ISIS in Iraq and Syria

Raoul said:
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.
Click to expand...

Yeah it sounds like a lot of their military advisors are being picked off which can only be a good thing.

My main worry is that when the organisation is lost you're going to end up with panic amongst their ranks which will form into anarchy and a lot more random horrific acts in the western world.
 
Baghdadi is definitely nothing more than a ceremonial leader, a face and name to personify the organisation.

I'd wager the real brains of the organisation are probably cosied up somewhere in Doha or Riyadh.
 
Kaos said:
Baghdadi is definitely nothing more than a ceremonial leader, a face and name to personify the organisation.

I'd wager the real brains of the organisation are probably cosied up somewhere in Doha or Riyadh.
Click to expand...

:lol: Not a chance.

The hierarchy are Baghdadi and his cronies. This is a distinctly ex-Ba'athist game dressed up as an extreme religious movement.
 
Only a matter of time until he gets got really. Be interesting to see who succeeds him. Al-Adnani seems the obvious candidate with his public profile. However, he's a Syrian, can't see the ex-Baathist Iraqi hierarchy letting a Syrian take charge, however nominal his power will be.
 
Raoul said:
:lol: Not a chance.

The hierarchy are Baghdadi and his cronies. This is a distinctly ex-Ba'athist game dressed up as a extreme religious movement.
Click to expand...

You're right about the the ex-Ba'athi element, but I sincerely doubt that anyone of importance is in Iraq or Syria where they're an airstrike away from being annihilated. I still think the senior elements that make up the brains of the organisation are housed safely in some gulf Arab state.
 
holyland red said:
The context suggests she is in agreement with the general sentiment.
Click to expand...

That's hardly a smoking gun to beat her up with. I can see how some members of Congress saw a well dressed, western educated guy who before the Syrian civil war was widely perceived as a less severe dictator than his Dad.
 
The latest:

2000px-syria9.png


2000px-iraq10.png
 
There have been a few recent reports that Assad's team have been suffering a few setbacks by the rebels - the first since 2013, which is quite interesting. Something will have to give at some point, at which point the levels of violence will be taken to a new level with ISIS involved.
 
Raoul said:
There have been a few recent reports that Assad's team have been suffering a few setbacks by the rebels - the first since 2013, which is quite interesting. Something will have to give at some point, at which point the levels of violence will be taken to a new level with ISIS involved.
Click to expand...

The rebels (led by Nusra and Ahrar ash-Sham) captured Idlib City a few weeks back, only the second provincial capital to fall after Raqqa in early 2013. Also lots of rumours of unrest within the regime (e.g. have a look at this strange case - http://carnegieendowment.org/syriaincrisis/?fa=59953). On the other hand, we've been hearing Assad is about to fall since the start of this whole thing.


 
Yeah I read about that, very bizarre indeed. I can't imagine Assad holding on for much longer since morale and resources seem to be gradually dwindling and there will be a tipping point where the rebels advance to within rocket/mortar distance of the regime's inner sanctum, at which point it could end quickly.
 
I could see an internal coup, probably backed by Iran, removing him before it gets to that stage.
 
2cents said:
I could see an internal coup, probably backed by Iran, removing him before it gets to that stage.
Click to expand...

It would be a big loss for the Iranians, as an Assad-less Syria would but a major crimp in their support of Hezbollah.
 
Just to be clear, I mean a coup within the regime to remove Bashar himself, not the actual overthrow of the Ba'th. The Iranians might come to the conclusion that Assad is more a liability than an asset, if of course they can find a suitable, more competent replacement.

All I know is that when this guy is coming out with this - "I am now of the view that Hizbullah and Iran may have reached a point to be ready to discuss an alternative to Bashshar. They would be dumb if they don't." http://angryarab.blogspot.ie/2015/04/end-of-bashshar.html - then there must be some discontent.
 
2cents said:
Just to be clear, I mean a coup within the regime to remove Bashar himself, not the actual overthrow of the Ba'th. The Iranians might come to the conclusion that Assad is more a liability than an asset, if of course they can find a suitable, more competent replacement.

All I know is that when this guy is coming out with this - "I am now of the view that Hizbullah and Iran may have reached a point to be ready to discuss an alternative to Bashshar. They would be dumb if they don't." http://angryarab.blogspot.ie/2015/04/end-of-bashshar.html - then there must be some discontent.
Click to expand...

I see. Not sure if that could happen in any sustainable manner as there is no infrastructure to sustain a new regime. The current situation would probably continue until there is an outside intervention that routs ISIS out of Syria and creates a set of humanitarian corridors where there is no fighting. Then there would have to be new, Internationally supported elections. Anything short of that will result in an indefinite continuation of the current construct.
 
Another reason the last two sentences of my prior post aren't likely to materialize is because Syria has become a full on proxy war whereby outside actors are attempting to influence the final outcome. Those two moral paragons, Iran and Russia, are propping up Assad, whereas Sunni Arab states and Turkey are supporting their interests, as is the US. This to me suggests a protracted conflict that has not yet to seen its bloodiest days - and we are not likely to see any meaningful progress until such time as the US or another country with the balls to do so, goes in to stabilize the country and oversee internationally supported elections.
 
Yeah, what this conflict's really missing is the US going in and stabilising the place, because it has such a remarkable track record of it.
 
Kaos said:
Yeah, what this conflict's really missing is the US going in and stabilising the place, because it has such a remarkable track record of it.
Click to expand...

Sorry, you're right. The US really screwed up Japan and Germany.
 
Kaos said:
Yeah, what this conflict's really missing is the US going in and stabilising the place, because it has such a remarkable track record of it.
Click to expand...

