A Look At The Islamic State

[T.Lex]

The kind of analysis you won't likely find in USian MSM:
Islamic State: Is the US-led campaign flawed? - BBC News

"I think the coalition strategy against IS was kind of non-existent," says Charlie Winter, a research analyst with the London-based counter extremism think-tank Quilliam.
"From the beginning it was dropping bombs against Islamic State positions, hoping to try and kill a few leaders, take out some artillery positions, that sort of thing.
"But besides that, it has resoundingly failed. Ramadi has just been taken, Palmyra has just been taken, Deir al-Zour airport is about to fall," Mr Winter says.
...
To be fair, the coalition strategy has not been an abject failure.... But for IS, these are manageable losses, irritating but not life-threatening to their cause. Their march across much of the Middle East continues.


The biggest setback to IS was not even a part of coalition strategy, it was the result of a joint Iraqi-Iranian deal.

...
"The US, the EU, the GCC, Turkey and the Iranian axis (Iran, Assad, Baghdad and Hezbollah) as well as the rest of the Syrian opposition are fighting an unco-ordinated campaign against IS."
...
In the short term at least, the prognosis for that part of the Middle East is dire.
"The capture of Palmyra will not be the last setback for the anti‐IS coalition in Syria and Iraq," says Mr Deen.
"Come Ramadan (mid-June), IS' campaign will be relentless and almost unstoppable."

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Islamic State has claimed responsibility for the suicide bombing in Saudi Arabia's eastern province that killed over 20 people while they prayed at a local mosque. The bombing marks the first time IS has struck inside Saudi Arabia.

 

[mrjarrell]

The bomber has been Id'ed as a Saudi national and IS has been talking more about it. Maybe now Saudi Arabia will start taking things seriously.
https://news.vice.com/article/islam...abia-as-bomber-in-mosque-attack-is-identified

 

[deal me in]

US intelligence knew AQI/ISI (the forerunners to the current ISIS) were the primary power in the Syrian rebellion. US intelligence viewed them as a tool in the fight to remove Assad. The talking points we heard from politicians and in the press about "moderate" Syrian rebels was vastly overblown at best. We know (thanks Joe Biden!) that our allies in the gulf funneled 100's of millions of dollars to ISIS. Ironically, these are the same gulf allies who are in our current coalition fighting against ISIS. It's unclear if ISIS is still receiving funds from our allies. US intelligence predicted in 2012 that ISIS would take control in northern Iraq and named several of the cities that have fallen recently.

Just in case anyone scoffs at the source. The primary intelligence document is linked, as well as, supporting articles and citations for other claims. ZH definitely has an editorial bias, but unless it's a complete fabrication, I think it's pretty damning evidence. Read and decide for yourself if you're so inclined.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-...ed-isis-tool-overthrow-syrias-president-assad

 

[pudly]

I read that same article and military report. I didn't want to post it here because, as you indicated, ZeroHedge is far from unbiased when it comes to this topic, though the fact that the source document is with JudicialWatch lends it more credence. I'll be watching for independent confirmation.

For any that want to read the source report, it is only 7 pages with moderate redactions and the most interesting stuff is at the end of page 4 and on page 5.

I will just say that some of us vigorously questioned the wisdom of Obama's strategy of supporting forces within Syria to overthrow Assad at the time. There were no good side to support there and no significant U.S. interests. It turns out that the "moderates" were actually Al Qaeda supporters and like Libya, the effort has turned a bad situation far worse.

It appears that Obama has mastered the art of turning "the enemy of our enemy" into our worst nightmare.

 

[jamil]

I read that same article and military report. I didn't want to post it here because, as you indicated, ZeroHedge is far from unbiased when it comes to this topic, though the fact that the source document is with JudicialWatch lends it more credence. I'll be watching for independent confirmation.

For any that want to read the source report, it is only 7 pages with moderate redactions and the most interesting stuff is at the end of page 4 and on page 5.

I will just say that some of us vigorously questioned the wisdom of Obama's strategy of supporting forces within Syria to overthrow Assad at the time. There were no good side to support there and no significant U.S. interests. It turns out that the "moderates" were actually Al Qaeda supporters and like Libya, the effort has turned a bad situation far worse.

It appears that Obama has mastered the art of turning "the enemy of our enemy" into our worst nightmare.

He's an ideologue. They don't care about the best outcome, they care about the "right" outcome.

 

[KG1]

I read that same article and military report. I didn't want to post it here because, as you indicated, ZeroHedge is far from unbiased when it comes to this topic, though the fact that the source document is with JudicialWatch lends it more credence. I'll be watching for independent confirmation.

