsors in Tehran. Remember There aren't just two sides in the Middle East, yes the Iranians and Puppets and the Sunni Radicals happen to wield the most power at the moment but there are other people who dont want nor need both terrorists.

[Papait]

Not really, no.

They act like the Nazis.

But not all facists are nazis.
Nazis aren't really facists either since facism inst racist

[Gauthier]

(Image)

OMG, can these silly islamist rebels finally stop?

Putin should send Assad many thermobaric bombs and tons of shrapnel shells to exterminate them finally. Legitimate government must focus on ISIL.

At any cost.

You know that the Syrian government tolerated and covertly supported ISIS for quite some time, allowing them to decimate the moderate rebel forces and now - in a classic, completely predictable Sorcerer's Apprentice turn of events - ISIS has grown beyond their control?

Israel propped up Hamas, and now Hamas is shitting on them. Syria propped up ISIS, and now ISIS is shitting all over them. The Enemy of your Enemy is Not Your Ally.

[The Seleucids (Ancient)]

The west should have supported Assad.

When? When the revolution was happening on the streets? That would have been completely contrary to American foreign policy. And after the rise of Daesh there was no way the U.S. could just remove its support for the other rebels and after it said Assad should step down. Assad needs to go and answer from his crimes against humanity., Syrian people aren't naturally Islamists and radicals therefore they dont need a minority leader ruling them in the name of "stability" and "secularism" who tries to expand his influence throughout the region, and is used as a puppet for the terrorists sponsors in Tehran. Remember There aren't just two sides in the Middle East, yes the Iranians and Puppets and the Sunni Radicals happen to wield the most power at the moment but there are other people who dont want nor need both terrorists.

1) Its not, the US wasn't as suportive when the "Arab Spring" reached Bahrain for example. The US, just like any other nation, only supports revolutions that benefit their own interests. It doesn't give two shits about what the people in said country want. Take Iran as a perfect example, look at the 1953 coup where a US backed dictator overthrew Iran's democracy.
2) So does the US, the "Syrian Rebels", Daesh, Saudi-Arabia, Turkey, Iran ect. ect. There isn't really any involved country that hasn't commited crimes against humanity.
3) The Syrian people support Assad, this even admitted by NATO (who's anti-Assad) back in 2013. Don't try to make a choice for the Syrian people on who should rule them. The choice is up to them, not you nor any other person, organization or country.
4) A. Ones terrorist is anothers freedomfighter.
B. Pretty much all countries suppport terrorism, its not that big of a deal.
C. Assad isn't really that much of a puppet of Iran, Syria itself has its own sphere of influence, its something Iran wants to keep in check but even that isn't always working. In the end its not a puppet, its just an ally.

[The Greater Lebanon]

When? When the revolution was happening on the streets? That would have been completely contrary to American foreign policy. And after the rise of Daesh there was no way the U.S. could just remove its support for the other rebels and after it said Assad should step down. Assad needs to go and answer from his crimes against humanity., Syrian people aren't naturally Islamists and radicals therefore they dont need a minority leader ruling them in the name of "stability" and "secularism" who tries to expand his influence throughout the region, and is used as a puppet for the terrorists sponsors in Tehran. Remember There aren't just two sides in the Middle East, yes the Iranians and Puppets and the Sunni Radicals happen to wield the most power at the moment but there are other people who dont want nor need both terrorists.

1) Its not, the US wasn't as suportive when the "Arab Spring" reached Bahrain for example. The US, just like any other nation, only supports revolutions that benefit their own interests. It doesn't give two shits about what the people in said country want. Take Iran as a perfect example, look at the 1953 coup where a US backed dictator overthrew Iran's democracy.
2) So does the US, the "Syrian Rebels", Daesh, Saudi-Arabia, Turkey, Iran ect. ect. There isn't really any involved country that hasn't commited crimes against humanity.
3) The Syrian people support Assad, this even admitted by NATO (who's anti-Assad) back in 2013. Don't try to make a choice for the Syrian people on who should rule them. The choice is up to them, not you nor any other person, organization or country.
4) A. Ones terrorist is anothers freedomfighter.
B. Pretty much all countries suppport terrorism, its not that big of a deal.
C. Assad isn't really that much of a puppet of Iran, Syria itself has its own sphere of influence, its something Iran wants to keep in check but even that isn't always working. In the end its not a puppet, its just an ally.

