View Full Version : Who does ISIS fear?
According to a German reporter embedded with them for 10 days, it's not the US:
Reporter Who Spent 10 Days With Islamic State Fighters Says There’s Only One Country the Jihadist Group Fears
A German journalist who spent 10 days with the Islamic State group and came out unharmed told a British Jewish news site that the jihadist fighters told him that the only country they fear is Israel.
“They told me they know the Israeli army is too strong for them,” journalist and former member of German parliament Jurgen Todenhofer told the U.K.’s Jewish News.
“They are not scared of the British and the Americans,” Todenhofer said. “They are scared of the Israelis and told me the Israeli army is the real danger.” He added that Israel Defense Forces can fight a guerrilla war.
The journalist said that the Islamist militants told him they hope to lure Western forces into Iraq and Syria where they could then kidnap American and British soldiers.
“They think they can defeat U.S. and U.K. ground troops, who they say they have no experience in city guerrilla or terrorist strategies,” Todenhofer said. “But they know the Israelis are very tough as far as fighting against guerrillas and terrorists.”
Todenhofer told Jewish News that the Islamic State was “preparing the largest religious cleansing in history” and that while they are prepared to accept Christian and Jewish citizens in exchange for the payment of a jizya tax, the fate for Shi’ite Muslims is death.
“They kill all the Shia Muslims they can get their hands on,” he said. “I asked them … if they were prepared to kill every Shia Muslim, and they scoffed: ‘150 million or 500 million, we don’t care, it’s only a technical problem for us. We are ready to do that.’”
Cont:
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/12/28/reporter-who-spent-10-days-with-islamic-state-fighters-says-theres-only-one-country-the-jihadist-group-fears/
Crow Hunter
12-28-15, 13:00
Darn.
I thought this was a Chuck Norris joke...
I figure they are afraid that Israel will nuke them/total war them while they know the US and Britain ROEs won't allow it.
Well, maybe it's time to prove'm wrong, and dust off a couple cans of sunshine, and show'em what they're all about. Nothing like firsthand experience, to tell the others about..
If, and when, it comes to this again.
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/8e/b8/70/8eb8703fffe173f6fd6c47571b842df0.jpg
If, and when, it comes to this again.
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/8e/b8/70/8eb8703fffe173f6fd6c47571b842df0.jpg
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20151228/41d088d8191a5c1b1acb9bb3fc43e5ea.jpg
Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk
Dist. Expert 26
12-28-15, 13:48
For ISIS to really fear the U.S. we need a complete cleansing of not only the executive branch and congress, but the upper brass at the Pentagon as well.
General officers/admirals, barring some notable exceptions, are often politicians in uniform, only concerned with what will best suit their career. Recommending the nuclear option in today's political climate would certainly not go over well, and thus will never be seriously considered by the top brass.
BrigandTwoFour
12-28-15, 14:51
Well, maybe it's time to prove'm wrong, and dust off a couple cans of sunshine, and show'em what they're all about. Nothing like firsthand experience, to tell the others about..
I keep seeing this sentiment pop up. What good do you think a nuclear weapon would do? What goal would it actually achieve? It's fun to talk about turning the whole region into a glass parking lot, but that's not a realistic use of nukes.
I keep seeing this sentiment pop up. What good do you think a nuclear weapon would do? What goal would it actually achieve? It's fun to talk about turning the whole region into a glass parking lot, but that's not a realistic use of nukes.
All saber/nuke rattling aside, considering their main plan against Shi’ite Muslims, it should be a coalition of Shi’ite Muslim countries who put together a main ground force to go clean them out with western coalition air power in support and of course western SOF in "advisory" roles to make sure chit actually gets done. But, regional politics being what they are, will not happen, and per usual, they'll leave to us to deal with while blaming us for all their troubles, etc
On the "we don't fear the US" nonsense, seems Muslim/middle east stupidity marketing 101. I recall the Iraqi brass told their soldiers the US relied totally on its tech and once the ground fighting started, US forces wouldn't fight well, were cowards, etc, etc. How'd that turn out?
I think they have little to fear from the US at the moment due to lack of will and leadership form current admin, plenty to worry about should they "awaken the sleeping giant" if they poke the bear one too many times. I don't think any foe to date has really been able to fathom what the US can unleash on them if the need arises, and that's their doom if it does happen.
End of the day, our biggest problem is always trying to walk the "reasonable" ground in response vs being all in or not.
BrigandTwoFour
12-28-15, 15:20
All saber/nuke rattling aside, considering their main plan against Shi’ite Muslims, it should be a coalition of Shi’ite Muslim countries who put together a main ground force to go clean them out with western coalition air power in support and of course western SOF in "advisory" roles to make sure chit actually gets done. But, regional politics being what they are, will not happen, and per usual, they'll leave to us to deal with while blaming us for all their troubles, etc
I agree with your assessment. It's simply not a fight that we will succeed in without the support of other organized muslim nations.
...meanwhile the Marine Corps' focus at the moment, should they eliminate cammies as the universal uniform of the day. I wouldn't fear us either with the priorities of our leadership. Now, if Mattis created his own "Blackwater" composed of nothing but Marine combat vets who had served under his charge, that they would fear.
They'd damn well better be scared of Israel...Their backs are against the wall, and they aren't going down without a fight...
MountainRaven
12-28-15, 15:54
The only issue with expecting a Shi'ite coalition to drive back ISIS with the support of NATO airstrikes is that the regional Shi'a power is... Iran. Or perhaps more accurately, it's Russia, Israel, and Saudi Arabia.
And Shi'a Iran doesn't get along real well with Sunni Saudi Arabia. And any support of Iran means indirectly supporting Hezbollah. Which means indirectly supporting Hamas. Which means irking Israel.
