Islamic State Crisis Megathread (ISIS/ISIL/IS)

[New Skaaneland]

We have malmö fans for that.. Or wait. They would be the victims. Rightfully so.

[Novus America]

We have malmö fans for that.. Or wait. They would be the victims. Rightfully so.

Can you explain what you are referring too?

Edit: oh, I see it is some football club thing. Never mind.

[Novus America]

https://ca.news.yahoo.com/gaddafis-home ... 30608.html

In other news Sirte in Libya has fallen to Daesh/ISIS.

[Dain II Ironfoot]

Russia to supply weapons to Iraq without preconditions

[Novus America]

Russia to supply weapons to Iraq without preconditions

Yeah, that is not going to help. The U.S. already gave huge amounts of weapons to Iraq who promptly turned them over to Daesh/ISIS. Even the best armed army is worse than useless if it lacks the will to fight.

Great, now in addition to humvees and M-1s Daesh will now have T-90s and S-300s.

[Rio Cana]

Russia to supply weapons to Iraq without preconditions

Yeah, that is not going to help. The U.S. already gave huge amounts of weapons to Iraq who promptly turned them over to Daesh/ISIS. Even the best armed army is worse than useless if it lacks the will to fight.

Great, now in addition to humvees and M-1s Daesh will now have T-90s and S-300s.

Most likely the Iraqi Shia troops will be using these weapons and not the Iraqi Sunni troops since the Sunni troops have tended in some places to leave all there weapons and go.

[Napkiraly]

A lot of my friends are saying they think Israel should intervene given that many ME states aren't and assembling an adequate sized force from the US and other Western allies would take awhile which we may not have, at least when it comes to Iraq, given ISIS's proximity to Baghdad.

On one hand, Israel is perfectly capable of intervening and most likely domestically it would be supported.

On the other hand, it would run the very high risk of galvanizing ISIS given the amount of anti-Israeli sentiment within the region and within the Islamic community as a whole.

Personally, the circumstances would have to be incredibly dire for me to support an Israeli intervention given the risk involved.

[Rio Cana]

A lot of my friends are saying they think Israel should intervene given that many ME states aren't and assembling an adequate sized force from the US and other Western allies would take awhile which we may not have, at least when it comes to Iraq, given ISIS's proximity to Baghdad.

On one hand, Israel is perfectly capable of intervening and most likely domestically it would be supported.

On the other hand, it would run the very high risk of galvanizing ISIS given the amount of anti-Israeli sentiment within the region and within the Islamic community as a whole.

Personally, the circumstances would have to be incredibly dire for me to support an Israeli intervention given the risk involved.

No. It would just cause them unnecessary problems.

[Rio Cana]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-32820857 - Daesh has captured Palmyra

If there were ever a time for Syria's chemical weaponry to be used for the common good (assuming that it'd be possible to do so without harming any civilians in Tadmur), that time would be now.

I think the Syrians really did not think putting all there forces to defend this city in the middle of the desert was worth it. There forces could be better used to defeat enemy forces closer to the Capital. They would have also had a long supply line. Now that ISIL took that city they must contend with having a long supply line. The more territory they control the thinner there line of defense.

It does seems the Syrian troops have managed to win a victory in Southern Syria near the border with Jordan. Israel is also not that far away.
Story from 18 hours ago - http://www.electronicresistance.net/201 ... from-isis/

In the map below, the fighting took place in the region just East of Bosra in Southern Syria (that sort of pink part of the map). Did you notice how close Israel is located to this area. This was ISIL closest point to them.

[New Skaaneland]

Hm. It could be more exciting if they took on Israel.

[Rio Cana]

Does anyone still believe ISIS is on the verge of defeat or even losing ground at this point?

Well it depend on what you mean by 'verge'. If you mean crumbing within the next few months absolutely not. However their actions are unsustainable, as a result they will lose even more support as time goes and and they'll likely kill each other off.


