ISIS in Iraq and Syria

Danny1982 said:
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)
Click to expand...

:lol: It's quite obvious which story you're quoting since you didn't read the other one. Otherwise, you would have known where I got that information from. Did I ever say they were invited by the central government? No. You also insisted the Turkish presence was with the US's blessing, which was patently false.

Turkey has sent more troops, along with armored vehicles and tanks, to northern Iraq to support a longstanding mission to train Kurdish and Sunni Arab forces in the fight against the Islamic State, touching off an uproar in Baghdad, where officials called the move a violation of Iraqi sovereignty.

...

For instance, Turkey has established its small military presence in the Kurdish region of northern Iraq without the approval of Baghdad. For nearly a year, it [Turkey] has trained a small group of largely Sunni Arab fighters. They are mostly former policemen from Mosul, Iraq’s second largest city, which fell to the Islamic State, also known as ISIS or ISIL, last year.
Click to expand...


There are also additional sources:

https://www.stratfor.com/analysis/retaking-ramadi-only-small-victory

In Iraq, Turkish forces — along with their reasons for being in the country — are causing a major stir in the media. Reports were rife with speculation that a sizable Turkish presence had entered Iraq to spearhead an offensive against the Islamic State-held city of Mosul. But in reality, these claims were wildly exaggerated: While it is true that Turkey increased its security presence, deploying some armored vehicles and troops in support of the pre-existing advisers conducting training in Iraq, the addition only amounted to about 100-300 personnel — hardly a notable increase.
Click to expand...
 
I want to come into this thread and read about ISIS in Iraq and Syria, not about Russians in the Crimea.
 
LeChuck said:
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.
Click to expand...
Look just so this doesn't drag on, the difference is there are no threats for the whole world developing in Crimea. And just to give you an idea how fecked up the situation is in Syria, just read this.


Terror trial collapses after fears of deep embarrassment to security services
Swedish national Bherlin Gildo’s lawyers argued British intelligence agencies were supporting the same Syrian opposition groups as he was
The prosecution of a Swedish national accused of terrorist activities in Syria has collapsed at the Old Bailey after it became clear Britain’s security and intelligence agencies would have been deeply embarrassed had a trial gone ahead, the Guardian can reveal.

His lawyers argued that British intelligence agencies were supporting the same Syrian opposition groups as he was, and were party to a secret operation providing weapons and non-lethal help to the groups, including the Free Syrian Army.

Bherlin Gildo, 37, who was arrested last October on his way from Copenhagen to Manila, was accused of attending a terrorist training camp and receiving weapons training between 31 August 2012 and 1 March 2013 as well as possessing information likely to be useful to a terrorist.

Riel Karmy-Jones, for the crown, told the court on Monday that after reviewing the evidence it was decided there was no longer a reasonable prospect of a prosecution. “Many matters were raised we did not know at the outset,” she told the recorder of London, Nicholas Hilliard QC, who lifted all reporting restrictions and entered not guilty verdicts.

In earlier court hearings, Gildo’s defence lawyers argued he was helping the same rebel groups the British government was aiding before the emergence of the extreme Islamist group, Isis. His trial would have been an “affront to justice”, his lawyers said.

The attorney general was consulted about Monday’s decision. Karmy-Jones told the court in pre-trial hearings that Gildo had worked with Jabhat al-Nusra, a “proscribed group considered to be al-Qaida in Syria”. He was photographed standing over dead bodies with his finger pointing to the sky.
Click to expand...


And this is the UK we're talking about here, not Saudi Arabia or Turkey. This is how fecked up the situation is in Syria.


P.S. I didn't bring Saudi Arabia up, he did. Please read.
 
Sir Matt said:
:lol: It's quite obvious which story you're quoting since you didn't read the other one. Otherwise, you would have known where I got that information from. Did I ever say they were invited by the central government? No. You also insisted the Turkish presence was with the US's blessing, which was patently false.




