Islamic State Crisis Megathread (ISIS/ISIL/IS)

[New Jordslag]

A 10-1 advantage means absolutely nothing when you have the strategic disadvantage. The Iraqi Troops had no Air Support and were caught by surprise. Numbers simply don't help in that scenario.

Look at the Kurds despite having far less western air support they have managed to beat back ISIS sometimes even when outnumbered, What happened in Ramadi was purely and simply bad performance on the Iraqi Army part
The Kurds have far less support yet they fare far better

You kidding me? The US Air Force gives tons of Air Support to the Kurds. Kobani has received more airstrikes than any other city in Iraq or Syria, as shown by this map.



Besides, the Kurds are actually starting to outnumber ISIS. So if you want to pick a group that defeated ISIS while outnumbered, surprised, and without Air Support, please bring it here.

[Novus America]

The thing is a federal state will inevitably be de facto split, so the unified federal state will only exist on paper. There is no reason to believe the grips will accept a federal state with any real powers, for example the Kurds have said they will only accept an extremely weak federal government. And the states are just going to disregard the federal government anyway.

The Kurds have already established their own regional government in northern Iraq
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:I ... tailed_map

Exactly and said government is de facto independent. They even have an entirety seperate military. They pretty much ignore what the Iraqi government tells them. And I do not blame them for doing so.

[New Jordslag]

A 10-1 advantage means absolutely nothing when you have the strategic disadvantage. The Iraqi Troops had no Air Support and were caught by surprise. Numbers simply don't help in that scenario.

Umm even the Scretary of Desense says the Iraqi army is a joke, and he is more authoritative than your unsourced claims.

The Secretary of Defense has not been surrounded by Terrorists in the middle of a Sandstorm without Air Support.

[Novus America]

Umm even the Scretary of Desense says the Iraqi army is a joke, and he is more authoritative than your unsourced claims.

He said the Iraq Army had no will to fight

An Army with no will to fight might as well not exist. The will to fight is THE most important thing for an Army to have. Even the largest and best equipped military will be defeated if it has no will to fight.

[Migas999]

Look at the Kurds despite having far less western air support they have managed to beat back ISIS sometimes even when outnumbered, What happened in Ramadi was purely and simply bad performance on the Iraqi Army part
The Kurds have far less support yet they fare far better

You kidding me? The US Air Force gives tons of Air Support to the Kurds. Kobani has received more airstrikes than any other city in Iraq or Syria, as shown by this map.



Besides, the Kurds are actually starting to outnumber ISIS. So if you want to pick a group that defeated ISIS while outnumbered, surprised, and without Air Support, please bring it here.

That alone proves nothing
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/02/2 ... 62456.html
http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinio ... 37906.html
The Kurds don´t receive as much as they need and they still win
The Iraq Army receives billions in foreign aid and assistance and they still lose, and when they do win it´s at the expense of Shia militias and their backer Iran

[Migas999]

Umm even the Scretary of Desense says the Iraqi army is a joke, and he is more authoritative than your unsourced claims.

The Secretary of Defense has not been surrounded by Terrorists in the middle of a Sandstorm without Air Support.

Have you? Cause if you haven´t your claims remain just as unsourced

[New Jordslag]

Umm even the Scretary of Desense says the Iraqi army is a joke, and he is more authoritative than your unsourced claims.

He said the Iraq Army had no will to fight

Which they do, and have shown the will to fight on several occasions. For example, in Baiji, the Iraqi Forces did not have to charge and break the ISIS forces around the Baiji Oil Refinery. They could have simply turned over their equipment. But, they didn't. They broke the siege, and are now winning in Baiji.

Much like the Italian Army in World War II, the Iraqi Army has several times shown soldiers of unimaginable bravery and shown quite some promise, but it is riddled with incompetent commanders. The Battle of Ramadi was lost because ISIS occupied every single strategic position in the city before the Sandstorm ended. By the time it did end, there was simply nothing the Iraqi Army could do to win back the momentum. They had had to sit there and take a beating. And honestly, it really is hard to fight back when you are in the middle of a sandstorm without Air Support against a highly determined enemy. This does not mean the Iraqi Army has no will to fight; it simply has less than ISIS.

[Migas999]

He said the Iraq Army had no will to fight

Which they do, and have shown the will to fight on several occasions. For example, in Baiji, the Iraqi Forces did not have to charge and break the ISIS forces around the Baiji Oil Refinery. They could have simply turned over their equipment. But, they didn't. They broke the siege, and are now winning in Baiji.