I suppose the bigger question is whether it is more important for us to check Putin's ambitions in Eastern Europe by keeping in Saudi's good graces and therefore keeping oil prices down - or checking Daesh's ambitions in the ME by supporting Iranian-backed Iraqi and Syrian militant groups.
The only way I see us being able to maintain or improve our strategic standing in the Middle-East without degrading our strategic standing in Europe would be if we could somehow completely lure the Iranians out of the Russian camp and into our camp without pissing off Israel in the process, assuming that Iranian oil output has close to the same impact on oil prices as Saudi oil output does.
I'm reminded of the saying that America has three Middle-Eastern wives: Israel, Saudi Arabia, and Iran. And none of them particularly like each other, so America has a hard time keeping them happy - and anything that America tries to do to make one of them happier pisses off the other two.
For ISIS to really fear the U.S. we need a complete cleansing of not only the executive branch and congress, but the upper brass at the Pentagon as well.
General officers/admirals, barring some notable exceptions, are often politicians in uniform, only concerned with what will best suit their career. Recommending the nuclear option in today's political climate would certainly not go over well, and thus will never be seriously considered by the top brass.
This. I really don't know if we have passed a point of no return. Our leadership consists of outright traitors, morons, highly-educated fools and infiltrators.
Trying to fight a war half way around the world is hard enough with a competent and proper leadership.
Well, maybe it's time to prove'm wrong, and dust off a couple cans of sunshine, and show'em what they're all about. Nothing like firsthand experience, to tell the others about..
Absolutely.
I keep seeing this sentiment pop up. What good do you think a nuclear weapon would do? What goal would it actually achieve? It's fun to talk about turning the whole region into a glass parking lot, but that's not a realistic use of nukes.
The same good it did when we used them against the last band of psychotic, committed radicals who believed the world belonged to them (the Japs).
The only issue with expecting a Shi'ite coalition to drive back ISIS with the support of NATO airstrikes is that the regional Shi'a power is... Iran. Or perhaps more accurately, it's Russia, Israel, and Saudi Arabia.
And Shi'a Iran doesn't get along real well with Sunni Saudi Arabia. And any support of Iran means indirectly supporting Hezbollah. Which means indirectly supporting Hamas. Which means irking Israel.
I suppose the bigger question is whether it is more important for us to check Putin's ambitions in Eastern Europe by keeping in Saudi's good graces and therefore keeping oil prices down - or checking Daesh's ambitions in the ME by supporting Iranian-backed Iraqi and Syrian militant groups.
The only way I see us being able to maintain or improve our strategic standing in the Middle-East without degrading our strategic standing in Europe would be if we could somehow completely lure the Iranians out of the Russian camp and into our camp without pissing off Israel in the process, assuming that Iranian oil output has close to the same impact on oil prices as Saudi oil output does.
I'm reminded of the saying that America has three Middle-Eastern wives: Israel, Saudi Arabia, and Iran. And none of them particularly like each other, so America has a hard time keeping them happy - and anything that America tries to do to make one of them happier pisses off the other two.
Good points.
Expecting help from Muslim countries when trying to kill Muslims is a pipe dream.
Sure, they might let you station a base here or there, and allow use of airspace, but they will never truly join in as an ally. It simply will not happen. They might kill each other, but they are far more reluctant to help kuffars do it.
Even when they do "help" in some token way, they will still work (not so) covertly to undermine you through unofficial channels.
The Saudis were our "allies" while funding and organizing 9/11. Our "leaders" covered for their murders of 3000 Americans.
Don't forget Turkey in all this too. They are our, and are even full members in NATO for God's sake, yet are funding ISIS, supplying them weapons, buying their oil, and shooting down Russian jets.
In a nutshell, we have numerous obstacles before we can even begin to properly go after ISIS.
1) Traitorous leadership across the board (with a few exceptions).
2) "Allies" that are actually enemies.
Dist. Expert 26
12-28-15, 19:06
...meanwhile the Marine Corps' focus at the moment, should they eliminate cammies as the universal uniform of the day. I wouldn't fear us either with the priorities of our leadership. Now, if Mattis created his own "Blackwater" composed of nothing but Marine combat vets who had served under his charge, that they would fear.
This.
The Marine Corps was already in the process of forgetting about war when I enlisted in 2010. By the time I got out it was full-retard; uniform inspections, room inspections, drill, division runs, etc. Shooting, patrolling, CQB and other elements of warfare had been moved to the back burner. For reasons I simply cannot fathom, SNCOs and officers who cut their teeth in the GWOT are chomping at the bit to drag the military back into the 1980's garrison mindset.
When the next war starts we'll get our ass handed to us for a few years while they figure everything out again. If, God forbid, we have to square off with another professional military the results could be catastrophic.
BrigandTwoFour
12-28-15, 19:51
The same good it did when we used them against the last band of psychotic, committed radicals who believed the world belonged to them (the Japs).
I agree with the rest of what you said. But this right here shows a failure to grasp the fundamental differences between ISIS and the 1940's Japanese Empire. Furthermore, it shows a misunderstanding of what the effects of nuclear weapons actually are, and how they are typically employed. The latter is understandable, as nuclear weapons simply aren't seriously discussed outside outside of select circles.
The former, well, it's everywhere. ISIS is not a resource-hungry military empire. They do not have easily targeted industrial centers, political leadership, or population centers. They do not ascribe to the typical motivations that drive other world powers. They are driven by pure religious zealousness, which makes them extraordinarily hard to deal with on a rational level.
KalashniKEV
12-28-15, 20:11
For reasons I simply cannot fathom, SNCOs and officers who cut their teeth in the GWOT are chomping at the bit to drag the military back into the 1980's garrison mindset.
Not sure about the Marine Corps, but a lot of it is because they see it as the best and fastest route back to the standards and discipline driven, shiny-boots-Army.
