The terrorists need to be removed first.
ISIS in Iraq and Syria
- Thread starter Suli
- Start date
The terrorists need to be removed first.
Great idea, get of the country's armed forces, because that worked really well for Iraq right?
Syria is seriously fecked irrespective of who is in charge. Its basically become a proxy for Russia, the west, and ISIS.
Agreed, it definitely is a clusterfeck, but the least we can do is home in lessons from Iraq and previous conflicts where severe mistakes were made.
Assad and his cronies should have a lot to answer for should there be tangible evidence linking him to the various war crimes he's being held culpable for, but I think we need to consider the big picture here. Getting rid of the Syrian army would be the worst possible thing - like Iraq, you'd deprive the nation of means to autonomously defend itself, and you'd simultaneously be giving an upper hand to the extremist factions who'll likely fill the vacuum and take over swathes of the country..much like what's happened in Iraq.
Enough people have been killed and there needs to be a power-sharing agreement set in place, perhaps mediated by the international community (and I don't mean the Arab league), perhaps by Bashar giving way too. But right now the biggest priority should be the eradication of extremist elements in Syria and Iraq.
Anyone have any thoughts on Nir Rosen's more limited proposal for freezing the conflict through localised ceasefires touted a few months back?
http://www.middleeasteye.net/columns/local-syria-ceasefires-way-out-us-policy-dead-end-849203599
http://www.middleeasteye.net/columns/local-syria-ceasefires-way-out-us-policy-dead-end-849203599
I don't think they would work to be honest, mainly because Assad's forces have little to gain by taking their foot off the accelerator in areas where they have been on the offensive against various non ISIS opponents. And along those lines, ISIS certainly have little incentive to agree to something like this, as they are attempting to launch various counter-offensives across their territory in order to avoid the perception they are on the wane (which they are).
Secret Files Reveal the Structure of Islamic State
An Iraqi officer planned Islamic State's takeover in Syria and SPIEGEL has been given exclusive access to his papers. They portray an organization that, while seemingly driven by religious fanaticism, is actually coldly calculating.
http://www.spiegel.de/international...cture-of-islamist-terror-group-a-1029274.html
An Iraqi officer planned Islamic State's takeover in Syria and SPIEGEL has been given exclusive access to his papers. They portray an organization that, while seemingly driven by religious fanaticism, is actually coldly calculating.
http://www.spiegel.de/international...cture-of-islamist-terror-group-a-1029274.html
This is something that isn't talked about enough - the remnants of Saddam's old regime pulling the strings in ISIS.
I find it a tad bit annoying when you have folks saying 'Saddam wouldn't have let Iraq fall to ISIS', whereas the fact of the matter is that ISIS's senior commanders stem right from Saddam's regime. You wouldn't have ISIS if Saddam was still in power because half of ISIS's commanders would still fecking be in Saddam's revolutionary guard or intelligence service. Its why ISIS have such profound military know-how.
Sadly, I think you're spot on here Kaos.
Get a clue.
The facts remain - Bashar has killed more in the same amount of time than ISIS has. He has systemically resorted to chemical warfare and depraved acts. The guy even has his people worshipping him and praying to him. He is a megalomaniac, and his removal will only be a good thing.
Comparing this to Iraq is comparing apples to oranges. The West went to Iraq under false pretenses, and it is that involvement which has put Iraq into perpetual civil warfare til now. Removing Bashar won't have the same affect. The crisis in Syria is a humanitarian crisis. The situation there is no way similar to Iraq in '03, and it's stupid to insinuate so.
The removal of Bashar will help aid the removal of ISIS. The fact that so many of ISIS' recruits come from people displaced and disillusioned in Syria is testament to that.
And how would you propose this so called "removal of Bashar" will take place ?
(What's left of) the FSA need to be backed militarily, and given aid. The U.S. can play a positive role, as well. It's funny seeing how quickly everyone was mobilised to deal with the Houthis in Yemen, but there was no such reaction to the civil war in Syria.
If that doesn't happen, I'd point to what happened to Qadaffi as a solution.
My point is, for the greater good, Bashar needs to go.
Wouldn't that be a recipe for further arms going to extremist organizations like ISIS once they rout FSA type members of their supplies ?
The direction of action in Yemen is exactly the opposite direction of the one you're proposing now to deal with the situation in Syria. The military action there is aiming to destroy the Yemeni rebels, not to help them.
However, there is still the similarity that both proposed interventions are leading to further spread of Al-Qaeda as we've already seen both in Syria and Yemen. Coincidence?