Much like the Italian Army in World War II, the Iraqi Army has several times shown soldiers of unimaginable bravery and shown quite some promise, but it is riddled with incompetent commanders. The Battle of Ramadi was lost because ISIS occupied every single strategic position in the city before the Sandstorm ended. By the time it did end, there was simply nothing the Iraqi Army could do to win back the momentum. They had had to sit there and take a beating. And honestly, it really is hard to fight back when you are in the middle of a sandstorm without Air Support against a highly determined enemy. This does not mean the Iraqi Army has no will to fight; it simply has less than ISIS.

And having less will than ISIS means it can´t fight it, not effectively

[New Jordslag]

The Secretary of Defense has not been surrounded by Terrorists in the middle of a Sandstorm without Air Support.

Have you? Cause if you haven´t your claims remain just as unsourced

No. I, personally, haven't. But the Iraqi Soldiers have, and if you think there was a single thing they could do at Ramadi, besides cut their losses, ask one of them. Better yet, read this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_ ... _of_Ramadi

[Pan-Dymaxis]

ISIS terrorists pray to Allah instead of the American flag, do not raise their kids to speak English, and not once have they ever thanked us for removing some of their scumbag leadership from the planet. they simply can't be reasoned with.

[New Jordslag]

Which they do, and have shown the will to fight on several occasions. For example, in Baiji, the Iraqi Forces did not have to charge and break the ISIS forces around the Baiji Oil Refinery. They could have simply turned over their equipment. But, they didn't. They broke the siege, and are now winning in Baiji.

Much like the Italian Army in World War II, the Iraqi Army has several times shown soldiers of unimaginable bravery and shown quite some promise, but it is riddled with incompetent commanders. The Battle of Ramadi was lost because ISIS occupied every single strategic position in the city before the Sandstorm ended. By the time it did end, there was simply nothing the Iraqi Army could do to win back the momentum. They had had to sit there and take a beating. And honestly, it really is hard to fight back when you are in the middle of a sandstorm without Air Support against a highly determined enemy. This does not mean the Iraqi Army has no will to fight; it simply has less than ISIS.

And having less will than ISIS means it can´t fight it, not effectively

Ah, but it is. It has caused, at the least, 2,000 casualties to ISIS. Add that to the 5,000 Terrorists arrested, and you will see that the Iraqi Army, too, functions. Because while ISIS may have more will, even they have their weaknesses.

[Novus America]

Umm even the Scretary of Desense says the Iraqi army is a joke, and he is more authoritative than your unsourced claims.

The Secretary of Defense has not been surrounded by Terrorists in the middle of a Sandstorm without Air Support.

Do you have any source for any of your claims that the Iraqi Army does not lack the will to fight? The Iraqi government had ISIS outnumbered 10 to 1, and hopelessly out gunned. They just had to hold their positions for a few hours and would have won easily. I have been in sandstorms, they suck but they do not cause most militaries to flee. And again I am not going to believe your unsourced claims when every authoritative source says the opposite.

[Migas999]

And having less will than ISIS means it can´t fight it, not effectively

Ah, but it is. It has caused, at the least, 2,000 casualties to ISIS. Add that to the 5,000 Terrorists arrested, and you will see that the Iraqi Army, too, functions. Because while ISIS may have more will, even they have their weaknesses.

Yes but the casualties inflicted on the Iraq army are disproportionate
1,668 policemen and 6,388 soldiers killed
3,088 policemen and 3,208 soldiers wounded
thats what a 2000-3000 difference?

[New Jordslag]

You kidding me? The US Air Force gives tons of Air Support to the Kurds. Kobani has received more airstrikes than any other city in Iraq or Syria, as shown by this map.



Besides, the Kurds are actually starting to outnumber ISIS. So if you want to pick a group that defeated ISIS while outnumbered, surprised, and without Air Support, please bring it here.

That alone proves nothing
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/02/2 ... 62456.html
http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinio ... 37906.html
The Kurds don´t receive as much as they need and they still win
The Iraq Army receives billions in foreign aid and assistance and they still lose, and when they do win it´s at the expense of Shia militias and their backer Iran

Not necessarily. The Iraqi Army has won engagements. It fights alongside Shia Militias, true, but the Syrian Army fights alongside Hezbollah, and I don't see anyone accusing them of ineffectiveness. There are several battles where the Shia Militias would have lost were it not for Government troops coming in.

The Kurds, meanwhile, received plenty from the US. Not as much as the Iraqi Government, I'll grant you that, but definitely not less than they need.

[Novus America]

Have you? Cause if you haven´t your claims remain just as unsourced

No. I, personally, haven't. But the Iraqi Soldiers have, and if you think there was a single thing they could do at Ramadi, besides cut their losses, ask one of them. Better yet, read this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_ ... _of_Ramadi

Again your source does not support your claim.

