ISIS in Iraq and Syria

Sir Matt said:
:lol: That is surreal. I half expected them to start chanting "I BELIEVE THAT WE WILL WIN!"

Some A-10s would be pretty nice in that situation though. Could wipe out ISIS quickly.
Click to expand...
They're chanting "Long live the YPG resistance" in Kurdish.
 
So a Saudi prince has pretty much come out and admitted that this 'ISIS war' really about removing Assad, which really is very telling..

 
Relevated said:
People start rumours on Twitter for fun and they turn into that.
Click to expand...

True. Though I would have thought (and hoped) that the Gulf centre for Human rights would ensure that their sources are more vigorous than twitter.
 
Kaos said:
So a Saudi prince has pretty much come out and admitted that this 'ISIS war' really about removing Assad, which really is very telling..

Click to expand...


Yep pretty much. Everyone except Iran wants Assad gone, so it shouldn't come as a surprise the Saudis do as well.
 
Erdogan is apparently setting up a plan to send ground troops to fight ISIS.

What he probably means is that if Kobane falls, Turkey will move in and retake the town. They'll then evacuate all civilians for "safety" and make it a buffer zone.
 
Suli said:
Erdogan is apparently setting up a plan to send ground troops to fight ISIS.

What he probably means is that if Kobane falls, Turkey will move in and retake the town. They'll then evacuate all civilians for "safety" and make it a buffer zone.
Click to expand...

Will be interesting to see if that actually happens, as it will require a ground force of some sort to deal with ISIS once they're sufficiently softened up from airstrikes. If it doesn't, there's a good chance he cut a deal with ISIS to stay out of the conflict in exchange for the safe return of the hostages.
 
Raoul said:
Yep pretty much. Everyone except Iran wants Assad gone, so it shouldn't come as a surprise the Saudis do as well.
Click to expand...

That's not surprise, but its a bit disconcerting that this Saudi prince has admitted that the real reason behind this military intervention is to topple Assad. Not only is this counterproductive considering the Syrian Arab Army's ongoing efforts to fight ISIL, but this suggests the US and her allies are finding new ways to justify a new military adventure against Assad after the people of the US and the UK had vehemently opposed bombing the regime last year. Makes you wonder, do they plan to just bomb pretty much everyone unlucky enough to be under the Syrian sky?
 
Kaos said:
That's not surprise, but its a bit disconcerting that this Saudi prince has admitted that the real reason behind this military intervention is to topple Assad. Not only is this counterproductive considering the Syrian Arab Army's ongoing efforts to fight ISIL, but this suggests the US and her allies are finding new ways to justify a new military adventure against Assad after the people of the US and the UK had vehemently opposed bombing the regime last year. Makes you wonder, do they plan to just bomb pretty much everyone unlucky enough to be under the Syrian sky?
Click to expand...

You're complicating things. The US want Assad gone, as do the Saudis, as does everyone else, except Iran - and he will be, its just a matter of time. Once ISIS are crushed there will be a renewed push to create a moderate middle that addresses the concerns of people who aren't interested in tin pot dictatorship nor Salfist death cult.
 
Raoul said:
You're complicating things. The US want Assad gone, as do the Saudis, as does everyone else, except Iran - and he will be, its just a matter of time. Once ISIS are crushed there will be a renewed push to create a moderate middle that addresses the concerns of people who aren't interested in tin pot dictatorship nor Salfist death cult.
Click to expand...

On the contrary, I'd arguing you're simplifying things. Considering Syrian's delicate sectarian fabric, its going to be naive to assume that a 'moderate middle' will keep sectarian strifes at bay, a bit like how it was naive to assume Iraq would naturally embrace democracy overnight.

My initial point is that when or if ISIL are dealt with, its going to be convenient that there's already going to be a horde of forces hostile to Assad already mobilised in the region. Makes me think that ISL are not, nor have they ever been the real target here. They're a convenient (albeit ghastly) red herring to beef up military presence in a region, while working towards getting rid of non-compliant heads of states.
 
Kaos said:
On the contrary, I'd arguing you're simplifying things. Considering Syrian's delicate sectarian fabric, its going to be naive to assume that a 'moderate middle' will keep sectarian strifes at bay, a bit like how it was naive to assume Iraq would naturally embrace democracy overnight.

My initial point is that when or if ISIL are dealt with, its going to be convenient that there's already going to be a horde of forces hostile to Assad already mobilised in the region. Makes me think that ISL are not, nor have they ever been the real target here. They're a convenient (albeit ghastly) red herring to beef up military presence in a region, while working towards getting rid of non-compliant heads of states.
Click to expand...

You're just being paranoid. Of course ISIS are the targets as they pose a threat of exporting terrorists to western nations. Assad is just an annoying side show at this point.
 
barros said:
Shouldn't we learned the lesson when we remove a dictator then something worse will replace the dictator ? Libya and Iraq as an example.
Click to expand...

In this case the dictator is still in power and it can't possibly get any worse.
 
Raoul said:
In this case the dictator is still in power and it can't possibly get any worse.
Click to expand...