Just go back to when things weren't completely ****ed by recreating that world. Standby for reset... BOOM.
I'm not saying I'm 100% with it... but I understand it.
It's at least interesting to watch as I chomp popcorn while wrapped up in my DD-214 blanket.
:)
A German journalist who spent 10 days with the Islamic State group and came out unharmed told a British Jewish news site that the jihadist fighters told him that the only country they fear is Israel.
LOL... ummmm, no.
I still say we go back and just take the land. Would solve all kinds of issues.
We'd at least have some treasure for the blood spilled. No one has nuts that kind of thing anymore though.
EtA,, we'd could have those 57 states Barry talks about.
LOL... ummmm, no.
Um no? Please elaborate. Reporter didn't say it? ISIS didn't say it? Other?
Dist. Expert 26
12-28-15, 20:37
Not sure about the Marine Corps, but a lot of it is because they see it as the best and fastest route back to the standards and discipline driven, shiny-boots-Army.
Just go back to when things weren't completely ****ed by recreating that world. Standby for reset... BOOM.
I'm not saying I'm 100% with it... but I understand it.
It's at least interesting to watch as I chomp popcorn while wrapped up in my DD-214 blanket.
:)
I'm also enjoying the comfort of my DD-214 blanket. It just pains me to see what could be such a fine fighting force dulled with stupidity and pointless games. The only thing they accomplish is driving 90% of people out after their first enlistment.
KalashniKEV
12-28-15, 20:39
Um no? Please elaborate. Reporter didn't say it? ISIS didn't say it? Other?
My first take is that Jpost says ISIS fears the Jew, Rudaw says they are afraid of Peshmerga, KNN says they fear most the mighty Naqib KalashniKEV al Ameriki...
Reading Jurgen Todenhofer's report on non-kooksites though, it appears that he initially contacted German Jihadis, then some official spokesperson, then got papers to embed for 10 days and collected a whole bunch of opinions.
The opinion that they fear the Israeli Army is actually 180 degrees from the group's official opinion.
From the mouth of ABB on 26 December:
God caused the Jews of the world to gather in Israel, and the war against them has become easy. It is the obligation of every Muslim to carry out Jihad. Jews, you will not enjoy in Palestine. God has gathered you in Palestine so that the Mujahedeen can reach you soon and you will hide by the rock and the tree. Palestine will be your graveyard. We are getting closer to you day by day. Do not think that we have forgotten about you.
FromMyColdDeadHand
12-28-15, 20:44
The fact that ISIS hasn't had any appreciable attacks against Israel is an interesting footnote. Atttacks in Paris and the US, but not in Israel, the original Satan. Either the IDF is on its game and whacking these threats, or else ISIS isn't trying. To me, attacks in Israel are 'free'. What is Israel going to do? Any attack by them on an ISIS force would be seen as a supporting ISIS's enemies. Israel running airsupport for Hezzie or Quds forces? I think ISIS would love it if Israel got dragged into this already convoluted, multifaceted scrum or a war.
Well, maybe it's time to prove'm wrong, and dust off a couple cans of sunshine, and show'em what they're all about. Nothing like firsthand experience, to tell the others about..
I agree with the rest of what you said. But this right here shows a failure to grasp the fundamental differences between ISIS and the 1940's Japanese Empire. Furthermore, it shows a misunderstanding of what the effects of nuclear weapons actually are, and how they are typically employed. The latter is understandable, as nuclear weapons simply aren't seriously discussed outside outside of select circles.
The former, well, it's everywhere. ISIS is not a resource-hungry military empire. They do not have easily targeted industrial centers, political leadership, or population centers. They do not ascribe to the typical motivations that drive other world powers. They are driven by pure religious zealousness, which makes them extraordinarily hard to deal with on a rational level.
Exactly. Who would you accept a 'surrender' from? The fall out would head towards China, not that you would notice with their air pollution. Anyone who thinks that we would go from scrubbed bombing runs with pre-leaflet drops to city-busting, first-use of nuclear weapons is Cra-Cra.
I agree with your assessment. It's simply not a fight that we will succeed in without the support of other organized muslim nations.
Exactly. People dismiss the WWII EU theater comparison- that we have to lead the fight, but I'd hate to break it to our history challenged members, we didn't win the EU theater, the Russians did. Sure, we had a part to play, but with out the Red Army eating German divisions and Army groups, D-Day would have been a slaughter. The Nazi-Russian di-pole is like the Shia-Sunni. That is where the bodies are going to come from. Lend-Lease and some troops will help, but not carry the day.
Going further back in history, the model I use for the ME is the Thirty Years War- and it appears that is what ISIS has in mind too. When both sides have bleed so much, lost the cream of the crazies and they start to look around and say this violence is BS, that's when it ends. That is why the BS deal with Iran on nukes is so dangerous. Quatar and Saudi aren't going to get into a one-way nuclear exchange, or depend on Israel or the US to check Iranian nuclear arms.
Hopefully more rational minds will carry the day, but rational isn't a powerful mindset in the ME.
KalashniKEV
12-28-15, 20:47
It just pains me to see what could be such a fine fighting force dulled with stupidity and pointless games. The only thing they accomplish is driving 90% of people out after their first enlistment.
At great risk of sidetracking, I'll just say that there is a happy balance of military tradition, discipline, and warfighting skill.
The biggest thing DoD can do to fix the force is just enforce all the standards properly, at all levels, and during all phases of the Soldier's career- especially before they even let them in. We let in too many shitbags during the GWOT and now they need to be purged (or else we end up waiting for them to retire).
KalashniKEV
12-28-15, 20:58
I think ISIS would love it if Israel got dragged into this already convoluted, multifaceted scrum or a war.
The opposite. Opening that front would be incredibly foolish of them, since they would then have to fight Hezbollah and Israel in addition to Baghdad and the Kurds.