[New Jordslag]

Ah, but it is. It has caused, at the least, 2,000 casualties to ISIS. Add that to the 5,000 Terrorists arrested, and you will see that the Iraqi Army, too, functions. Because while ISIS may have more will, even they have their weaknesses.

Yes but the casualties inflicted on the Iraq army are disproportionate
1,668 policemen and 6,388 soldiers killed
3,088 policemen and 3,208 soldiers wounded
thats what a 2000-3000 difference?

I said at the least. We don't know the exact amount of casualties, because ISIS refuses to release them. For all we know, it could be 2,000-3,000 in Iraq's favor.

[New Jordslag]

No. I, personally, haven't. But the Iraqi Soldiers have, and if you think there was a single thing they could do at Ramadi, besides cut their losses, ask one of them. Better yet, read this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_ ... _of_Ramadi

Again your source does not support your claim.

It sure as hell does. Here, I'll quote to you:

On 14 May, ISIL launched an assault on the city using armored bulldozers and the use of 10 suicide bombers to burst through the main gate, resulting in the capture of the police headquarters, government buildings and the Ramadi Great Mosque.[60] On 16 May, Iraqi officials claimed that ISIS militants withdrew from the main government building in the Iraqi city of Ramadi after air strikes by the US-led coalition.[61] Despite official claims, ISIS appeared to be still advancing, unhindered by US-led Coalition airstrikes, and ultimately consolidated full control over the last government-controlled neighborhood of "Mal'ab", south of Ramadi on 17 May.[62][63]
On 17 May, it was reported that Ramadi fell to the complete control of ISIL insurgents, with the Iraqi Army and special forces employed as well as Iraqi Government officials filmed fleeing from the city escorted by tanks, with a total of 500 civilians and security personnel reported dead.[17][64]
According to a report by current and former American officials, ISIL fighters used a sandstorm to help seize a critical military advantage in the early hours of the terrorist group’s attack on Ramadi. The sandstorm delayed American warplanes and kept them from launching airstrikes to help the Iraqi forces, helping to set in motion an assault that forced Iraqi security forces to flee. ISIL fighters used the time to carry out a series of car bombings followed by a wave of ground attacks in and around the city that eventually overwhelmed the Iraqi forces. Once the storm subsided, ISIL and Iraqi forces were intermingled in heavy combat in many areas, making it difficult for allied pilots to distinguish between ISIL and pro-government fighters, the officials said. By that point, the militants had gained an operational momentum that could not be reversed.[65]

I rest my case.

[Novus America]

He said the Iraq Army had no will to fight

Which they do, and have shown the will to fight on several occasions. For example, in Baiji, the Iraqi Forces did not have to charge and break the ISIS forces around the Baiji Oil Refinery. They could have simply turned over their equipment. But, they didn't. They broke the siege, and are now winning in Baiji.

Much like the Italian Army in World War II, the Iraqi Army has several times shown soldiers of unimaginable bravery and shown quite some promise, but it is riddled with incompetent commanders. The Battle of Ramadi was lost because ISIS occupied every single strategic position in the city before the Sandstorm ended. By the time it did end, there was simply nothing the Iraqi Army could do to win back the momentum. They had had to sit there and take a beating. And honestly, it really is hard to fight back when you are in the middle of a sandstorm without Air Support against a highly determined enemy. This does not mean the Iraqi Army has no will to fight; it simply has less than ISIS.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Compass

Yeah, I will not dispute they are like the Italian Army. Which also completely lacked the will to fight in many key battles. The WWII Italian army is one of the worst "armies" that ever went to war. In fact they were so bad Germany would have been much better off if Italy stayed neutral.

[Migas999]

That alone proves nothing
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/02/2 ... 62456.html
http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinio ... 37906.html
The Kurds don´t receive as much as they need and they still win
The Iraq Army receives billions in foreign aid and assistance and they still lose, and when they do win it´s at the expense of Shia militias and their backer Iran

Not necessarily. The Iraqi Army has won engagements. It fights alongside Shia Militias, true, but the Syrian Army fights alongside Hezbollah, and I don't see anyone accusing them of ineffectiveness. There are several battles where the Shia Militias would have lost were it not for Government troops coming in.

The Kurds, meanwhile, received plenty from the US. Not as much as the Iraqi Government, I'll grant you that, but definitely not less than they need.

First the link you gave me requires a subscription to read
Second from what I can read it says small arms not heavy weaponry like Iraq has received
Third Iraq doesn´t fight alongside them, It almost completely depends on them

[Migas999]

Which they do, and have shown the will to fight on several occasions. For example, in Baiji, the Iraqi Forces did not have to charge and break the ISIS forces around the Baiji Oil Refinery. They could have simply turned over their equipment. But, they didn't. They broke the siege, and are now winning in Baiji.

