I don't know him so can't say much about him, but have to say he didn't strike me as a great comedian. He did raise a couple of good points though.
ISIS in Iraq and Syria
- Thread starter Suli
- Start date
What part of Brand's rant did you disagree with?
The actual idea of someone who admits he has no solution ranting about politics for the sake of creating content for his YouTube page.. He tends to do that. Its not just about his recent squabbles with Fox. He made a similar rant about how people shouldn't vote on Parkinson. Underwhelming stuff.
He does make some compelling points though. He offers no tangible solution but he's spot on regarding the causes of this conflict and has done a pretty solid job of debunking various misconceptions.
Someone tried to convince me that arming the Kurds could lead to an Afghan 2.0 in that the weapons would be used to kick America off Kurdish land. He was convinced.
What are you, a thousand years old?
No that would be Syria - where the weapons given to nutters there has now been passed on to ISIS.
He's actually not spot on. There's little indication ISIS or similar groups wouldn't exist in a security vacuum of the Syrian civil war. The idea that limited weapons given to moderate Syrian factions have created ISIS is also wrong, as they are looting Syrian government weapons as well, and using whatever they have been able to take off fleeing Iraqi units. Even if one were to take the position that the US introduced those weapons into the area, they were clearly intended for moderate factions (the Iraqi military and non-Salafist Syrian groups fighting Assad). What he conveniently doesn't address is that ISIS would not be what it is today if the Iraqi government would've kept a small amount of US troops in Iraq after 2011, which at least in Iraqi terms, has led us to where we are today. Had they done so, they would've provided the necessary air support to allow Iraqi and Pesh forces to repel ISIS much earlier and avoid the needless slaughter of thousands, as well as kept a vast majority of them bottled up in eastern Syria.
Even if the US intended to deliver those weapons to the 'moderate' factions, they should have surely anticipated the risk of it falling into toxic hands, which it has. Has nothing been learnt from the calamity of empowering Bin Laden and his merry men?
The Iraqi government did the right thing by asking the US military to leave. Their presence is inflammatory and what was initially responsible for the flock of jihadists from across the globe to Iraq (an important point Brand makes).
Why doesn't the US just establish it's presence in Kurdistan? I'm sure Barzani would happily lick the boots of every US serviceman stationed there if he was asked to.
That's not how it works. The logic of arming a moderate opposition is just that - you give weapons to a particular side to empower them to win. You could make a good argument the US didn't do nearly enough in Syria, just as you could make the argument they shouldn't have armed anyone.
I agree that the US presence in Iraq brought many others to fight there. But once they stabilized the violence from its peak in late 2006, they should've stayed longer to ensure things didn't unravel as they have. During the final two years, US troops were on their bases and only engaged in fighting when asked by the Iraqi government in support of Iraqi troops. Those were the most stable of the war years, and were more peaceful than the state Iraq is in today without them. Iraq needs two fundamental things in order to develop - national unity and security. The first can only come from internal political will, the second can only come with help from the US (as we're seeing play out right now).
Photos of Mosul Dam when it was retaken. The operation involved a thousand Peshmerga, 150 Iraqi Special Forces and the American Air Force.
ISIS uploaded a video today of photojournalist James Wright Foley being beheaded in response to American intervention in Iraq.
The video then showed another American and said his fate depends on Obama's next step.
Horrible video.
The video then showed another American and said his fate depends on Obama's next step.
Horrible video.
So, they're threatening to kill someone they're going to kill no matter what as a negotiation piece?
Beheadings are so 500 years ago. Well, except in parts of the middle east.
His attempt to link the Islamic State to Western policy and economics is total nonsense. The movement is religious in nature and has little to do with the West....it's about scriptural fundamentalism and little else, something Brand is too cowardly to talk about.
You really think that's possible?
I've just seen the video of the beheading of James Foley....absolutely horrible.
The executioner has a British accent, by the way. Probably from a middle class background....but according to Russel Brand, economic inequality is to blame...
The executioner has a British accent, by the way. Probably from a middle class background....but according to Russel Brand, economic inequality is to blame...
What part of it is nonsense? Prior to the Iraq war there was zero radical Islamist elements in Iraq - the US-led invasion had caused a flock of them into the country, and the subsequent gutting of Iraq's military structure had only made the country less able to defend itself. Meanwhile, next door over in Syria, western policy deemed it perfectly reasonable to arm jihadist lunatics in an attempt to overthrown the secular Assad, and now their weapons are finding their way into the hands of their ISIS mates.