I don't think they will be too quick to drag new combatants in during the early part of 2016... but Putin will, and that's what's scary...
Exactly. Who would you accept a 'surrender' from?
It would certainly be wonderful if the GWOT were a simple color war.
"The enemy capital has fallen! You are THE WINNER!!!"
FromMyColdDeadHand
12-28-15, 21:15
The opposite. Opening that front would be incredibly foolish of them, since they would then have to fight Hezbollah and Israel in addition to Baghdad and the Kurds.
I don't think they will be too quick to drag new combatants in during the early part of 2016... but Putin will, and that's what's scary...
It would certainly be wonderful if the GWOT were a simple color war.
"The enemy capital has fallen! You are THE WINNER!!!"
But what about the optics of Israel as being seen as against ISIS, so every other Muslim force is now on the 'Israeli' side? A potential rallying point for more Sunni d-bags.
(I hate the word optics)
Blue- no Green! AHHHHHHHH!
Talk about full spectrum warfare... We are rapidly running past the 8 crayon box of sides.
Dist. Expert 26
12-28-15, 22:02
At great risk of sidetracking, I'll just say that there is a happy balance of military tradition, discipline, and warfighting skill.
The biggest thing DoD can do to fix the force is just enforce all the standards properly, at all levels, and during all phases of the Soldier's career- especially before they even let them in. We let in too many shitbags during the GWOT and now they need to be purged (or else we end up waiting for them to retire).
I won't derail the thread past this point, but I largely agree with you. Conventional infantry units (that's all I know, I can't speak for POGs) need some measure of discipline in order to keep the kids in line. That being said, the atmosphere of inspections, endless formations and constant threat of NJP is enough to drive even the most moto guys to drink.
KalashniKEV
12-28-15, 22:24
But what about the optics of Israel as being seen as against ISIS, so every other Muslim force is now on the 'Israeli' side?
The truth is, Israel don't want it with ISIS either.
We are rapidly running past the 8 crayon box of sides.
When it all shakes out it will be Saudi Arabia (plus team and proxies) vs. Iran (plus team and proxies). We will be forced to abandon our Cold War alliances and make a high level battlefield assessment (for the first time... in the entire War...).
Saudi Arabia will be fully exposed for what we all know they are- the greatest Evil in the world- and all their dirty friends will pay the price, including those among us.
Karma's a bitch.
I seriously doubt that ISIL/ISIS/IMAFSH fears anything in the same manner as we define fear. At least not the average field guy looking to kill infidels and get his 72 virgins should he catch a bullet in the face. My guess is that about the only way to grab these guys by the short curlies is to go after their families like the Taliban did and most likley ISIS leadership does should they find any unmotivated soldiers. Its going to take some serious atrocities for the west to get pushed that hard if it can even be done anymore.
To expect that Muslims will fight along our side to kill other Muslims is pretty much retarded. Its served us, the Russians and others so well over the years to build up resistance fighters and armies. Once you are done killing one batch the batch that helped you turns into the batch that needs killing. Islam, Christianity, Democracy and Freedom are not compatible values. The sooner we get that into our heads the better off we will be. IMO our war against workplace violence is a lost cause. We are hemorrhaging good people and $$ out the ass with absolutely no chance of a return on investment of any kind.
We need a paradigm shift in our view and acceptance of how things are. We need to accept that a portion of Islam isnt peaceful and that the rest may not truly give enough of a crap to get involved. We also need to get into our heads that these folks arent in it for the next sound bite, but rather they are in it for the long haul. We cant have radical strategy changes with every wave of freshman politicians coming to DC.
Immediate action needs to be containment and elimination of physical threats/resources. Simple rules of engagement: Must Haves - 1) Kill the enemy and destroy his assets no matter where on the planet they materialize. 2) Minimize US casualties. Would be nice to haves - 1) Minimize US resource depletions as possible. 2) Minimize collateral damage. Long term would require a dedication to dismantling their ability to generate more resources to replenish the ones we are busy blowing up. This primarily means $$ and having the balls to go after the Saudi's and other "moderate" nations who we know funnel $$ to terror organizations but choose to ignore it. Kill their ability to generate $$ and they wont be able to recruit anyone and send them overseas to kill innocents, much less feed themselves. Contain the radicals in the ME and let them die of thirst, starvation or murder.
All saber/nuke rattling aside, considering their main plan against Shi’ite Muslims, it should be a coalition of Shi’ite Muslim countries who put together a main ground force to go clean them out with western coalition air power in support and of course western SOF in "advisory" roles to make sure chit actually gets done.
Just a few problems.
First the Shia muslims who liberated Iraq from ISIS would promptly hand over control of the region to Iran, including the Iraqi oil fields and we'd have to start a new war with Iran to get them back.
Second, a big part of this is a result Iraq transforming from a Sunni majority to a Shia majority population, especially in government. This has also caused a balance of power problem in the entire middle east.
All this ISIS crap is really a proxy conflict between the Iranian Islamic theocracy and the Saudi Islamic monarchy. And we are just stupid enough to find ourselves in the middle of it and doing a lot of the heavy lifting.
When it all shakes out it will be Saudi Arabia (plus team and proxies) vs. Iran (plus team and proxies). We will be forced to abandon our Cold War alliances and make a high level battlefield assessment (for the first time... in the entire War...).
Saudi Arabia will be fully exposed for what we all know they are- the greatest Evil in the world- and all their dirty friends will pay the price, including those among us.
Karma's a bitch.
Effin scary I tell ya. Me and Kev nearly verbatim.
I would only add, I hope our next President makes his first order of business to repair relations with Russia. Time for Glastnost Part II. We have many common issues and enemies, be nice to get on the same page.
Per Russia: I want to use my High School Analogy.
ISIS, ME, et al are the shitbag hoods. They don't care.
