ISIS in Iraq and Syria

You can't impose it but external factors or motivators can forge it from disparate groups. The northern and southern colonies that became the US were fairly similar but had substantial religious differences, regional interests, and varying political ideas. King George became the external threat that helped bring them together despite their differences. One major difference is that they were forming a secular government that enshrined freedom of religion, speech, etc. If the Iraqis weren't so intent on making their religious group the dominant power, there would be a greater chance for success of the Iraqi state. Unfortunately, there has yet to be a Martin Luther of Islam to reconcile secular government with the religion. Nor does an "Enlightenment" appear on the horizon for the Middle East. Then again, the push for religious tolerance followed the Thirty Years War in Europe.

I hear you. Our independence war as you say is an example of that and there are others. But, there has to be a genuine and well grounded reasons for unity. I can easily see a scenario where warring factions unite for a common purpose, but such alliances are only short term. And they end up going back to their historical differences.

As a muslim - I grow more and more pessimistic of the future. It's almost like we had our renaissance too early. Muslim rule reached a peak and there was a time when what Islam ruled was more or less was enlightened and tolerant (relatively speaking). But, there is no room for debate in the Islamic world today and even the young generation is growing moire and more intolerant of those asking for introspection.

For Islam to come out of this dark age, the focus has to move away from the ME - Muslims elsewhere outnumber them, yet due to historical dominance - they are still the authority when it comes to religion. Yet, the ME ( I speak of the rulers and regimes here, not the general populace) is not only a backward cesspool in terms of western democracy, but the same when it comes to Islamic rule and jurisprudence.
 
I hear you. Our independence war as you say is an example of that and there are others. But, there has to be a genuine and well grounded reasons for unity. I can easily see a scenario where warring factions unite for a common purpose, but such alliances are only short term. And they end up going back to their historical differences.

As a muslim - I grow more and more pessimistic of the future. It's almost like we had our renaissance too early. Muslim rule reached a peak and there was a time when what Islam ruled was more or less was enlightened and tolerant (relatively speaking). But, there is no room for debate in the Islamic world today and even the young generation is growing moire and more intolerant of those asking for introspection.

For Islam to come out of this dark age, the focus has to move away from the ME - Muslims elsewhere outnumber them, yet due to historical dominance - they are still the authority when it comes to religion. Yet, the ME ( I speak of the rulers and regimes here, not the general populace) is not only a backward cesspool in terms of western democracy, but the same when it comes to Islamic rule and jurisprudence.

excellent post
 
I hear you. Our independence war as you say is an example of that and there are others. But, there has to be a genuine and well grounded reasons for unity. I can easily see a scenario where warring factions unite for a common purpose, but such alliances are only short term. And they end up going back to their historical differences.

As a muslim - I grow more and more pessimistic of the future. It's almost like we had our renaissance too early. Muslim rule reached a peak and there was a time when what Islam ruled was more or less was enlightened and tolerant (relatively speaking). But, there is no room for debate in the Islamic world today and even the young generation is growing moire and more intolerant of those asking for introspection.

For Islam to come out of this dark age, the focus has to move away from the ME - Muslims elsewhere outnumber them, yet due to historical dominance - they are still the authority when it comes to religion. Yet, the ME ( I speak of the rulers and regimes here, not the general populace) is not only a backward cesspool in terms of western democracy, but the same when it comes to Islamic rule and jurisprudence.
In my opinion if the middle east and Iran suddenly turned secular they would be modern countries, I know a few people that came from Iran 1980's (Christians) and they are from upper middle class, also like I said before I never saw any middle east Muslim in north jersey living in poverty and we don't have any ghettos with Muslims.
 
You can't drive a national identity...it's an organic phenomenon.

The British made up arbitrary borders....it's why bengali speaking Bangladesh which shared no borders and shared nothing but religion with Pakistan was lumped together with Pakistan during the partition after WWII.

End result? You guessed it, civil war after 35 years and two separate countries.

You're right. You can't force it. It has to happen organically, but as an outside actor, you can foster it, you can tend it, and you can help it grow. Imperialism created such a cluster feck in the middle east as you pointed out, that the only real way I can see to foster these sorts of national identities and allegiances is for the whole place to devolve into complete chaos. Great adversity seems to be the only way these things tend to happen. At the same time, we in the west have a vested interest in limiting how much chaos in the middle-east we will tolerate. So we stick our big fat noses in and disrupt, and contain, and protect our own interests, and in the process just ensure that an organic, internal solution to these issues will never come about.

National identities form when people realize that what they have in common is more valuable and important than what sets them apart. What usually makes people realize that? Fire and steel.
 