I don't think that'd occur. The natural extension of FSA control in Syria would be to eradicate IS. Providing aid to FSA will help strengthen their grip on the region and allow them to take back regions they lost to IS due to their lack of equipment and manpower. Their relationship is increasingly tenuous and antagonistic (same with al Nusra and IS). Contrary to popular belief, most Muslims, including the majority of Arab based Muslims are against IS, and have no qualms with seeing their end.
Agreed - maybe it's my naivety of wanting to see a greater good for the ME, that I'd see the Arab/Gulf states aid the FSA to remove an evil such as Bashar.
I sort of see what you're saying here, and I think the spread of AQ is indirect. A disillusioned, disenfranchised mind is ripe pickings for groups such as AQ and IS. With 4 years(!) of perpetual conflict in Syria, we have droves of people voiceless and angry to the carnage around them. An AQ recruiter in such conflicts must be the easiest job in the world.
I don't see how removing Bashar will aid removal of ISIS, if anything you'll empower them.
ISIS want to create an Islamic caliphate in Syria and Iraq, and they won't stop until every non Sunni Muslim has either been massacred or force to convert. The only factions currently fighting them in Syria are the Kurdish militia and the Syrian Army. It makes no sense to antagonise the latter if you're serious about combating ISIS.
What natural extension of FSA ? They've mostly been routed by Assad and ISIS and are either dead or defected. You have little evidence that providing the FSA with weapons would do anything other than increase the likelihood Syria will be flooded with yet more weapons, most of which would find their way into the hands of ISIS.
Ahh the FSA. The same bunch who've been hanging children, embracing Al-Nusra, and selling hostages to ISIS. I don't see how arming them could possibly be a risky maneuver.
You're conflating FSA and IS (again).
I said the natural extension of FSA control in Syria.
Backing them with military aid would allow them to take back control of regions lost to IS, as well as toppling Assad's regime. You and Kaos are in the habit of lumping the FSA and IS together when they are distinctly different groups, with distinctly different goals.
Backing them militarily will allow them to win the war against Assad, and IS.
The Syrian Army/Bashar's men:
There's countless videos of Assad's lot carrying out depraved acts on Liveleak, and I can't even bring myself to watch them, let alone post them.
It's quite telling that you'd ignore all the crimes perpetrated by Assad.
Edit: The video didn't embed for some reason. Working on it.
@Kaos
Postmortem images allegedly documenting the torture and killing of detainees by the Assad regime in Syria, loaned to the Museum by a Syrian Army defector known as 'Caesar.' UNITED STATES HOLOCAUST MEMORIAL MUSEUM
UNITED STATES HOLOCAUST MEMORIAL MUSEUM
UNITED
STATES HOLOCAUST MEMORIAL MUSEUM
http://www.newsweek.com/photos-syria-allegedly-show-torture-systematic-killing-278894
https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=99&v=CjCAXyYoByo (this video won't embed for some reason).
http://www.newsweek.com/photos-syria-allegedly-show-torture-systematic-killing-278894
https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=99&v=CjCAXyYoByo (this video won't embed for some reason).
Kaos and I know who the FSA are and know they aren't part of IS. My argument is the FSA scarcely exist as a legitimate group that can be funded and equipped to actually make a difference without said weapons not being guaranteed of getting into the hands of ISIS. The idea that the FSA can somehow wrestle control away from Assad and ISIS is therefore not legitimate or feasible.
@Kaos
STATES HOLOCAUST MEMORIAL MUSEUMPostmortem images allegedly documenting the torture and killing of detainees by the Assad regime in Syria, loaned to the Museum by a Syrian Army defector known as 'Caesar.' UNITED STATES HOLOCAUST MEMORIAL MUSEUM
UNITED STATES HOLOCAUST MEMORIAL MUSEUM
UNITED
http://www.newsweek.com/photos-syria-allegedly-show-torture-systematic-killing-278894
https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=99&v=CjCAXyYoByo (this video won't embed for some reason).
What exactly is the point of this?
And yes I'm aware FSA and ISIS aren't the same faction. But to say there hasn't been any collaboration or beneficial relationship between the two would be obtuse.
Yes - and my point all along has been they've lost a lot of momentum, they've lost a lot of men to IS and AQ etc. but they are a legitimate fighting body still. There are key strategic areas that the FSA still have control over - namely parts of Aleppo, and along the Turkey border. If they are given aid (weapons and men), not only will it allow them to consolidate these areas, but it'll also allow them to grow. It's obvious without the funding, it won't allow them to succeed. The reasons so many of their guys have defected is because IS has the higher grade of weapon, and it has the money. Whether you believe that they can succeed with that aid is another matter.