There are also additional sources:

https://www.stratfor.com/analysis/retaking-ramadi-only-small-victory
Click to expand...
The forces Iraq objected to (including the tanks) arrived on Thursday, it was not in Iraq "for a year, and just somehow decided to object to it under pressure from the Shia government".

The addition is a very notable increase, considering you don't need tanks to "train fighters", so it's actually a major development and a serious precedent, and I don't think there is a need to debate about that.

The second point about not having the blessing of the US, true, publicly the US has denied any blessing, but excuse me for finding it hard to believe that Erdogan did it against the US will, and that if Obama was serious about opposing such action that he wouldn't be able to apply pressure on Turkey not to do it, or to withdraw quickly.

Of course it's not expected that the US would endorse such action publicly, but privately, I think it's very clear that at the very least (if they didn't encourage Turkey to do it) then they didn't object to it. And the way they told the Iraqi government and the Turkish government to solve it by themselves I found it clear that the US is kind of punishing the Iraqi government for asking it to leave in 2011, just like when it told Maliki to "deal with ISIS yourself" when he asked for weapons to fight ISIS in 2014.
 
Danny1982 said:
The forces Iraq objected to (including the tanks) arrived on Thursday, it was not in Iraq "for a year, and just somehow decided to object to it under pressure from the Shia government".

The addition is a very notable increase, considering you don't need tanks to "train fighters", so it's actually a major development and a serious precedent, and I don't think there is a need to debate about that.

The second point about not having the blessing of the US, true, publicly the US has denied any blessing, but excuse me for finding it hard to believe that Erdogan did it against the US will, and that if Obama was serious about opposing such action that he wouldn't be able to apply pressure on Turkey not to do it, or to withdraw quickly.

Of course it's not expected that the US would endorse such action publicly, but privately, I think it's very clear that at the very least (if they didn't encourage Turkey to do it) then they didn't object to it. And the way they told the Iraqi government and the Turkish government to solve it by themselves I found it clear that the US is kind of punishing the Iraqi government for asking it to leave in 2011, just like when it told Maliki to "deal with ISIS yourself" when he asked for weapons to fight ISIS in 2014.
Click to expand...

The reinforcements arrived on a Thursday. Reinforcements means that there were already forces there. So why didn't they complain about the existing base until the Turks sought to resupply and reinforce it? They didn't invite those troops in either, KRG did. So what inspired them to be upset about the new convoy but not those already in two bases in Northern Iraq? Maybe Abadi just wanted to appear as though he were doing something so his weakness wouldn't be so obvious.

As for the tanks (assuming they were accurately reported as tanks and not APCs or other fighting vehicles), would you travel in unsecured, potentially hostile (since Iraq hasn't secured the area and doesn't exert more than nominal control over it) territory without armament? ISIS have RPGs, captured armored vehicles and tanks from the deserting or defeated Iraqi and Syrian militaries. Do you expect the fighters being trained to all drive into Mosul in trucks? The Peshmerga have various tanks and armored vehicles that the fighters would need to be prepared to operate effectively against entrenched and similarly outfitted forces.
 
Danny1982 said:
Turkey is one of ISIS' biggest supporters (among other terrorist organisations), and it's not even a secret.
Click to expand...
No - they may be accused of supporting them through inaction, but that's not really the same of being their 'biggest supporters'. They are the 'biggest supporters' of the FSA, and Islamic Front. If you're on about oil - the only links I've seen of the Turks trading oil with IS is through Russian propaganda, which I can't accept at face value. (If you have non Russian sources, please share, and I want some proof, not just speculation).
 
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/nov/24/vladimir-putin-turkey-isis-terrorists-warplane-analysis

Turkish businessmen struck lucrative deals with Isis oil smugglers, adding at least $10m (£6.6m) per week to the terror group’s coffers, and replacing the Syrian regime as its main client. Over the past two years several senior Isis members have told the Guardian that Turkey preferred to stay out of their way and rarely tackled them directly.