In terms of Battlespace,

The Kurds are making progress as they're actually fighting while the Iraqi Army runs away holding their lady parts. Not to familiar with the gig in Syria

Iraq is a mess. Best after this war ended would be to divide Iraq into three parts. One Shia, One Kurd and One Sunni. Since the Sunni would be in the middle they could be attached to Jordan. The central and eastern parts of Syria could also be thrown in.

[Novus America]

Well it depend on what you mean by 'verge'. If you mean crumbing within the next few months absolutely not. However their actions are unsustainable, as a result they will lose even more support as time goes and and they'll likely kill each other off.


In terms of Battlespace,

The Kurds are making progress as they're actually fighting while the Iraqi Army runs away holding their lady parts. Not to familiar with the gig in Syria

Iraq is a mess. Best after this war ended would be to divide Iraq into three parts. One Shia, One Kurd and One Sunni. Since the Sunni would be in the middle they could be attached to Jordan. The central and eastern parts of Syria could also be thrown in.

That was actually my exact plan down to the T. I guess crazy minds think alike.

But I think this is the only long term solution. The King of Jordan actually has the only legitimate claim to those lands if you believe in monarchy, they are his families ancestral lands and were promised to them by the British in exchange for help in WWI. I do not believe in monarchy but many Sunni do. Also the King of Jordan is from Muhammad's tribe, again this matters to the Sunnis even if it seems silly to us. And he has for these reasons and his brilliant understanding of Sunni tribal politics kept order in Jordan.

Maybe let him have Palestine too.

[Farnhamia]

Iraq is a mess. Best after this war ended would be to divide Iraq into three parts. One Shia, One Kurd and One Sunni. Since the Sunni would be in the middle they could be attached to Jordan. The central and eastern parts of Syria could also be thrown in.

That was actually my exact plan down to the T. I guess crazy minds think alike.

But I think this is the only long term solution. The King of Jordan actually has the only legitimate claim to those lands if you believe in monarchy, they are his families ancestral lands and were promised to them by the British in exchange for help in WWI. I do not believe in monarchy but many Sunni do. Also the King of Jordan is from Muhammad's tribe, again this matters to the Sunnis even if it seems silly to us. And he has for these reasons and his brilliant understanding of Sunni tribal politics kept order in Jordan.

Maybe let him have Palestine too.

The King of Jordan's ancestral lands are in the Hejaz, western Arabia, not in Syria or Iraq. It is true that the Hashemite princes were given realms in the north by the Allies after the war but much of that was in compensation for their loss of the Hejaz to the Saudis in the 20s.

[Novus America]

Yeah, that is not going to help. The U.S. already gave huge amounts of weapons to Iraq who promptly turned them over to Daesh/ISIS. Even the best armed army is worse than useless if it lacks the will to fight.

Great, now in addition to humvees and M-1s Daesh will now have T-90s and S-300s.

Most likely the Iraqi Shia troops will be using these weapons and not the Iraqi Sunni troops since the Sunni troops have tended in some places to leave all there weapons and go.

Even the Shia troops fled at Ramadi. Though better this is not the solution. Shia troops will flee from Sunni areas and leave weapons because they only care about defending their tribes in the south. Many Sunnis will actually sympathize or dislike the Shia enough the will willingly give the weapons away. Either way ISIS gets the weapons.

[Dain II Ironfoot]

A lot of my friends are saying they think Israel should intervene given that many ME states aren't and assembling an adequate sized force from the US and other Western allies would take awhile which we may not have, at least when it comes to Iraq, given ISIS's proximity to Baghdad.

On one hand, Israel is perfectly capable of intervening and most likely domestically it would be supported.

On the other hand, it would run the very high risk of galvanizing ISIS given the amount of anti-Israeli sentiment within the region and within the Islamic community as a whole.

Personally, the circumstances would have to be incredibly dire for me to support an Israeli intervention given the risk involved.

No, just no.
Israel would be the worst nation to intervene there.

The reason why things are going slow is becouse Iraq does not want foreign soldiers on their ground, not becouse the region is unwilling to help.