Huge gains for Syrian army in Latakia.
Rebellion line fast collapsing.
Syrian Army has regained full control of Rabiah, the last rebel stronghold in Latakia

hZBLX8v.jpg
hZBLX8v.jpg
hZBLX8v.jpg
 
40 years of strongman and his Dad are precisely what started the absolute chaos.
Um no, you and your Wahhabi allies are what started this chaos by pumping money and weapons into Syria and training terrorists to fight your (and their) political foe, just like you did in Afghanistan.

U.S. Relies Heavily on Saudi Money to Support Syrian Rebels

Look at Nigeria, Mali, Afghanistan, Sudan, Yemen, Burkina Faso...etc. and countless countries where Al-Qaeda (-like organisations) are active and growing thanks to your Wahhabi ally actively spreading terrorism in the middle East and the world, with your support. Is Assad to blame for that too? Non-sense. That's the fatal flaw in your apologism for the Wahhabi terrorists (/oil).

Oh and:
Yes, but that's different from what i am proposing, which is a situation that is actually sustainable over the long run. Nothing will be resolved until all stakeholders have equal access to their own governance, which will never happen under dictatorship. This is the fatal flaw in Assad apologism.

So you're back at it aren't you? I thought we have settled this many times before.

Another Bush. That will really help the world to understand 'democracy'.
It will also strike fear in the hearts of a few dictators who think they are here to stay.
But not the ones in Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Bahrain and UAE..they'll be assured that they can stay.
Sure, its the way things go. Had Assad chosen a pro US position years ago, it would've been the same.
 
So basically the Syrian Revolution had nothing to do with Assad? Interesting.
Of course it has to do with Assad, didn't you read the quotes above?
Sure, its the way things go. Had Assad chosen a pro US position years ago, it would've been the same.
I wonder what would have happened in Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Bahrain, ...etc. if we kept pumping money and advanced weaponry into rebel areas...

Assad is a dictator. However, the terrorists in Syria (who are running the "revolution") are being created by Saudi Arabia and the US (and Qatar and Turkey), not by Assad. Not a single area that have fallen outside the "dictator's hands" has shown any kind of "freedom" or "democracy" that you're talking about here (which I don't think even you believe). The biggest two examples we have are Raqqa and Idlib. Both models of democracy and freedom. :wenger:

And forget the 70% who are still choosing to live in the regime controlled areas, even the Kurds (who were the ones oppressed the most by Assad) seem to be now much more on the dictator side, than the "revolution" side.
 
Isil releases beheading video featuring Paris attackers

Abu Qital al-Faransi and Bilal Hadfi appear in the video, which was shot before the Paris attacks but has now been published

By James Rothwell, and Josie Ensor
24 Jan 2016


The gunmen behind the Paris terror attacks have appeared in a newly released Isil video in which they behead several unidentified hostages.

The footage was shot before the attacks took place in November 2015 but was published on Sunday evening.

It is unclear when exactly the footage was filmed.

Among those who carry out the beheadings in the video is Bilal Hadfi, who was killed during the Paris attacks.

"You destroy our homes and kill our fathers, our brothers, our sisters, our mothers and our children," he says into the camera during the footage.

The video also features Abu Qital al-Faransi, his nom-de-guerre, who is believed to have been one of the gunmen who opened fire in the Bataclan.

"Whoever stands in the ranks of the kuffar (enemy), will be a target for our swords,” the video warned, showing pictures of Tower Bridge and St Paul’s Cathedral in London, claiming they were ready to strike “any time, anywhere”.

A few minutes later the face of John Bercow, the speaker of the House of Commons, appears on the screen with a crosshair over his face.

Then the footage ends with the message "Whoever stands in the ranks of Kufr will be a target for our swords and will fall in humiliation" superimposed over an image of David Cameron.

It appears to be an account of the attackers' last words before they travelled to France to carry out the attack.

The film is more brutal than previous propaganda videos as it does not cut away before the victims are beheaded.

The video finishes with an encrypted massage dated Nov 16, 2015 which they say reveals the location of their next attack.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...eheading-video-featuring-Paris-attackers.html
 
Israel's defense minister: 'Islamic State 'enjoyed Turkish money for oil'.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-m...idUSKCN0V421N?feedType=RSS&feedName=worldNews
Israel's defense minister said on Tuesday that Islamic State militants had been funded with 'Turkish money', an assertion that could hinder attempts to mend fences between the two countries after years of estrangement.

"It's up to Turkey, the Turkish government, the Turkish leadership, to decide whether they want to be part of any kind of cooperation to fight terrorism. This is not the case so far," Moshe Yaalon told reporters in Athens.