How is NATO going to count and take polls in a Country facing a civil war and regime that is a dictatorship, tell me how these things were reported?? The Syrian people made their decision heard in the beginning phases of the uprising when the regime battered them down in response. Plus I have an absolute right to question Assad's legitimacy and record as he has been the head of the snake in war and killing historically in Lebanon. Assad is clearly a puppet of iran, is undeniably a fact. Assad doesn't theoretically want Hezbollah, it would prefer a force like the PLO, the Mourabitoun, or a Pan arabist militia in Lebanon. Hezbollah answers only to Tehran. Syria's incapability of creating and nurturing an organization in Lebanon directly in line with its own interests and the fact it moved with Iran and had to use Iranian revolutionary guards to create something that would protect its interests in Lebanon clearly shows Syria cannot stand alone, as we see in the civil war as well. Your other point I agree with however, one's terrorist is anothers freedom fighter.

[The Seleucids (Ancient)]

1) Its not, the US wasn't as suportive when the "Arab Spring" reached Bahrain for example. The US, just like any other nation, only supports revolutions that benefit their own interests. It doesn't give two shits about what the people in said country want. Take Iran as a perfect example, look at the 1953 coup where a US backed dictator overthrew Iran's democracy.
2) So does the US, the "Syrian Rebels", Daesh, Saudi-Arabia, Turkey, Iran ect. ect. There isn't really any involved country that hasn't commited crimes against humanity.
3) The Syrian people support Assad, this even admitted by NATO (who's anti-Assad) back in 2013. Don't try to make a choice for the Syrian people on who should rule them. The choice is up to them, not you nor any other person, organization or country.
4) A. Ones terrorist is anothers freedomfighter.
B. Pretty much all countries suppport terrorism, its not that big of a deal.
C. Assad isn't really that much of a puppet of Iran, Syria itself has its own sphere of influence, its something Iran wants to keep in check but even that isn't always working. In the end its not a puppet, its just an ally.

How is NATO going to count and take polls in a Country facing a civil war and regime that is a dictatorship, tell me how these things were reported?? The Syrian people made their decision heard in the beginning phases of the uprising when the regime battered them down in response. Plus I have an absolute right to question Assad's legitimacy and record as he has been the head of the snake in war and killing historically in Lebanon. Assad is clearly a puppet of iran, is undeniably a fact. Assad doesn't theoretically want Hezbollah, it would prefer a force like the PLO, the Mourabitoun, or a Pan arabist militia in Lebanon. Hezbollah answers only to Tehran. Syria's incapability of creating and nurturing an organization in Lebanon directly in line with its own interests and the fact it moved with Iran and had to use Iranian revolutionary guards to create something that would protect its interests in Lebanon clearly shows Syria cannot stand alone, as we see in the civil war as well. Your other point I agree with however, one's terrorist is anothers freedom fighter.

1 ) Ask NATO, its the best we have, if you have any better source on what the Syrian people want then please bring it forward, if you don't, stop complaining and accept what we have.
2 ) You obviously missed A. The people claiming that armed people where among the protestors and B. The massive Pro-Assad rallies.
3 ) Everybody has but that doesn't change anything. He, as far as we can tell, is still the legitimate ruler, by the will of the people and by the UN untill proven otherwise.
4 ) Show me a clear source that proves this, i'm not listening to random claims.
5 ) Hezbollah isn't what it used to be, even they answer only to themselves. Iran has indeed a big influence over Hezbollah but it isn't like Iran controlls Hezbollah all the way. Hezbollah is Lebanese, they do what would favour Lebanon. Just look at their whole involvement in Syria.
6 ) It really doesn't.
7 ) The civil war has really nothing to do with Syria's capabilities, you're talking now like you don't even know what the Syrian conflict is all about or how it emerged and grew.
8 ) Then there's the question, what do you consider terrorists and what do you consider freedomfighters?