Much like the Italian Army in World War II, the Iraqi Army has several times shown soldiers of unimaginable bravery and shown quite some promise, but it is riddled with incompetent commanders. The Battle of Ramadi was lost because ISIS occupied every single strategic position in the city before the Sandstorm ended. By the time it did end, there was simply nothing the Iraqi Army could do to win back the momentum. They had had to sit there and take a beating. And honestly, it really is hard to fight back when you are in the middle of a sandstorm without Air Support against a highly determined enemy. This does not mean the Iraqi Army has no will to fight; it simply has less than ISIS.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Compass

Yeah, I will not dispute they are like the Italian Army. Which also completely lacked the will to fight in many key battles. The WWII Italian army is one of the worst "armies" that ever went to war. In fact they were so bad Germany would have been much better off if Italy stayed neutral.

Italy overextended its german ally by forcing it to send much needed troops down to Africa

[Migas999]

Yes but the casualties inflicted on the Iraq army are disproportionate
1,668 policemen and 6,388 soldiers killed
3,088 policemen and 3,208 soldiers wounded
thats what a 2000-3000 difference?

I said at the least. We don't know the exact amount of casualties, because ISIS refuses to release them. For all we know, it could be 2,000-3,000 in Iraq's favor.

It could but from what you stated then it´s 2000-3000 in ISIS favor

[Novus America]

Again your source does not support your claim.

It sure as hell does. Here, I'll quote to you:

On 14 May, ISIL launched an assault on the city using armored bulldozers and the use of 10 suicide bombers to burst through the main gate, resulting in the capture of the police headquarters, government buildings and the Ramadi Great Mosque.[60] On 16 May, Iraqi officials claimed that ISIS militants withdrew from the main government building in the Iraqi city of Ramadi after air strikes by the US-led coalition.[61] Despite official claims, ISIS appeared to be still advancing, unhindered by US-led Coalition airstrikes, and ultimately consolidated full control over the last government-controlled neighborhood of "Mal'ab", south of Ramadi on 17 May.[62][63]
On 17 May, it was reported that Ramadi fell to the complete control of ISIL insurgents, with the Iraqi Army and special forces employed as well as Iraqi Government officials filmed fleeing from the city escorted by tanks, with a total of 500 civilians and security personnel reported dead.[17][64]
According to a report by current and former American officials, ISIL fighters used a sandstorm to help seize a critical military advantage in the early hours of the terrorist group’s attack on Ramadi. The sandstorm delayed American warplanes and kept them from launching airstrikes to help the Iraqi forces, helping to set in motion an assault that forced Iraqi security forces to flee. ISIL fighters used the time to carry out a series of car bombings followed by a wave of ground attacks in and around the city that eventually overwhelmed the Iraqi forces. Once the storm subsided, ISIL and Iraqi forces were intermingled in heavy combat in many areas, making it difficult for allied pilots to distinguish between ISIL and pro-government fighters, the officials said. By that point, the militants had gained an operational momentum that could not be reversed.[65]

I rest my case.

Ok, the you lose. American troops were often caught in similar scenarios and never fled. Being temporarily denied air support is a common ouccurance in battle. So is bad weather. If your army cannot cope with said conditions it is by default on fit for battle. All your source says that the Iraqi Army will break and flee unlesss things go perfectly. That does not happen. That is not an army fit for battle.

And yeah, they were intermingled but Iraq had 10 to one advantage. ISIS was also intermingled and they did not flee. All Iraq had to do is fight, even just a little. And the could have easily mopped up the scattered ISIS forces.

[Novus America]

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Compass

Yeah, I will not dispute they are like the Italian Army. Which also completely lacked the will to fight in many key battles. The WWII Italian army is one of the worst "armies" that ever went to war. In fact they were so bad Germany would have been much better off if Italy stayed neutral.

Italy overextended its german ally by forcing it to send much needed troops down to Africa

True. Which is why Germany would have better off they stay neutral. Germany would not have had to bail them out if they did not spectacularly loose so many battles against much smaller and hopelessly out gunned opponents.

[Migas999]

Italy overextended its german ally by forcing it to send much needed troops down to Africa

True. Which is why Germany would have better off they stay neutral. Germany would not have had to bail them out if they did not spectacularly loose so many battles against much smaller and hopelessly out gunned opponents.

Just as Iraq does

[Migas999]

ISIS terrorists pray to Allah instead of the American flag, do not raise their kids to speak English, and not once have they ever thanked us for removing some of their scumbag leadership from the planet. they simply can't be reasoned with.

Sorry when did we help ISIS by removing leadership?