How can you still make that statement?
I mean the strongest opposition is al-Nusra and ISIS. How are they not 'any worse' than (for all his brutality) secular Assad?
The second half of that sentence, 'it could not get any worse', I can't believe any outside observer could say that.
 
vidic blood & sand said:
http://edition.cnn.com/2014/09/27/world/meast/isis-syria-iraq/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

One heck of an explosion from a missile hitting the building. Wouldn't like to be in there.
I'm not sure how modern missiles work, but it looked as if there was an initial hit, then a massive explosion.
Click to expand...


"A London-based monitoring group also claimed Saturday that other airstrikes may have also resulted in the deaths of six civilians near the Syrian city of al-Hasakah."

Civilian deaths, eh? because there's a "threat" of terrorism-export to Western nations...interesting.
 
berbatrick said:
How can you still make that statement?
I mean the strongest opposition is al-Nusra and ISIS. How are they not 'any worse' than (for all his brutality) secular Assad?
The second half of that sentence, 'it could not get any worse', I can't believe any outside observer could say that.
Click to expand...

My point is Syrians shouldn't be limited to a simple choice between Assad and ISIS, neither of which have international legitimacy. They should have a third option that allows them to set up their own parliamentary democracy where people have the ability to elect their own leader in order to control how their country is governed.
 
At some point airstrikes are going to lose their effectiveness and there will need to be some sort of ground force, ideally an Arab or Turkish one, that goes in to deal with these chaps.
 
Raoul said:
You're complicating things. The US want Assad gone, as do the Saudis, as does everyone else, except Iran - and he will be, its just a matter of time. Once ISIS are crushed there will be a renewed push to create a moderate middle that addresses the concerns of people who aren't interested in tin pot dictatorship nor Salfist death cult.
Click to expand...

Who cares what the US or the Saudis or anyone else wants? Let's look at the Syrians themselves:

LONDON — After two years of civil war, support for the regime of Syrian President Bashar Assad was said to have sharply increased.

NATO has been studying data that told of a sharp rise in support for Assad. The data, compiled by Western-sponsored activists and organizations, showed that a majority of Syrians were alarmed by the Al Qaida takeover of the Sunni revolt and preferred to return to Assad, Middle East Newsline reported.

“The people are sick of the war and hate the jihadists more than Assad,” a Western source familiar with the data said. “Assad is winning the war mostly because the people are cooperating with him against the rebels.”

The data, relayed to NATO over the last month, asserted that 70 percent of Syrians support the Assad regime. Another 20 percent were deemed neutral and the remaining 10 percent expressed support for the rebels.

The sources said no formal polling was taken in Syria, racked by two years of civil war in which 90,000 people were reported killed. They said the data came from a range of activists and independent organizations that were working in Syria, particularly in relief efforts.

The data was relayed to NATO as the Western alliance has been divided over whether to intervene in Syria. Britain and France were said to have been preparing to send weapons to the rebels while the United States was focusing on protecting Syria’s southern neighbor Jordan.

A report to NATO said Syrians have undergone a change of heart over the last six months. The change was seen most in the majority Sunni community, which was long thought to have supported the revolt.

“The Sunnis have no love for Assad, but the great majority of the community is withdrawing from the revolt,” the source said. “What is left is the foreign fighters who are sponsored by Qatar and Saudi Arabia. They are seen by the Sunnis as far worse than Assad.”
Click to expand...

http://www.worldtribune.com/2013/05/31/nato-data-assad-winning-the-war-for-syrians-hearts-and-minds/
 
Crono said:
Who cares what the US or the Saudis or anyone else wants? Let's look at the Syrians themselves:



http://www.worldtribune.com/2013/05/31/nato-data-assad-winning-the-war-for-syrians-hearts-and-minds/
Click to expand...

Hardly surprising that they hate war and view the jihadists as worse than Assad - as well they should. But let's not forget none of this would be taking place if Assad himself had implemented reforms years ago, which would've eliminated the chance of an Arab spring type revolt in his country.
 
Raoul said:
Hardly surprising that they hate war and view the jihadists as worse than Assad - as well they should. But let's not forget none of this would be taking place if Assad himself had implemented reforms years ago, which would've eliminated the chance of an Arab spring type revolt in his country.
Click to expand...

Interesting you view the jihadists as worse than Assad - The US's allies in this coalition don't share the same sentiments nor do the US for the matter if they had previously funded and supported them to help oust Assad.

Reforms wouldn't have guaranteed anything anyway considering the sectarian nature of the conflict. Democracy hadn't protected Iraq from civil war and terrorist infestation.
 
Kaos said:
Interesting you view the jihadists as worse than Assad - The US's allies in this coalition don't share the same sentiments nor do the US for the matter if they had previously funded and supported them to help oust Assad.

Reforms wouldn't have guaranteed anything anyway considering the sectarian nature of the conflict. Democracy hadn't protected Iraq from civil war and terrorist infestation.
Click to expand...

I'm obviously talking to the ones who are aligned with ISIS. The US obviously isn't interested in supporting them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.