The US is more or less Syria's only hope. Assad's time is more or less done, as is the reign of minority dictatorship.
 
PedroMendez said:
Yeah. And we all know, that those interventions don´t kill anyone and result in lasting peace. :lol:
Click to expand...

In that case, what difference does it make ? At least an outside intervention has a chance of stopping the fighting sooner than allowing half a dozen factions to indefinitely murder one another.
 
Raoul said:
The US is more or less Syria's only hope. Assad's time is more or less done, as is the reign of minority dictatorship.
Click to expand...

The only way the US can help in Syria or indeed Iraq is if it puts pressure on its Gulf Arab allies to stop funneling funds and weapons for extremists like ISIS and Al Nusra. Sending troops in just about the worst thing it can do, regardless of who they fight.
 
Kaos said:
Stabilising countries which had already been decimated following a crippling world war.

Iraq and Afghanistan though, job well done.
Click to expand...

Your favorite sectarian dictator of choice is about to get routed. Its game over soon. Time to look at a sustainable future for Syria.
 
Kaos said:
The only way the US can help in Syria or indeed Iraq is if it puts pressure on its Gulf Arab allies to stop funneling funds and weapons for extremists like ISIS and Al Nusra. Sending troops in just about the worst thing it can do, regardless of who they fight.
Click to expand...

That's nonsense, and even if it were't, its far too late for that. Assad is hanging on by a thread and will be gone eventually. Therefore the only viable solution is an outside peacekeeping force that is capable of keeping a degree of stability until a new government is voted in. Before any of that happens, ISIS would need to get routed out of the equation, and the only way to accomplish that is a proper boots on the ground campaign in both Iraq and Syria.
 
Raoul said:
Your favorite sectarian dictator of choice is about to get routed. Its game over soon. Time to look at a sustainable future for Syria.
Click to expand...

Despite the fact you've been saying he's going to get routed for the last 3-4 years, I couldn't care if he was in power or not.

A sustainable future won't happen so long as ISIS and Al Nusra reign free and her Gulf enablers continue to funnel them. They're not going to go away if Assad leaves.
 
Raoul said:
That's nonsense, and even if it were't, its far too late for that. Assad is hanging on by a thread and will be gone eventually. Therefore the only viable solution is an outside peacekeeping force that is capable of keeping a degree of stability until a new government is voted in. Before any of that happens, ISIS would need to get routed out of the equation, and the only way to accomplish that is a proper boots on the ground campaign in both Iraq and Syria.
Click to expand...

US troop presence is what caused every Jihadist on the globe to flock to Iraq, they serve an inflammatory presence. Air strikes and logistical support may be useful by all means, but the second we see Uncle Sam in his desert camo is when we start seeing an increased jihadist sentiment.
 
Kaos said:
Despite the fact you've been saying he's going to get routed for the last 3-4 years, I couldn't care if he was in power or not.

A sustainable future won't happen so long as ISIS and Al Nusra reign free and her Gulf enablers continue to funnel them. They're not going to go away if Assad leaves.
Click to expand...

You do care because you've consistently, and in a very sectarian way, been backing him from the start of the conflict. The sooner you get used to the reality that he's not coming back to power as he and his Dad were before the civil war, the better.
 
Kaos said:
US troop presence is what caused every Jihadist on the globe to flock to Iraq, they serve an inflammatory presence. Air strikes and logistical support may be useful by all means, but the second we see Uncle Sam in his desert camo is when we start seeing an increased jihadist sentiment.
Click to expand...

Air strikes and logistical support are only extending the war. The only way to squash it permanently is to rout all ISIS elements from both Iraq and Syria, and simultaneously push an international effort to hold elections in Syria so the public can get on with rebuilding.
 
Raoul said:
You do care because you've consistently, and in a very sectarian way, been backing him from the start of the conflict. The sooner you get used to the reality that he's not coming back to power as he and his Dad were before the civil war, the better.
Click to expand...

I have, in a secular war, been backing the Syrian army in its efforts to rout the extremists which threaten Syrian's secular fabric with their extremist sentiments. I couldn't care who sits on their throne so long as it isn't some self-proclaimed caliphate mentalist.
 
Raoul said:
Air strikes and logistical support are only extending the war. The only way to squash it permanently is to rout all ISIS elements from both Iraq and Syria, and simultaneously push an international effort to hold elections in Syria so the public can get on with rebuilding.
Click to expand...

Air strikes and logistical support from both the Iranians and US have done a stellar job in giving assistance to Iraqi and Kurdish ground troops who've used the edge to claim back territories.
 
Kaos said:
Air strikes and logistical support from both the Iranians and US have done a stellar job in giving assistance to Iraqi and Kurdish ground troops who've used the edge to claim back territories.
Click to expand...

They haven't done anything in terms of ending the war though, which will continue indefinitely, and by extension, the death toll will continue indefinitely until after Assad falls and after.

http://www.businessinsider.com/the-assad-regime-is-in-huge-trouble-2015-4

Which is why there is no viable option other than an outside force coming in to deal with ISIS, stabilize the country, and allow proper, inclusive elections to take place.
 
It's not only ISIS who have to be dealt with though. If the US put troops on the ground in Syria, they'd soon enough find themselves fighting every single group of any standing currently involved in the war, alongside the Islamic State AND Assad/Hezbollah. All the focus on ISIS has shifted attention away from the numerous groups of largely local Syrian Sunni origin who are really no better than ISIS, Nusra being the most well known example, but also the coalition of groups making up the Islamic Front.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.