Concerns continued to grow in intelligence circles that the links eclipsed the mantra that “my enemy’s enemy is my friend” and could no longer be explained away as an alliance of convenience. Those fears grew in May this year after a US special forces raid in eastern Syria, which killed the Isis official responsible for the oil trade, Abu Sayyaf.

A trawl through Sayyaf’s compound uncovered hard drives that detailed connections between senior Isis figures and some Turkish officials. Missives were sent to Washington and London warning that the discovery had “urgent policy implications”.
Click to expand...

Turkey is only interested in preventing a Kurdish state. They don't give a shit about anything else, and if ISIS helps them do that, happy days.
 
Last edited:
Silva said:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/nov/24/vladimir-putin-turkey-isis-terrorists-warplane-analysis



Turkey is only interested in preventing a Kurdish state. They don't give a shit about anything else, and if ISIS helps them do that, happy days.
Click to expand...
Yea, you cut off the first line from your excerpt and additionally the Syrian regime is the biggest buyer of IS oil, which Russia is backing to the hilt. It's why you can't really believe any of the shite Putin or Assad come out with.

Anywho - have a read

http://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-says-syria-is-buying-oil-from-islamic-state-1448471418

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/12/10/isis-is-the-con-ed-of-syria.html

http://www.businessinsider.com/reve...etween-the-syrian-regime-and-isis-2015-3?IR=T

http://www.techinsider.io/isis-selling-oil-to-biggest-enemy-2015-11

http://www.ibtimes.com/isis-sells-oil-syrias-assad-regime-some-turkey-us-official-says-2221300
 
If SA send significant amounts of ground troops to Syria to fight Assad (not just special forces or "military advisers"), it will mark the beginning of the end of their rule. I doubt that they are that stupid.
 
LeChuck said:
It's to fight IS.
Click to expand...

Assad won´t allow SA troops in Syra regardless of what they intend to do. So where would they deploy? Certainly not in the territory, that is still controlled by Assad. Iraq won´t invite them either. If they want to fight ISIS, they can´t start there as well. That leaves them with the other rebels and would bring them in direct conflict with Assad. They´d need to go through Jordan and ended up in the area of the southern front. Anyway. I doubt that this happens, but it sounds like a disaster.
 
PedroMendez said:
Assad won´t allow SA troops in Syra regardless of what they intend to do. So where would they deploy? Certainly not in the territory, that is still controlled by Assad. Iraq won´t invite them either. If they want to fight ISIS, they can´t start there as well. That leaves them with the other rebels and would bring them in direct conflict with Assad. They´d need to go through Jordan and ended up in the area of the southern front. Anyway. I doubt that this happens, but it sounds like a disaster.
Click to expand...
There's groups in there that weren't invited but still got in, no?

This is all on the basis of acceptance of the US coalition. If they were to go in, they'd go in via Jordan or SW Iraq.
 
yes. That is precisely what I am saying. They´d either stand side by side with the southern front or they have to go through a lot of dessert. Regardless of where they start, sooner or later they´d come in contact with Assad&Co and they won´t be friendly.
I am not making any judgement here. I am just pointing out the obvious: If SA sends in significant military ground forces, they´ll sooner or later clash with Assad and that would turn out very ugly for both sides.
 
LeChuck said:
Yea, you cut off the first line from your excerpt and additionally the Syrian regime is the biggest buyer of IS oil, which Russia is backing to the hilt. It's why you can't really believe any of the shite Putin or Assad come out with.

Anywho - have a read

http://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-says-syria-is-buying-oil-from-islamic-state-1448471418

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/12/10/isis-is-the-con-ed-of-syria.html

http://www.businessinsider.com/reve...etween-the-syrian-regime-and-isis-2015-3?IR=T

http://www.techinsider.io/isis-selling-oil-to-biggest-enemy-2015-11

http://www.ibtimes.com/isis-sells-oil-syrias-assad-regime-some-turkey-us-official-says-2221300
Click to expand...
A) No one here has denied Syria - ISIS oil dealings, we know this already - B) They're all older than that article, which bluntly says it replaced Syria as the biggest buyer of oil. I was addressing your request for a non-Russian source that Turkey is outright helping ISIS. Can't think of a less Russian source than America.
 