Well it depend on what you mean by 'verge'. If you mean crumbing within the next few months absolutely not. However their actions are unsustainable, as a result they will lose even more support as time goes and and they'll likely kill each other off.


In terms of Battlespace,

The Kurds are making progress as they're actually fighting while the Iraqi Army runs away holding their lady parts. Not to familiar with the gig in Syria

Iraq is a mess. Best after this war ended would be to divide Iraq into three parts. One Shia, One Kurd and One Sunni. Since the Sunni would be in the middle they could be attached to Jordan. The central and eastern parts of Syria could also be thrown in.

I don't agree to this, it would only cause more trouble then it does currently and those new states would never be able to function independently becouse of the major powerstruggle in the Middle-East.

[Novus America]

That was actually my exact plan down to the T. I guess crazy minds think alike.

But I think this is the only long term solution. The King of Jordan actually has the only legitimate claim to those lands if you believe in monarchy, they are his families ancestral lands and were promised to them by the British in exchange for help in WWI. I do not believe in monarchy but many Sunni do. Also the King of Jordan is from Muhammad's tribe, again this matters to the Sunnis even if it seems silly to us. And he has for these reasons and his brilliant understanding of Sunni tribal politics kept order in Jordan.

Maybe let him have Palestine too.

The King of Jordan's ancestral lands are in the Hejaz, western Arabia, not in Syria or Iraq. It is true that the Hashemite princes were given realms in the north by the Allies after the war but much of that was in compensation for their loss of the Hejaz to the Saudis in the 20s.

Well they were promised Syria before around 1916. But I doubt the Saudis would turn over the throne so they can get their true ancestral lands. Even if Hashemites would be better than the brutal and corrupt Saudis.

But the King of Jordan has as good a claim for the Sunni areas of Iraq and Syria as any, and somebody needs to restore order to those areas, now in chaos.

[Novus America]

A lot of my friends are saying they think Israel should intervene given that many ME states aren't and assembling an adequate sized force from the US and other Western allies would take awhile which we may not have, at least when it comes to Iraq, given ISIS's proximity to Baghdad.

On one hand, Israel is perfectly capable of intervening and most likely domestically it would be supported.

On the other hand, it would run the very high risk of galvanizing ISIS given the amount of anti-Israeli sentiment within the region and within the Islamic community as a whole.

Personally, the circumstances would have to be incredibly dire for me to support an Israeli intervention given the risk involved.

No, just no.
Israel would be the worst nation to intervene there.

The reason why things are going slow is becouse Iraq does not want foreign soldiers on their ground, not becouse the region is unwilling to help.

Iraq is a mess. Best after this war ended would be to divide Iraq into three parts. One Shia, One Kurd and One Sunni. Since the Sunni would be in the middle they could be attached to Jordan. The central and eastern parts of Syria could also be thrown in.

I don't agree to this, it would only cause more trouble then it does currently and those new states would never be able to function independently becouse of the major powerstruggle in the Middle-East.

I agree Israel should stay away, but the King of Jordan is the only one with the family legitimacy to bring order to the Sunni tribes.

[Novus America]

http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSK ... 1?irpc=932

Erdogan may have given weapons to Islamist rebels that went to extremists like Daesh.

What side is Erdogan really on?

[The balkens]

http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN0O61L220150521?irpc=932

Erdogan may have given weapons to Islamist rebels that went to extremists like Daesh.

What side is Erdogan really on?

Clearly not Turkey's.

[Ganos Lao]

The King of Jordan's ancestral lands are in the Hejaz, western Arabia, not in Syria or Iraq. It is true that the Hashemite princes were given realms in the north by the Allies after the war but much of that was in compensation for their loss of the Hejaz to the Saudis in the 20s.

Well they were promised Syria before around 1916. But I doubt the Saudis would turn over the throne so they can get their true ancestral lands. Even if Hashemites would be better than the brutal and corrupt Saudis.

But the King of Jordan has as good a claim for the Sunni areas of Iraq and Syria as any, and somebody needs to restore order to those areas, now in chaos.