[The Greater Lebanon]

How is NATO going to count and take polls in a Country facing a civil war and regime that is a dictatorship, tell me how these things were reported?? The Syrian people made their decision heard in the beginning phases of the uprising when the regime battered them down in response. Plus I have an absolute right to question Assad's legitimacy and record as he has been the head of the snake in war and killing historically in Lebanon. Assad is clearly a puppet of iran, is undeniably a fact. Assad doesn't theoretically want Hezbollah, it would prefer a force like the PLO, the Mourabitoun, or a Pan arabist militia in Lebanon. Hezbollah answers only to Tehran. Syria's incapability of creating and nurturing an organization in Lebanon directly in line with its own interests and the fact it moved with Iran and had to use Iranian revolutionary guards to create something that would protect its interests in Lebanon clearly shows Syria cannot stand alone, as we see in the civil war as well. Your other point I agree with however, one's terrorist is anothers freedom fighter.

1 ) Ask NATO, its the best we have, if you have any better source on what the Syrian people want then please bring it forward, if you don't, stop complaining and accept what we have.
2 ) You obviously missed A. The people claiming that armed people where among the protestors and B. The massive Pro-Assad rallies.
3 ) Everybody has but that doesn't change anything. He, as far as we can tell, is still the legitimate ruler, by the will of the people and by the UN untill proven otherwise.
4 ) Show me a clear source that proves this, i'm not listening to random claims.
5 ) Hezbollah isn't what it used to be, even they answer only to themselves. Iran has indeed a big influence over Hezbollah but it isn't like Iran controlls Hezbollah all the way. Hezbollah is Lebanese, they do what would favour Lebanon. Just look at their whole involvement in Syria.
6 ) It really doesn't.
7 ) The civil war has really nothing to do with Syria's capabilities, you're talking now like you don't even know what the Syrian conflict is all about or how it emerged and grew.
8 ) Then there's the question, what do you consider terrorists and what do you consider freedomfighters?

The proof is the beginning of the war man, the first battles, the first combat, the armed men shooting back at the Regime's fascist like police that were beating people, taking them, torturing them, the mass graves. A source even by NATO or anyone is clearly impossible to conduct in Syria unless you ask the regime which is obviously gonna give you some BS. Even research on the people living under the Daesh areas in Syria. They welcomed them with open hearts to remove the regime in eastern Syria. Even now under occupation they hate Daesh but they also mention that they hate the regime just as much. Of course Hezbollah isn't what it used to be in terms of military and how it goes by achieving its goals. They dont blow up or launch suicide attacks because they are comfortable and stable. When you put Hezbollah or even iran on the defensive they immediately turn to sending suicide bombers, kids, this isn't anything new its just a change of tactics and strategy due to being on the upperhand now. Hezbollah is a Lebanese group true but it is undeniably a tool of Iran, Hezbollah does what Iran tells it to do, iran isn't obviously going to want Lebanese officials make national goals that will benefit the country and try to remove it from the turmoil from the region because Lebanon is too strategic to Iran, therefore it orders Hezbollah to conduct the assassinations and blackmail and threats. In beirut, in neighborhoods we know the men that come here they buy and rent apartments are Hezbollah but they do this in our areas because they store their arms and would use these "properties" as staging points to cut off any attempt to enforce an goal or vision that is not their in territory not directly controlled by them. Look at the Sunni in Lebanon, in Tripoli, Arsal, Sidon, people are welcoming the Nusra and Daesh because theya re sick of Hezbollah and the lebanese government that submits to their will because they are took weak. The Christians is a whole other story that requires a long paragraph. Yes Hezbollah they give to their own people the Shia, but the strategic and military goals are directed by Iran, that is the part that is bad. Im saying the fact that Syria had to bring in Iranian proxy group, IRGC, let Iran create Hezbollah like militias in Syria highlights how the official regime of Bashar al Assad is a puppet of Iran because it is too weak to even protect itself from the inside.