Silva said:
A) No one here has denied Syria - ISIS oil dealings, we know this already - B) They're all older than that article, which bluntly says it replaced Syria as the biggest buyer of oil. I was addressing your request for a non-Russian source that Turkey is outright helping ISIS. Can't think of a less Russian source than America.
Click to expand...
See - that's the thing - this is what America says about it:

We don't see any evidence that the Turkish government is purchasing oil from ISIL. The preponderance of their sales, we believe, are happening at the wellhead in a sense. In other words, they're selling to middlemen or black marketeers, who are then in turn providing it to others.

In terms of external purchasers, we’ve talked about the Syrian government as a purchaser -- especially when it comes to gas. But I think in terms of the overall destination, a lot of ISIL’s oil is going within the territory that they control -- whether with respect to fueling their own efforts and their own military campaigns, or whether with respect to providing electricity to the territories they're trying to govern.
Click to expand...

That's Adam Szubin from the US Treasury Department on 16 Dec 2015.

http://www.unitedstatesnews.net/index.php/sid/239093661 - there's more here from earlier in the month.

So, again - can you give me something? The link you initially gave doesn't really prove your point. It avoids any detail and just gives a half assed claim based on what Putin said. The above two excerpts came after the article you posted in chronology.
 
LeChuck said:
See - that's the thing - this is what America says about it:



That's Adam Szubin from the US Treasury Department on 16 Dec 2015.

http://www.unitedstatesnews.net/index.php/sid/239093661 - there's more here from earlier in the month.

So, again - can you give me something? The link you initially gave doesn't really prove your point. It avoids any detail and just gives a half assed claim based on what Putin said. The above two excerpts came after the article you posted in chronology.
Click to expand...
You should be well aware that there's a difference between what governments say officially (about their allies in this case, you really think they're gonna be blunt about it?) and what the truth is, especially in war scenarios. If you're unwilling to accept the Guardian quoting American intelligence as a reasonable non-Russian source then there's really no point in carrying on because you've already decided what the answer is. And it's at odds with what everyone else of almost every ideological stance is saying. It's the worst kept secret in the middle east.
 
Last edited:
Turkish clandestine oil dealings with ISIS are probably the worst kept secret. Why is it you think fleets of trucks carrying ISIS oil go in and out their border on a daily basis?
 
Kaos said:
Turkish clandestine oil dealings with ISIS are probably the worst kept secret. Why is it you think fleets of trucks carrying ISIS oil go in and out their border on a daily basis?
Click to expand...
Not to mention ISIS getting their weapons and their recruits through Turkey. But no, there's clearly nothing to see here. It takes some extraordinary mental arithmetics to follow the conflict this much and completely miss what's happening.
 
Silva said:
Not to mention ISIS getting their weapons and their recruits through Turkey. But no, there's clearly nothing to see here. It takes some extraordinary mental arithmetics to follow the conflict this much and completely miss what's happening.
Click to expand...

They got their original recruits and leaders from Syrian prisons and from the terrorists Syria funneled into Iraq.
 
Sir Matt said:
They got their original recruits and leaders from Syrian prisons and from the terrorists Syria funneled into Iraq.
Click to expand...

Original recruits perhaps, but how many current ISIS combatants today were released from prison all those years ago? The vast majority of them have crossed through Turkey, especially the foreign ones.
 
Neutral said:
I see some of the news agencies are saying, Aleppo won't be in rebel hands for long...
Click to expand...

The SAA and Hezbollah have liberated Mayer and Ratyan, only matter of time before all of Aleppo goes back into government hands. The SDF on the other hand are doing pretty well in the north, taking territory from ISIS and Al Nusra, much to the dismay of Erdogan :)
 
Kaos said:
The SAA and Hezbollah have liberated Mayer and Ratyan, only matter of time before all of Aleppo goes back into government hands. The SDF on the other hand are doing pretty well in the north, taking territory from ISIS and Al Nusra, much to the dismay of Erdogan :)
Click to expand...