We are the preppy jock kids who could cram them up their own assholes but don't because we don't want to get "in trouble"
Russia is like the sorta shady kid from a bad home, but doesn't want to live that life. They want nice things and don't want to be effed with and don't care about being "in trouble", but again aren't hoods despite their former reputation. Drapes. You know, like the kids who wore chain wallets but still try to pass the class. They drive an IROC and carry a switchblade but don't really want to be a thug. Just products of a negative environment.
If Jock kid(us ) and Drape kid (Russia) decided one day to clean house and just whip every hoods narrow ass, then it would do a lot to deter any more hood shit.
Because jock kid will break your neck and Drape kid will stab you with a switchblade. And the rest of the nerdy kids (other countries) won't do anything neither will the school (U.N.) because they sorta need both but pitted one another against each other for so long.
A lot of mended fences and mutual respect of turf would go a long way here to making it 'okay' to lullaby the hood kids.
Because when you have two large nations with nukes, large standing armies, and don't want none of the BS, then the incentive to start mess goes away.
I remember it was a thing when Reagan asked Gorbachev if they would ally if aliens invaded. Gorbachev agreed. People thought it was a stupid question.
But here we are....muslims shooting up Russia and the US, in each respective border.
Pissing matches over petty things while real stuff happens. Guilty of that sentiment myself.
Hell, it took a US/Russia alliance to crack the Nazis. Is it so different?
Nobody wants to be communist anymore but Democrats.
Shit, why not team up, whip everyone's ass, and split the spoils of war 50/50?
That may seem pretty hawkish but, why not? Only way they'll learn. This isn't going away as is.
I really don't see the downside. NATO is kind of a dinosaur, the EU punishes its own members more than anyone else.
Survival beats programming and profit is better than debt.
KalashniKEV
12-29-15, 07:20
Second, a big part of this is a result Iraq transforming from a Sunni majority to a Shia majority population...
Iraq was never a majority Sunni country.
Sykes-Picot put the border straight through the heartland of the Sunni warriors after the Arab Revolt (see Lawrence of Arabia).
The funny thing was- under Saddam, nobody cared if you were Shia or Sunni, except for a bunch of professional Shia victims who were persecuted more because of their Iranian sympathies during Iran-Iraq (see Badr Corps).
Iraq was never a majority Sunni country.
Sykes-Picot put the border straight through the heartland of the Sunni warriors after the Arab Revolt (see Lawrence of Arabia).
The funny thing was- under Saddam, nobody cared if you were Shia or Sunni, except for a bunch of professional Shia victims who were persecuted more because of their Iranian sympathies during Iran-Iraq (see Badr Corps).
A lot of sources state otherwise.
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/06/18/the-sunni-shia-divide-where-they-live-what-they-believe-and-how-they-view-each-other/
Under Saddam Hussein’s regime in Iraq, which was dominated by Sunnis, the country clashed with Iran.
In regards to post number 1 on this thread:
I'll certainly buy that they are afraid of Israel, but I'm not buying that they aren't afraid of us. They may not be afraid of "America" as a whole, or our ridiculous current farce of a president, but they are damn sure afraid of our troops and their behavior proves it. They know damn well that we will kick their ass in any sort of straight up fight, even though we are on their terrain and outnumbered. This is why they sneak around with bombs and surprise attacks on civilians. Even the American public will hand them their asses if they tried to pull some of that Paris crap here. They may succeed in a "gun free" zone or two initially, but you watch how many American's start ignoring all these unconstitutional, illegal gun restricting laws in short order after an attack or two like that. We will simply put them down like the rabid dogs that they are.
I keep seeing this sentiment pop up. What good do you think a nuclear weapon would do? What goal would it actually achieve? It's fun to talk about turning the whole region into a glass parking lot, but that's not a realistic use of nukes.
The middle east would be mighty peaceful with nothing but skeletons and cockroaches inhabiting it..... :p
Saudi Arabia will be fully exposed for what we all know they are- the greatest Evil in the world- and all their dirty friends will pay the price, including those among us.
You know, I read something not long ago that basically called the Saudis "ISIS that succeeded long term" and really I'm not sure it's an inaccurate description. The House of Saud might be our ally but they aren't what you'd call nice people.
A lot of sources state otherwise.
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/06/18/the-sunni-shia-divide-where-they-live-what-they-believe-and-how-they-view-each-other/
Yeah, under Saddam it was a Sunni minority holding power over the Shia majority. Most stable ME states have been this way with minority rule of some form or another. Syria was (is?) the exact opposite with a Shia minority ruling over a Sunni minority.
You know, I read something not long ago that basically called the Saudis "ISIS that succeeded long term" and really I'm not sure it's an inaccurate description. The House of Saud might be our ally but they aren't what you'd call nice people.
The enemy of my enemy is my friend and they sell us oil. One of the (legit) criticisms we endure is the fact we lecture one country or other on their human rights abuses and or heavy handed government tactics in the ME, while ignoring the transgressions of the Saudis on their population, the fine country who gave us our 911 attackers.
Energy self sufficiency - by any means - would be the single most effective way to disconnect ourselves from the chit hole that is the ME and improve national security and without that petro $, they'd would go back to the stone ages as they deserve. We could support a few key countries in the region willing to play by the rules, and not be held hostage to their messing with oil prices to keep us quiet.
A pipe dream I know.
A lot of sources state otherwise.
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/06/18/the-sunni-shia-divide-where-they-live-what-they-believe-and-how-they-view-each-other/
I think Kev actually agrees with "Pew". The Saddam regime was indeed mostly Sunni and therefore Sunni ruled... but the country as a whole was majority Shia population wise.
The middle east would be mighty peaceful with nothing but skeletons and cockroaches inhabiting it..... :p
Yeah, let's $h-t wreck the homes and kill everybody; regardless of "leanings." Last time I checked, Israel was in the ME. Also, not everyone in the ME is a mooslem.