It was possible pre-2012 when the US was still in town. Unfortunately, it's looking increasingly bleak these days. I think we're in for protracted conflict and a possible redrawing of territorial boundaries within Iraq. Its also quite likely the US will be back in the country militarily, as there is too much pressure to "do something" about ISIS - and in this instance, doing something has to involve a comprehensive solution to both Syria and Iraq, as a piecemeal solution will only allow ISIS to hop across the border and hide. It will require a simultaneous and well coordinated effort from within both Syria and Iraq.
Personally I think this could be Putin's chance to get back into good international graces. He's continuously waxing poetic about the dangers of terrorism, and with his close ties to Assad - the US should favor a plan whereby Russia helps deal with ISIS in Syria while the US helps the Kurds and Iraqi Army to deal with them inside Iraq.
As I said above - Brand is equally as clueless as O'Reilly - just on the opposite end of the comedy spectrum.
And who's to deal with the ISIS in London and Birmingham then?
What do you guys reckon will be the future of Iraq and will this beheading video change anything?
They're only drawing attention to themselves, which may be what they want - but it won't be good for them in the end as it will only turn public opinion sharply against them (more so than it already is) and will accelerate and intensify a US response.
What would that help them with?
Any chance you could give us some more fancy tech besides some rusty M1Abrams and ancient F16s - you give the Israelis some prestige gear!
I think they want a fight. Also, they are pissed that the US is intervening in their genocidal escapades and are using this to protest (the second guy who wasn't beheaded was apparently being lined up as next to die unless the US eases off).
The Israelis are a stable country where advanced weapons aren't likely to fall into the wrong hands, whereas from what we've seen in Iraq, that's not really the case.
This shit is crazy flippin hell
Rekt
Then stop arming Jihadists..sorry 'moderates' with Jihadist friends in Syria...or anywhere in the world for that matter!
I doubt they're arming them with the advanced weapons you're begging for.
I was being facetious when I 'begged' for those weapons.
Advanced or not, any weapons that could do considerable damage (i.e. the weapons ISIS are currently using) should not be donated in a region where they can end up in the wrong hands.
Perhaps the West did make mistakes in that they underestimated the threat posed by radical Islamist groups in Iraq after the fall of Saddam, but I don't think we can say that this is the cause of what is currently unfolding. Even if present day Iraq were a secure dictatorship under Saddam, ISIS or groups like them could just as easily pop up somewhere else in the Middle East or elsewhere, just as they have in Nigeria and Somalia. And there's certainly no evidence that economics (which is what Brand seems to be emphasizing) has anything to do with it. Many of these guys are Westerners from comfortable backgrounds, backed by wealthy Saudis and Qataris. This is a worldwide problem that has its routes (uncomfortably) in scripture.The Islamic State just happens to be the most dangerous example.
This whole idea that arming of moderate factions in Syria has led to ISIS is way over the top. ISIS were destined to flourish in an environment of both Assad's civil war and the US leaving Iraq. If neither happened, they would never have gotten the oxygen to expand the way they have.
That video is absolutely disgusting.
I highly doubt it.
Nevertheless, pretty clear that the fanatical nature of religion (or certain interpretations of it) is the primary factor behind the existence of groups like ISIS, little else.
Britons heading to fight in Iraq/Syria are little more than thick, brainwashed idiots.
I highly doubt it.
Nevertheless, pretty clear that the fanatical nature of religion (or certain interpretations of it) is the primary factor behind the existence of groups like ISIS, little else.
Britons heading to fight in Iraq/Syria are little more than thick, brainwashed idiots.
It also highlights the need for Europe to wake up and start taking notice that there are currently ISIS members living in their cities. Unless addressed immediately, its only a matter of time until something happens in European cities.
The coward wouldn't even show his face.
I've seen on twitter suggestions that he's a Pakistani immigrant from East London based on his accent.
Interesting ideas. But it's hard to confidently predict an endgame in all this.
I do think it's a big ask to put Humpty Dumpty together again. Is there enough vested interest in the old states to even attempt it? That Sunni sheik, who was interviewed recently, seemed to make his people's participation in an anti-IS push conditional on radical political change. And the Kurds won't march on Mosul without renegotiation of their relationship with Baghdad. A federal solution might be the only way to reconstitute the Iraqi state.
If it's possible at all. I can't believe the Americans will come back in and start drawing maps themselves.
I think the maps will redraw themselves organically. I used to laugh at people who in the mid 2000s proposed partitioning Iraq among Sunni, Shi'a, and Kurdish areas; but now it seems as though it would actually be a good idea.
I'm fairly confident the US will be back in Iraq soon. Obama is not an interventionist at heart, but the pressure will become so intense, that he will take a more comprehensive approach. Beyond that, whoever replaces Obama (whether Hillary or some Republican) are likely to be significantly more aggressive and interventionist.
Here is the censored version of the video. It's very disturbing, nonetheless.
How do you go about tackling this sort of mentality?
How do you go about tackling this sort of mentality?