"As you know, Daesh (Islamic State) enjoyed Turkish money for oil for a very, very long period of time. I hope that it will be ended," Yaalon, a right-wing former armed forces chief, told reporters after meeting his Greek counterpart, Panos Kammenos.

Turkey has denied permitting oil smuggling by the Islamist militant group, which holds swathes of territory in Syria and Iraq. The United States last month rejected Russian allegations that the Turkish government and President Tayyip Erdogan's family were in league with Islamic State to smuggle oil.

However, U.S. State Department spokesman Mark Toner said last month that IS was selling oil to middlemen who in turn were involved in smuggling the oil across the frontier to Turkey.

Yaalon also said that Turkey had "permitted jihadists to move from Europe to Syria and Iraq and back, as part of Daesh's terrorist network, and I hope this will stop too," according to a Greek transcript provided by the defense ministry.

Efforts by Israel and Turkey to normalize ties hit a setback this month when Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu said there was no agreement on Ankara's demands for compensation for the deaths of 10 Turkish activists on an aid ship in 2010 or for an end to Israel's blockade of Gaza.

Senior Israeli and Turkish officials met in December to try to repair relations, raising hopes of progress in negotiations to import Israeli natural gas, particularly since Turkey's relationship with Russia has worsened over the Syria conflict.
 


Guess who has been saying this for years... It isn't the riddle of the Sphinx really and I'm pretty sure everybody knows this, still kudos to Mr Johnson for having enough guts and honesty to say it out loud.
 
So while we're focused on Iraq and Syria, Turkey has continuously been butchering Kurds in Eastern Turkey, even those raising white flags:


Video shows Kurds waving white flag 'shot by Turkish soldiers'


blank.gif


Kurds-shot.jpg

In the video, several civilians are shown waving white flags as they walk with a cart which appears to hold two covered bodies Bilal Gezer/Twitter


A video has been shared allegedly showing Turkish forces firing on Kurdish civilians in the town of Cizre.

In the video, several civilians are shown waving white flags as they walk with a cart which appears to hold two covered bodies.

As they move through the streets, shots ring out, the crowd panics and runs to cover while the journalist continues to film.

Other footage, too graphic to show, shows several people lying motionless on the ground in pools of blood.

Shouting and screaming can be heard in the background.

The Turkish government has imposed curfews and clashed with fighters of the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK), which is considered a terrorist organisation in Turkey, since August.

Amnesty International criticised the curfews, saying: "The draconian restrictions imposed during indefinite curfews, some of which have been in place for over a month, increasingly resemble collective punishment, and must end."

The human rights group also said Turkey's curfews and cuts to services on Kurdish towns put the lives of up to 200,000 people at risk.

At least 150 civilians and hundreds of fighters have died in the conflict.
 
Look where the Turkish backed militias are storing their weapons and ammunition.



Yeah, I would totally trust a "safe zone for refugees" created by Turkey.
 
or this:

http://news.sky.com/story/1632762/russia-blamed-for-1400-syrian-civilian-deaths

Russia Blamed For 1,400 Syrian Civilian Deaths
Activists accuse Russian forces of indiscriminate attacks as opposition negotiators arrive in Geneva for UN-brokered peace talks.

Putin is a cnut.

Another source:
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/russia-acc...ilians-during-syrian-bombing-campaign-1541013

Both of these 'reports' cite Syrian Observatory for Human Rights as their source.
 
Both of these 'reports' cite Syrian Observatory for Human Rights as their source.
That's the thing - you can corroborate it with what's already been reported from non SOHR sources.

https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/n...ful-failure-to-acknowledge-civilian-killings/

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2015/...rikes-kill-400-civilians-151122063024984.html

This one has the Syrian Network for Human Rights as a source as well as the SOHR.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics...-norms-of-war-by-targeting-civilians-in-syria

Crazy right.
 
Watch the video right above your post. What does it look like you're watching? And what did it turn out to be?


Assad created those. He's the root you know.

I can't watch Facebook videos at work.
 
That's the thing - you can corroborate it with what's already been reported from non SOHR sources.

https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/n...ful-failure-to-acknowledge-civilian-killings/

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2015/...rikes-kill-400-civilians-151122063024984.html

This one has the Syrian Network for Human Rights as a source as well as the SOHR.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics...-norms-of-war-by-targeting-civilians-in-syria

Crazy right.

Like SOHR, the Syrian Network for Human Rights is also based in the UK. Would you trust some Syrian organization located in Russia that would post information from their own "sources"? I'm not saying they're necessarily lying, but they're biased.
 