Yeah, let's $h-t wreck the homes and kill everybody; regardless of "leanings." Last time I checked, Israel was in the ME. Also, not everyone in the ME is a mooslem.
I guess the facetious nature of my post didn't come across...
Sent from my VS986 using Tapatalk
I guess the facetious nature of my post didn't come across...
Sent from my VS986 using Tapatalk
I apologize. My bad for not noticing the emoticon. Stuck at home with two young children all day; slightly out of whack.
Facetious--Good word.
I agree with the rest of what you said. But this right here shows a failure to grasp the fundamental differences between ISIS and the 1940's Japanese Empire. Furthermore, it shows a misunderstanding of what the effects of nuclear weapons actually are, and how they are typically employed. The latter is understandable, as nuclear weapons simply aren't seriously discussed outside outside of select circles.
The former, well, it's everywhere. ISIS is not a resource-hungry military empire. They do not have easily targeted industrial centers, political leadership, or population centers. They do not ascribe to the typical motivations that drive other world powers. They are driven by pure religious zealousness, which makes them extraordinarily hard to deal with on a rational level.
Yes, ISIS is not the same as the Japanese Empire, but the principle of destroying your enemy still applies. ISIS, of course is not the only member of that enemy. Saudi Arabia and Turkey are included.
All of the above are resource hungry. Oil is a resource, and each of them are as hungry as any empire/nation.
Yes, the are driven by religious zealousness, which makes them hard to deal with on a rational level. The same was largely true about the Japs. This is an even stronger argument for using nuclear weapons.
As for what ISIS fears, it really is too bad that the Western world is ruled by pathetic weaklings.
The USA is ruled (uh, governed??) by an Islamophile Marxist, and possibly an outright Muslim.
Canada is ruled by an airhead drama teacher trust fund baby with a soft spot for Islam.
http://en.cijnews.com/?p=17895
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2012/12/16/islamic-conference-sponsor-justin-trudeau-irfan_n_2312677.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2012/12/22/justin-trudeau-irfan-conference-appearance_n_2353752.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2012/12/16/islamic-conference-sponsor-justin-trudeau-irfan_n_2312677.html
FromMyColdDeadHand
12-30-15, 02:05
Saudi Arabia will be fully exposed for what we all know they are- the greatest Evil in the world- and all their dirty friends will pay the price, including those among us.
Saudi Arabia doesn't run bombers up and down our coast. They don't have thousands of war heads pointed at us. The don't threaten our allies in Eastern Europe with existential threats. Russia can inflict 1000 9/11s faster than Dominoes can get a pizza to your door. You can only make apologies for Iran in their quest, and our acquiescence, for nuclear arms.
Saudis- Bad guys, yes. By your own posts Kev the reason that the Russians back Assad is to block a pipeline that would threaten Russia's increasing market share (close to a third) of EU gas usage- and higher for some countries. They aren't there as Crusaders, they are protecting their energy flank and their ability to gas-mail the EU democracies.
So we drew the shorter of two extremely short straws. This is geopolitics. We play the cleanest game we can.
You are a smart guy and well informed, but you have a blind spot that really shows in your portrayal of the Sunni-Shia conflict as being almost all one sided.
FromMyColdDeadHand
12-30-15, 02:15
I love how everyone makes WWII out to be some kind of a-side:b-side fight.
China was split in two and the Nationalists did the majority of the fighting against the Japanese. Finland and Russia, oh and let's not forget Poland. Russia not getting in on the pacific war, even held some of our B-29s and pilots as they copied them to carry atomic bombs for raids on us in the 50s. France, and the myth of the resistance. The whole nationalists versus communist sub plot to WWII along with the WWI armistice boundaries that we're all out of whack. A complete cluster fudge that didn't get cleared up until the history was written for public school junior high text books.
Stop making the ME out to be some kind aberration in the history or warfare. The only clear fight was Cain and Able, and my guess is the Bible whitewashed Baker out of it all.
I love how everyone makes WWII out to be some kind of a-side:b-side fight.
China was split in two and the Nationalists did the majority of the fighting against the Japanese. Finland and Russia, oh and let's not forget Poland. Russia not getting in on the pacific war, even held some of our B-29s and pilots as they copied them to carry atomic bombs for raids on us in the 50s. France, and the myth of the resistance. The whole nationalists versus communist sub plot to WWII along with the WWI armistice boundaries that we're all out of whack. A complete cluster fudge that didn't get cleared up until the history was written for public school junior high text books.
Stop making the ME out to be some kind aberration in the history or warfare. The only clear fight was Cain and Able, and my guess is the Bible whitewashed Baker out of it all.
You forgot Italy and most of Eastern Europe switching sides when things went bad for Germany. Finland is the only country I know that can be invaded by both Russia and their German allies and then considered a Nazi ally at the end of the war because they fought the Russians who were now NATO allies.
Only Poland got screwed worse. They were invaded by prior agreement by German in the west and Russia in the east a week later. Makes no difference that by existing agreement Stalin started WWII with the same culpability as Hitler, he was our ally so we had to pretend otherwise. And despite the entire conflict being started because Poland was violated, they ended up sacrificed as a client state of the USSR well behind the Iron Curtain.
Then there was the appalling crap our country did, like giving those as Unit 731 complete immunity in exchange for their data when they tested biological and chemical weapons on human subjects and large populations. And of course participating in the absurd lie that the Emperor of Japan had no knowledge of Japanese atrocities committed by his military forces and in fact actually was a hero for invoking his status which we are told was mostly symbolic and bringing a peaceful conclusion to the pacific war.
We then paraded him around like some kind of Gandhi until he died. What a farce. He was ever bit a war criminal as any member of the Black Dragon Society whom he had direct ties to.