For any that want to read the source report, it is only 7 pages with moderate redactions and the most interesting stuff is at the end of page 4 and on page 5.

I will just say that some of us vigorously questioned the wisdom of Obama's strategy of supporting forces within Syria to overthrow Assad at the time. There were no good side to support there and no significant U.S. interests. It turns out that the "moderates" were actually Al Qaeda supporters and like Libya, the effort has turned a bad situation far worse.

It appears that Obama has mastered the art of turning "the enemy of our enemy" into our worst nightmare.

You've got that last part about right. While there's no denying that other past presidents policies have brought about similar results it has usually taken alot longer.

 

[pudly]

You've got that last part about right. While there's no denying that other past presidents policies have brought about similar results it has usually taken alot longer.

If you are referring to President Bush, I'll remind you that he neither created Al Qaeda, nor did he leave them in good shape when he was done. It took Obama to turn George Bush's Iraq win into a loss.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Iraqi forces 'failed to fight' in Ramadi: Pentagon chief to CNN

 

[mrjarrell]

Interesting look at the rise of IS as a western supported organisation, used to confront Syria's Assad, Iran and the shiites. All backed up by declassified US document (released by JudicalWatch). The western powers really screwed the pooch on this one, if the document is correct. They built up and supported IS all to get rid of Assad and the shiites. The did the same thing in Libya and allowed AQ to get a grip then morph over to IS. The hubris of these people is unimaginable. They thought they could control this genie they created and foster a sunni run ME. Now people are paying for their games.

https://medium.com/insurge-intellig...west-saw-isis-as-strategic-asset-b99ad7a29092

 

[1DOWN4UP]

That place is a mess. Are they tied to the Syrian rebels at all?

Yea.....that was the same group Obama wanted to give arms to last year. He won't have to now......they have em.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

This implies Obama created ISIS to take down Assad

https://medium.com/insurge-intellig...west-saw-isis-as-strategic-asset-b99ad7a29092

 

[1DOWN4UP]

Their flag over the Whitehouse.......Hum.......Mabye it is Obbamman Empire.......part 2.........

 

[mrjarrell]

This implies Obama created ISIS to take down Assad

https://medium.com/insurge-intellig...west-saw-isis-as-strategic-asset-b99ad7a29092

I just posted that. Late again. And it doesn't lay the blame on Obama, it lays it on the western powers, he's not the only one. And most of the blame can go to the Pentagon, who came up with the plans. He just rubber stamped them.

 

[KG1]

If you are referring to President Bush, I'll remind you that he neither created Al Qaeda, nor did he leave them in good shape when he was done. It took Obama to turn George Bush's Iraq win into a loss.

I didn't get into specifics. You did. My post was generic in nature and it wasn't specifically resigned to this particular conflict.

 

[pudly]

I just posted that. Late again. And it doesn't lay the blame on Obama, it lays it on the western powers, he's not the only one. And most of the blame can go to the Pentagon, who came up with the plans. He just rubber stamped them.

Are you really sure the motivation didn't flow the opposite way? Generally it is the Administration that determines direction and the Pentagon makes plans on how those directions can be implemented. The analysis even included a warning that an Islamic State might arise as a side effect the operation.

 

[1DOWN4UP]

I just posted that. Late again. And it doesn't lay the blame on Obama, it lays it on the western powers, he's not the only one. And most of the blame can go to the Pentagon, who came up with the plans. He just rubber stamped them.

I know he didn't have anything to do with it ,THAT IS FOR SURE. Riddle me this,Has the funding for "the rebels"for sure been cut yet? That is the Question that still has to be answered.

 

[mrjarrell]

I know he didn't have anything to do with it ,THAT IS FOR SURE. Riddle me this,Has the funding for "the rebels"for sure been cut yet? That is the Question that still has to be answered.

Oh, I'm sure the Pentagon got his stamp of approval, but the congress were the ones behind the funding of these groups that have since morphed into IS, (he also rubber stamped that funding, too). I wouldn't be at all surprised if the CIA and the others weren't still funneling money into the coffers of the insurgents in Syria. Congress controls the purse strings. It's up to the republicans in congress to cut that funding, since they're the ones in control. Do they have the sense to do that or will they continue doing the bang up job they've already done?

 

[KG1]

I knew this was gonna end up being about republicans.

 

[mrjarrell]

I knew this was gonna end up being about republicans.

They're the ones that beat the drums to fund the insurgents, they need to own it.