Like SOHR, the Syrian Network for Human Rights is also based in the UK. Would you trust some Syrian organization located in Russia that would post information from their own "sources"? I'm not saying they're necessarily lying, but they're biased.
They're really really not. Because the info can be corroborated. Please look at the other links if you don't believe me.
 
It's already proven that Turkey has invaded another country (and still is) in Iraq (with the blessing of the policeman of the world). Don't you get the news where you live?

We get the news but we don't know how you can complain about it given the things you said when Russia annexed Crimea.
 
We get the news but we don't know how you can complain about it given the things you said when Russia annexed Crimea.
Even if you do, what chance do you have if you can't even read two posts above your post to see who is the one who's actually (still) complaining.

My position on Crimea and Iraq is consistent by the way. I support the people's right of independence, whether it's the Crimeans, the Kurds, the Catalans, ...etc. And the Crimeans actually had the best case of them all after the illegal coup that toppled the democratically elected government. Both Iraq and Spain are ruled by democratic governments, but I still support the Kurds and the Catalans' rights to form their own independent states (if it's supported by an overwhelming majority). The only exception of course is terrorist states like ISIS, because they're not seeking "independence" to live peacefully and develop their nation, but to turn the children in those areas into a new wave of suicide bombers to kill as many people they hate as they can.

I'm still waiting for sanctions to be imposed on Turkey though, and for a massive uproar here (and a thread named "Erdogan in Iraq"!) for both breaking the international law by invading another country (openly!) and for supporting multiple terrorist organisations in Syria.
 
Even if you do, what chance do you have if you can't even read two posts above your post to see who is the one who's actually (still) complaining.

My position on Crimea and Iraq is consistent by the way. I support the people's right of independence, whether it's the Crimeans, the Kurds, the Catalans, ...etc. And the Crimeans actually had the best case of them all after the illegal coup that toppled the democratically elected government. Both Iraq and Spain are ruled by democratic governments, but I still support the Kurds and the Catalans' rights to form their own independent states (if it's supported by an overwhelming majority). The only exception of course is terrorist states like ISIS, because they're not seeking "independence" to live peacefully and develop their nation, but to turn the children in those areas into a new wave of suicide bombers to kill as many people they hate as they can.

I'm still waiting for sanctions to be imposed on Turkey though, and for a massive uproar here (and a thread named "Erdogan in Iraq"!) for both breaking the international law by invading another country (openly!) and for supporting multiple terrorist organisations in Syria.

You spent weeks denying there were even Russians in Crimea and supporting Putin's lies about the matter. Yet here you have no problem accepting that the Turkish govt is doing exactly the same thing. It was wrong when Russia did it and it's wrong when Turkey does it. Your position on the events in Ukraine means you couldn't even complain if Turkey declares large parts of Iraq forever Turkish sovereign territory and end up seizing it because that is what Russia did after arming and leading a rebellion something which you also spend a vast amount of time complaining about when the Saudi's do it.
 
It's already proven that Turkey has invaded another country (and still is) in Iraq (with the blessing of the policeman of the world). Don't you get the news where you live?


http://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-iraq-turkey-idUSKBN0TQ0SS20151207

Washington, which is leading an international coalition against Islamic State that includes Turkey, Arab states and European powers like Britain and France, has told Ankara and Baghdad to resolve the standoff, and says it does not support deployments in Iraq without Baghdad's consent.

Even RT: https://www.rt.com/news/326172-us-turkey-troops-iraq/

The Turkish forces there were invited by KRG but not the Shia-dominated central government to train peshmerga and Sunni fighters to balance the Iran-funded Shiite militias in Iraq. Unsurprisingly, Shiite leaders in Baghdad weren't happy with this. They had even been there for over a year before it became an issue thanks to pressure from Iran and Russia.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/06/w...rkish-troops-angers-iraqi-officials.html?_r=0

Baghdad has been aware of Turkey’s presence but chose to publicly challenge it only now — underscoring, analysts say, the increasing pressure Mr. Abadi is facing from Iran and its proxies, including Iraq’s former prime minister, Nuri Kamal al-Maliki.
 
or this:

http://news.sky.com/story/1632762/russia-blamed-for-1400-syrian-civilian-deaths

Russia Blamed For 1,400 Syrian Civilian Deaths
Activists accuse Russian forces of indiscriminate attacks as opposition negotiators arrive in Geneva for UN-brokered peace talks.

Putin is a cnut.

Another source:
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/russia-acc...ilians-during-syrian-bombing-campaign-1541013

Even worse is he is doing it to cynically deflect the Russian public's attention away from his crumbling economy.