There would be some Iraqis who would welcome a monarchy. In fact, the remnants of the Iraqi Royal Family had organized a movement after the Iraq War in the hopes of retaking the country. The movement is led by Sharif Ali bin al-Hussein, whose parents were given asylum at the Saudi embassy until the Iraqi revolutionaries ordered they be expelled.

However, some claim Ra'ad bin Zeid, the Lord Chamberlain of Jordan, is the real heir due to a specific interpretation of the Iraqi Constitution. Ra'ad is the son of Zeid bin Hussein, the Iraqi Ambassador to the UK who was appointed head of the Royal House after Faisal II was killed.

[Novus America]

Well they were promised Syria before around 1916. But I doubt the Saudis would turn over the throne so they can get their true ancestral lands. Even if Hashemites would be better than the brutal and corrupt Saudis.

But the King of Jordan has as good a claim for the Sunni areas of Iraq and Syria as any, and somebody needs to restore order to those areas, now in chaos.

There would be some Iraqis who would welcome a monarchy. In fact, the remnants of the Iraqi Royal Family had organized a movement after the Iraq War in the hopes of retaking the country. The movement is led by Sharif Ali bin al-Hussein, whose parents were given asylum at the Saudi embassy until the Iraqi revolutionaries ordered they be expelled.

However, some claim Ra'ad bin Zeid, the Lord Chamberlain of Jordan, is the real heir due to a specific interpretation of the Iraqi Constitution. Ra'ad is the son of Zeid bin Hussein, the Iraqi Ambassador to the UK who was appointed head of the Royal House after Faisal II was killed.

I think a personal union with Jordan, and hence Abdullah bin al-Hussein would be the best choice for Sunni Iraq. Ali and Ra'ad could be given positions in the government. But it definitely appears many Sunni Iraqis would welcome a Hashemite return. That is probably the only way to restore a stable respected government to those areas.

[The Nuclear Fist]

We have malmö fans for that.. Or wait. They would be the victims. Rightfully so.

Can you explain what you are referring too?

Edit: oh, I see it is some football club thing. Never mind.

It's best to just assume all his posts are irrelevant shitposts and ignore them.

[Salus Maior]

There would be some Iraqis who would welcome a monarchy. In fact, the remnants of the Iraqi Royal Family had organized a movement after the Iraq War in the hopes of retaking the country. The movement is led by Sharif Ali bin al-Hussein, whose parents were given asylum at the Saudi embassy until the Iraqi revolutionaries ordered they be expelled.

However, some claim Ra'ad bin Zeid, the Lord Chamberlain of Jordan, is the real heir due to a specific interpretation of the Iraqi Constitution. Ra'ad is the son of Zeid bin Hussein, the Iraqi Ambassador to the UK who was appointed head of the Royal House after Faisal II was killed.

I think a personal union with Jordan, and hence Abdullah bin al-Hussein would be the best choice for Sunni Iraq. Ali and Ra'ad could be given positions in the government. But it definitely appears many Sunni Iraqis would welcome a Hashemite return. That is probably the only way to restore a stable respected government to those areas.

What about the Shiites?

[Novus America]

I think a personal union with Jordan, and hence Abdullah bin al-Hussein would be the best choice for Sunni Iraq. Ali and Ra'ad could be given positions in the government. But it definitely appears many Sunni Iraqis would welcome a Hashemite return. That is probably the only way to restore a stable respected government to those areas.

What about the Shiites?

They would probably prefer their own separate government after years of oppression by Sunni Saddam. Probably a rump version of the current Iraqi government they currently control, basically little would change. It seems to be supported by a majority of Shia.

They could make whatever democratic change they want to though.

[Ganos Lao]

What about the Shiites?

They would probably prefer their own separate government after years of oppression by Sunni Saddam. Probably a rump version of the current Iraqi government they currently control, basically little would change. It seems to be supported by a majority of Shia.

They could make whatever democratic change they want to though.

If you think Jordan should annex the Sunni majority areas, why not suggest Iran annexing the Shia majority areas? Then you could let the rest go to the Kurds or something, right?