I apologize. My bad for not noticing the emoticon. Stuck at home with two young children all day; slightly out of whack.
Facetious--Good word.
I feel you brother. I got a 2 year old and a 2 week old at home. I'm living on caffeine and misery right now lol
KalashniKEV
12-30-15, 13:11
A lot of sources state otherwise.
No... no "sources" state otherwise, or else they would be incorrect. Read the link you provided.
Iraq is 32%-37% Sunni according to 2010 numbers... maybe even less before the invasion, when the pie was larger and included almost a million Christians who fled.
You post a lot about Iraq... I'm really surprised you didn't know that.
Yes, ISIS is not the same as the Japanese Empire, but the principle of destroying your enemy still applies.
That is only the most basic principle of warfare, and it might be the only one that applies.
Understand: WWII was a color war. "Hooray! The capital has fallen, let's go home and have a tickertape parade!" This is much more complex.
After the war in Japan, there was significant exchange between the Japanese populace and American business and manufacturing. Japan became an economic miracle.
Nobody jumped down from the roof with a samurai sword and started chopping heads, or performed exotic torture or execution methods in retaliation.
Saudi Arabia doesn't run bombers up and down our coast. They don't have thousands of war heads pointed at us. The don't threaten our allies in Eastern Europe with existential threats.
No... they just drop our buildings, kill our people, deplete our resources, and destroy our way of life.
Have you ever tried to tally the number of American citizens that Russia or Russian proxies have killed vs Saudi Arabia and Wahabbist-fueled transnational jihad? Or just... the number of humans, period?
Your post is just... so shockingly backward and ill informed.
Russia is not even on the top of the list of "frenemies," nor is it #2...
FromMyColdDeadHand
12-30-15, 14:05
No... they just drop our buildings, kill our people, deplete our resources, and destroy our way of life.
Have you ever tried to tally the number of American citizens that Russia or Russian proxies have killed vs Saudi Arabia and Wahabbist-fueled transnational jihad? Or just... the number of humans, period?
Your post is just... so shockingly backward and ill informed.
You don't understand the difference between warfare and terrorism- a shocking revelation for your supposed level of understanding.
Russian proxies body count? Are you seriously overlooking Vietnam and Korea, let alone all the other smaller wars the Russians have killed? And don't be a dumbass try a Soviet versus Russians when the leader of Russia is a KGB thug. Throw in their killing of their own people and in the same camp throw in the deaths in Communist China and the middle east starts to look like a boutique war- arts and crafts versus industrial scale human suffering.
KalashniKEV
12-30-15, 14:24
You don't understand the difference between warfare and terrorism- a shocking revelation for your supposed level of understanding.
I'm sorry... I'm still just jaw-on-the-floor that you're scared of the Russians.
Did you know there's a Communist country still in existence that is actively trying to destroy us?
Also, have you ever heard of something called, "Radical Islamic Terrorism?"
Seriously... I'm just like WOW... WOOOOOW...
No... no "sources" state otherwise, or else they would be incorrect. Read the link you provided.
Iraq is 32%-37% Sunni according to 2010 numbers... maybe even less before the invasion, when the pie was larger and included almost a million Christians who fled.
You post a lot about Iraq... I'm really surprised you didn't know that.
I was under the assumption that during the Saddam years the Shia were a minority with questionable loyalties to Iran. I know Saddam had frequent problems with the Shia who were loyal to the Ayatollah and even made a significant assassination attempt early on.
KalashniKEV
12-30-15, 15:58
I was under the assumption that during the Saddam years the Shia were a minority with questionable loyalties to Iran.
Iraq is majority Shia, previously ruled by a Sunni controlled Ba'ath Party.
Syria is majority Sunni, previously ruled (in it's entirety) by a Shia controlled Ba'ath Party.
The idea of "Shia allegiance to Iran" comes mostly from the Badr Corps (a small group), and their desire to spread the 1979 Islamic Revolution into Iraq (Saddam was like... NOPE). Most of the regular "drink a beer and watch the game" type Iraqi Shia still hate Iran, despite their common sect, because of the Iran-Iraq War, and the true existential threat the Iranians posed (and likewise). They are also keenly aware of Iran's control of the Iraqi government.
It's only in the last 10 years that Iran has become just-barely-tolerable to mainstream Iraqis, mostly because of the work of OMS (Office of the Martyr Sadr) after the JAM ceasefire, fixing what we broke and succeeding at what we were failing at.
Also... the success of Iranian led Hash'd al Shaabi/ Popular Mobilization Forces in holding back ISIS, taking back terrain, killing bad guys helps... though they hate the idea of Iranian boots marching all over Iraqi soil.
Most of the Scout Platoon I distilled down from an entire Iraqi Infantry Battalion has now left the Iraqi Army and joined PMF.
Iraq is majority Shia, previously ruled by a Sunni controlled Ba'ath Party.
Syria is majority Sunni, previously ruled (in it's entirety) by a Shia controlled Ba'ath Party.
The idea of "Shia allegiance to Iran" comes mostly from the Badr Corps (a small group), and their desire to spread the 1979 Islamic Revolution into Iraq (Saddam was like... NOPE). Most of the regular "drink a beer and watch the game" type Iraqi Shia still hate Iran, despite their common sect, because of the Iran-Iraq War, and the true existential threat the Iranians posed (and likewise). They are also keenly aware of Iran's control of the Iraqi government.
It's only in the last 10 years that Iran has become just-barely-tolerable to mainstream Iraqis, mostly because of the work of OMS (Office of the Martyr Sadr) after the JAM ceasefire, fixing what we broke and succeeding at what we were failing at.
Also... the success of Iranian led Hash'd al Shaabi/ Popular Mobilization Forces in holding back ISIS, taking back terrain, killing bad guys helps... though they hate the idea of Iranian boots marching all over Iraqi soil.