This lays it all out on a plate...

http://blogs.reuters.com/great-deba...anic-in-the-kremlin-as-economy-sinks-further/
 
You spent weeks denying there were even Russians in Crimea and supporting Putin's lies about the matter. Yet here you have no problem accepting that the Turkish govt is doing exactly the same thing. It was wrong when Russia did it and it's wrong when Turkey does it. Your position on the events in Ukraine means you couldn't even complain if Turkey declares large parts of Iraq forever Turkish sovereign territory and end up seizing it because that is what Russia did after arming and leading a rebellion something which you also spend a vast amount of time complaining about when the Saudi's do it.
:confused: There were thousands of Russian troops in Crimea even before the conflict (according to a treaty between the two countries). What the hell are you on about? Obviously you have some serious reading problems.

And I have explained my position about Saudi Arabia at least 2000 times now. If you want to have a good debate about it go first and read and what I wrote, otherwise this is just a waste of time.

By the way you might want to follow the rules of your buddies...
Again, it's petty deflection because the truth is you have no real answer.
Says the guy who answers every charge against Assad or Putin with a post about something some other nation has done. Pot please meet this similarly hued kettle.
Standard fare for our resident dictator fanboys. Its because they can't defend their dictators against truthbombs and have to obfuscate by accusing country a or b of also having done something bad.
Remember this?

I'm fine with it by the way, just make sure you get together and agree on a single policy for the debates here. ;)
 
The Turkish forces there were invited by KRG but not the Shia-dominated central government to train peshmerga and Sunni fighters to balance the Iran-funded Shiite militias in Iraq. Unsurprisingly, Shiite leaders in Baghdad weren't happy with this.

Actually it weren't just Shias outraged at Iraq's sovereignty being violated, the Sunnis didn't like it either.

And regardless, the KRG's president Massoud Barzini is a known Ankara puppet dictator who has no authority in undermining the Iraqi government to allow Turkish troops to be stationed on Iraqi soil. Furthermore most Kurds are also opposed to this. Basically the only people in Iraq who support this are the despotic Barzini family.
 
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-iraq-turkey-idUSKBN0TQ0SS20151207



Even RT: https://www.rt.com/news/326172-us-turkey-troops-iraq/

The Turkish forces there were invited by KRG but not the Shia-dominated central government to train peshmerga and Sunni fighters to balance the Iran-funded Shiite militias in Iraq. Unsurprisingly, Shiite leaders in Baghdad weren't happy with this. They had even been there for over a year before it became an issue thanks to pressure from Iran and Russia.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/06/w...rkish-troops-angers-iraqi-officials.html?_r=0
You might want to read the links you post..

"The Iraqi government says it never invited such a force, and will take its case to the United Nations if they are not pulled out."

"The troops arrived on Thursday with tanks and armored personnel carriers at a camp in territory held by Iraqi Kurds near the Islamic State-held northern Iraqi city of Mosul."

Did you not read that? Or just conveniently replaced it with some "analysis" you liked better?


(I'm quoting the Reuter's story by the way)
 
You spent weeks denying there were even Russians in Crimea and supporting Putin's lies about the matter. Yet here you have no problem accepting that the Turkish govt is doing exactly the same thing. It was wrong when Russia did it and it's wrong when Turkey does it. Your position on the events in Ukraine means you couldn't even complain if Turkey declares large parts of Iraq forever Turkish sovereign territory and end up seizing it because that is what Russia did after arming and leading a rebellion something which you also spend a vast amount of time complaining about when the Saudi's do it.

:confused: There were thousands of Russian troops in Crimea even before the conflict (according to a treaty between the two countries). What the hell are you on about? Obviously you have some serious reading problems.

And I have explained my position about Saudi Arabia at least 2000 times now. If you want to have a good debate about it go first and read and what I wrote, otherwise this is just a waste of time.

By the way you might want to follow the rules of your buddies...



Remember this?

I'm fine with it by the way, just make sure you get together and agree on a single policy for the debates here. ;)

Danny you still haven't addressed this. Ironically, you've deflected from answering it.
 
Danny you still haven't addressed this. Ironically, you've deflected from answering it.
I've addressed it at least three times on this page alone.

And remember, this thread is about Iraq and Syria. So guess who's deflecting (won't be surprised if you still can't figure it out).
 
I've addressed it at least three times on this page alone.

And remember, this thread is about Iraq and Syria. So guess who's deflecting (won't be surprised if you still can't figure it out).
No - you've deflected to talk about Saudi.

DKB has called you up on your differing stances wrt Iraq and Crimea. So, instead of deflecting, address what he's posed.
 
I'm sure that's not relevant. Keep the thread on topic and avoid descending into petty point scoring debates.