As I said earlier, their relationship is a lot more tenuous and antagonistic than you, or others may think.
And I showed you that because I can't see how anyone can support a regime when they commit crimes such as that.
Again, why fund an organisation that has been known to collaborate with ISIS, sell them western hostages and have a sectarian agenda.
What exactly do you think their end-game plan is?
Funding and equipping a group that owns an ever decreasing sliver of territory is still not feasible though. Syria needs a regional and international solution that can step in and create humanitarian corridors where no fighting takes place and is secured by the UN. It also requires first and foremost that ISIS are gradually eroded both from within and through airstrikes. Getting rid of Assad is really not much of a priority at the moment as the ensuing security vacuum would only serve to further destabilize the country, even beyond current levels.
Contrary to what you or others may think, I'm not a supporter of the Assad regime. I simply believe that the alternative is more macabre.
And assuming those photos are verified and not more fabricated lies by the FSA, there have been equally, if not more heinous acts carried out by the rebellion too. No one can claim the moral high ground in this conflict.
Talk of the FSA taking on Assad and IS seems to miss the point that they're no longer even relevant as a fighting force, and that the groups making up the Islamic Front have routed them out of Idlib and elsewhere. So they'd not only be taking on Assad and IS, but also Nusra, Ahrar ash-Sham, Jaysh al-Islam, etc. who are already much better armed and funded from the Gulf, and not exactly nice guys themselves (e.g. Google what Zahran Alloush had to say about his shelling of Damascus, or Ahrar ash-Sham's plan for the future political structure of the country).
When we talk about the FSA, who exactly are we talking about anymore?
When we talk about the FSA, who exactly are we talking about anymore?
Didn't you see my post from earlier?
Getting rid of Assad is paramount to solving this conflict. The guy is a butcher. The stats don't lie. He's killed far more than IS in the same amount of time. (I posted a link a while back in this thread). He's using chemical warfare on his people. He needs to be removed.
Once he has been, the fight can be brought to IS. Having Syria stabilised will stem the flow of support from the Syrian people to IS, and of defectors who couldn't became disillusioned with the FSA. Removing IS (from Syria) before Assad, will only increase their support further afield.
Didn't you read my post from earlier?
I'm not denying the authenticity of those photos, nor the regime's capability for the crimes. Its just that its become notoriously common for the opposition to use lies and fabrications to strengthen their cause globally. Hence my skepticism.
Fair enough, akh.
That's a very myopic, half-thought out view. You can say get rid of him all you want but you haven't yet provided any rational ideas as to how - equipping the nearly non-existent FSA is not a viable approach. You also haven't provided any viable solutions as to what would happen after he is gone, as it would more or less open up Assad held territory to ISIS control, which would merely exacerbate the carnage.
I've said many times, that international and military support for the FSA will help them grow domestically as well. You may think they are non existent, but they still hold strategically key areas, and a close bond with Turkey. Aiding them will consolidate their own areas and help on the push back against IS. An FSA led front will be best for Syria. Considering the majority of their hierarchy are are high defectors from Bashar's army and office, I'd say they'd have a pretty good idea on what worked, and what didn't work in running Syria.
It's well documented that the FSA's fight was more or less highjacked by IS, and they didn't have the resources to compete.
I've bolded that bit as this suggests that they didn't have the money to build on the areas that they did control, as opposed to not wanting to. IS had the money.
I've intimated many times that the reason for the FSA's failings was lack of money and resources. And, I believe that with money and resources coming into the FSA, they'd receive a lot more ground support from the average Syrian, and wider circles.
Edit: On a separate-ish note - routing out IS from the region can only be done via an FSA spearheaded front. Anyone else leading the charge, will only increase their support in other regions.
Last edited:
Still no mention of Nusra and the Islamic Front, who are far far more relevant on the ground today than the FSA.
Again I'd ask, who exactly are you talking about when you speak of the FSA?
Chill. I recently learned that Jihad was not a violent concept.
Baghdadi seems like quite a moron, always hiding in places where he gets partially blown up.
Which is ironic because he sounds like the brains behind the op, or is he more of a spiritual leader/front man?
He probably was until his last near brush with death a couple of months ago. At this point, ISIS is basically gasping to stay alive in the face of airstrikes and Iraqi army gains.