Maybe then Assad and Russia will start attacking ISIS at last.
 
Sir Matt said:
The reinforcements arrived on a Thursday. Reinforcements means that there were already forces there. So why didn't they complain about the existing base until the Turks sought to resupply and reinforce it? They didn't invite those troops in either, KRG did. So what inspired them to be upset about the new convoy but not those already in two bases in Northern Iraq? Maybe Abadi just wanted to appear as though he were doing something so his weakness wouldn't be so obvious.

As for the tanks (assuming they were accurately reported as tanks and not APCs or other fighting vehicles), would you travel in unsecured, potentially hostile (since Iraq hasn't secured the area and doesn't exert more than nominal control over it) territory without armament? ISIS have RPGs, captured armored vehicles and tanks from the deserting or defeated Iraqi and Syrian militaries. Do you expect the fighters being trained to all drive into Mosul in trucks? The Peshmerga have various tanks and armored vehicles that the fighters would need to be prepared to operate effectively against entrenched and similarly outfitted forces.
Click to expand...
To be honest I think you're arguing for the sake of arguing now (I mean even your source said tanks and now you're trying to throw doubts into that fact?!). I've made my points concerning this issue, and if you can't tell the difference between a few personnel training other fighters and a full military force including tanks and armor then there is no point in discussing this any further.

Good thing though the those trainers survived the "very dangerous terrain!" for about a year before they remembered tanks are necessary to protect them!
 
Silva said:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/nov/24/vladimir-putin-turkey-isis-terrorists-warplane-analysis



Turkey is only interested in preventing a Kurdish state. They don't give a shit about anything else, and if ISIS helps them do that, happy days.
Click to expand...
I would say primarily, not only. They're also interested in having influence inside Syria and Iraq. They've supported Al-Nusra and co in Latakia and there are no Kurds there. But I agree, the Kurds is their primary problem. Unfortunately to solve that "problem" they have supported pretty much every single terrorist group in Syria, from ISIS to Al-Nusra, to Ahrar Al-Sham, ...

And by the way, Turkey's support to ISIS goes much farther beyond oil deals. All the logistics, weapons, supplies and fighters of ISIS (and other terrorist groups) come through Turkey.

Here is an example..

'ISIS SEES TURKEY AS ITS ALLY': FORMER ISLAMIC STATE MEMBER REVEALS TURKISH ARMY COOPERATION
 
Last edited:
Neutral said:
I see some of the news agencies are saying, Aleppo won't be in rebel hands for long...
Click to expand...
There is still a long way to go (despite the recent advances). However if Aleppo (the city) falls completely, the fight is practically over.
 
Sir Matt said:
Maybe then Assad and Russia will start attacking ISIS at last.
Click to expand...
Your sources for the news are very suspicious. There are bloody battles going with ISIS East of Homs, and in East Aleppo, almost all of the ISIS territory shown in this map has been liberated, and the army is still advancing.

CMTu-lgWUAA_0zW.jpg:large


Here is the latest map. I hope (even with your very tinted glasses on) you can see not only the fight that is going, but the progress that has been made.

q4wRHsn.jpg


I don't blame you though, it's the news sources that you follow.
 
Danny1982 said:
To be honest I think you're arguing for the sake of arguing now (I mean even your source said tanks and now you're trying to throw doubts into that fact?!). I've made my points concerning this issue, and if you can't tell the difference between a few personnel training other fighters and a full military force including tanks and armor then there is no point in discussing this any further.

Good thing though the those trainers survived the "very dangerous terrain!" for about a year before they remembered tanks are necessary to protect them!
Click to expand...

My suggestion is that the people initially reporting the news don't potentially know what they're talking about with regards to specific equipment. So as long as the invasion force is small enough it's ok? Send in the SAS, SEALs, and Delta Force and it's all good. Send in a few tanks and it's suddenly an problem. They were an uninvited force from the time they arrived regardless of the size of the Turkish deployment. Iraq had no problem then. Also, the news reported that it was "thousands" initially yet it ended up being many fewer soldiers.