Most of the Scout Platoon I distilled down from an entire Iraqi Infantry Battalion has now left the Iraqi Army and joined PMF.
Thanks for the crash course and getting me up to speed.
Most of my understanding of Iraq comes from the first Persian Gulf War and events that preceded it. Obviously even that was somewhat incomplete. It was never my intention to be well versed in the history and developments of Iraq, it just kind of happened that I ended up learning a little bit about something that I tried to have zero interest in.
I dunno. If they're Muslims why not just drop a C-130 load of pork chops on them.
I dunno. If they're Muslims why not just drop a C-130 load of pork chops on them.
Waste of good pork.
The solution to ISIS is as follows...
Dear Russian Federation aka Putin,
We are really, really sorry about messing with the works on your "fuel racket" that you had in the works with Assad. We are going to sack up and stop messing with the works. Please take any and all actions in the region that you consider prudent in order to restore stability.
Seriously,
The United States.
Waste of good pork.
The solution to ISIS is as follows...
Dear Russian Federation aka Putin,
We are really, really sorry about messing with the works on your "fuel racket" that you had in the works with Assad. We are going to sack up and stop messing with the works. Please take any and all actions in the region that you consider prudent in order to restore stability.
Seriously,
The United States.
I would tentatively agree with this.
He certainly isn't on our side, or an anyone's side but his own, but might as well use him to crush ISIS if that is in his interest too.
MountainRaven
12-31-15, 09:23
Russia is about as interested in crushing ISIS as Turkey and Saudi are.
For Russia, it's chiefly about propping up Asad and making the rest of the world think better of them, without having to do much of substance.
Russia is about as interested in crushing ISIS as Turkey and Saudi are.
You could not be more wrong, again. But out of curiosity, upon what information are you basing your assertion?
FromMyColdDeadHand
12-31-15, 19:13
It is hyperbole, but you could say that Russia is primarily focused on keeping Assad in power. Whacking at ISIS is one way to do that, but not the reason that they are in Syria.
It is hyperbole, but you could say that Russia is primarily focused on keeping Assad in power. Whacking at ISIS is one way to do that, but not the reason that they are in Syria.
Upon what exactly are you basing your opinion? The articles I have read by those who actually know a thing or two about Russia and the Middle East have actually explained Russia's mindset on the issue and why it is so absolutely important for Russia that a militant fundamentalist Islamic Caliphate not be established in the region.
It is hyperbole, but you could say that Russia is primarily focused on keeping Assad in power. Whacking at ISIS is one way to do that, but not the reason that they are in Syria.
Assad can't be in power if the prospect of a Islamic Caliphate is even a possibility within his borders. Also Russia isn't exactly thrilled with their downed airline. Given that Putin has had no reservations about starting shit in the Ukraine and simply taking things like the Crimea and Georgia, I'm amazed he hasn't simply told the US and Nato to FO and roll in troops and tanks.
I think he simply has a complex logistic issue and nothing more.
That is only the most basic principle of warfare, and it might be the only one that applies.
Understand: WWII was a color war. "Hooray! The capital has fallen, let's go home and have a tickertape parade!" This is much more complex.
After the war in Japan, there was significant exchange between the Japanese populace and American business and manufacturing. Japan became an economic miracle.
Nobody jumped down from the roof with a samurai sword and started chopping heads, or performed exotic torture or execution methods in retaliation.
I think that we are seeing WWII as more simple as it was (I'm sometimes guilty of this too). Perhaps it's hindsight, or just because we are so far removed.
WWII was complex. We aided the USSR, despite them having been a totalitarian empire, their soldiers having raped close to a million women on their advance to and partial withdrawal from Germany.
Also, your point about Japan becoming an economic miracle is true. (This is also true about West Germany). However, the reason for this is that the people/culture of Germany and Japan are generally more intelligent and productive than Arab Muslims.
If anything, that actually supports my position. We absolutely devastated, carpet bombed and nuked the Germans and Japs respectively, with whom we shared a lot more in common than we do with Muslims of any stripe, especially Arab ones.
No... they just drop our buildings, kill our people, deplete our resources, and destroy our way of life.
Have you ever tried to tally the number of American citizens that Russia or Russian proxies have killed vs Saudi Arabia and Wahabbist-fueled transnational jihad? Or just... the number of humans, period?
Your post is just... so shockingly backward and ill informed.
Russia is not even on the top of the list of "frenemies," nor is it #2...
There is no question that Saudi Arabia is a huge threat to the United States.
I would agree with you on that.
Assad can't be in power if the prospect of a Islamic Caliphate is even a possibility within his borders. Also Russia isn't exactly thrilled with their downed airline. Given that Putin has had no reservations about starting shit in the Ukraine and simply taking things like the Crimea and Georgia, I'm amazed he hasn't simply told the US and Nato to FO and roll in troops and tanks.
I think he simply has a complex logistic issue and nothing more.
I would agree.
The US (the gov, not the people obviously) and NATO need to be told to **** off. The leadership is really off the reservation.
Assad can't be in power if the prospect of a Islamic Caliphate is even a possibility within his borders. Also Russia isn't exactly thrilled with their downed airline. Given that Putin has had no reservations about starting shit in the Ukraine and simply taking things like the Crimea...
I'm pretty damn certain that the CIA and US State Department planing, funding, and instigating, a bloody coup against the legitimately elected president of Ukraine because he was not as hostile to Russia as we wanted him to be and then installing a puppet president is rather what got the ball rolling in Ukraine.
As for Crimea, a communist dictator simply decided to give the land and all the people to Ukraine, but when they finally had the opportunity the Crimeans themselves voted to repeal that forced communist edict. I know, I know, how dare they. :rolleyes:
Honestly, if Putin developed a cure for cancer some people would hate him all the more for it.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.