And if anyone argues just to argue, it's the guy who denied a Russian presence in Ukraine for weeks despite the fact that the same vehicles, with the same license plates and ID numbers were in a Russian military parade in Rostov several months before being seen in Crimea with the little green men on them. There were pictures and video of both yet you refused to accept it. It's astonishing really.

Danny1982 said:
Your sources for the news are very suspicious. There are bloody battles going with ISIS East of Homs, and in East Aleppo, almost all of the ISIS territory shown in this map has been liberated, and the army is still advancing.

CMTu-lgWUAA_0zW.jpg:large


Here is the latest map. I hope (even with your very tinted glasses on) you can see not only the fight that is going, but the progress that has been made.

q4wRHsn.jpg


I don't blame you though, it's the news sources that you follow.
Click to expand...

Yes, random guy on Twitter is the source I need to be using.
 
Sir Matt said:
Yes, random guy on Twitter is the source I need to be using.
Click to expand...
You're actually claiming that those maps are wrong?! Are you even following the conflict? If you are then your sources are terrible man, and if you aren't, why bother to post?

RedTiger said:
Come on guys, stop the fecking blame game and just post things about the conflict at hand.
Click to expand...
I'm really doing my best here.
 
Silva said:
A) No one here has denied Syria - ISIS oil dealings, we know this already - B) They're all older than that article, which bluntly says it replaced Syria as the biggest buyer of oil. I was addressing your request for a non-Russian source that Turkey is outright helping ISIS. Can't think of a less Russian source than America.
Click to expand...

Silva said:
You should be well aware that there's a difference between what governments say officially (about their allies in this case, you really think they're gonna be blunt about it?) and what the truth is, especially in war scenarios. If you're unwilling to accept the Guardian quoting American intelligence as a reasonable non-Russian source then there's really no point in carrying on because you've already decided what the answer is. And it's at odds with what everyone else of almost every ideological stance is saying. It's the worst kept secret in the middle east.
Click to expand...

:lol: Are you serious? So we use American sources unless the American sources are too American in which they can't be used? The latter source was actually used to refute your source. What you've presented is circular logic, and doesn't really hold much weight.

Kaos said:
Turkish clandestine oil dealings with ISIS are probably the worst kept secret. Why is it you think fleets of trucks carrying ISIS oil go in and out their border on a daily basis?
Click to expand...
I'm not denying IS oil being in Turkey, but it's not an overt gov't sponsored trade. There's certainly no where near as much overt evidence as there is for Assad (who's propping up IS with oil funds).

Illegal black market smuggling with 3rd parties and private Turk individuals, yes. With the gov't not quite.

Putin not long ago accused Erdogan jnr of trading directly which was shown to be quite clearly a false accusation. But it is the norm for him to come out with a lot of shite.
 
LeChuck said:
:lol: Are you serious? So we use American sources unless the American sources are too American in which they can't be used? The latter source was actually used to refute your source. What you've presented is circular logic, and doesn't really hold much weight.


I'm not denying IS oil being in Turkey, but it's not an overt gov't sponsored trade. There's certainly no where near as much overt evidence as there is for Assad (who's propping up IS with oil funds).

Illegal black market smuggling with 3rd parties and private Turk individuals, yes. With the gov't not quite.

Putin not long ago accused Erdogan jnr of trading directly which was shown to be quite clearly a false accusation. But it is the norm for him to come out with a lot of shite.
Click to expand...
LeChuck said:
No - they may be accused of supporting them through inaction, but that's not really the same of being their 'biggest supporters'. They are the 'biggest supporters' of the FSA, and Islamic Front. If you're on about oil - the only links I've seen of the Turks trading oil with IS is through Russian propaganda, which I can't accept at face value. (If you have non Russian sources, please share, and I want some proof, not just speculation).
Click to expand...
You, you've denied it, on this page.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.