ISIS in Iraq and Syria

Raoul

Admin
Staff
Joined
Aug 14, 1999
Messages
130,973
Location
Hollywood CA
But when did the US leave Iraq? 2011/2012 I think? Doesn't look like they've left it in a very stable place
It was relatively stable when the US left in 2011. Trouble is, the Iraqis didn't have a sense of national Unity between the Shi'a government, Sunni minority, and increasingly autonomous minded Kurds. The lack of unity and general mismanagement within the government allowed Al-Qaeda/ISIS back into the game.
 

Attila

Full Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2013
Messages
11,073
Location
RIP Mino
Supports
Trad Bricks
It was relatively stable when the US left in 2011. Trouble is, the Iraqis didn't have a sense of national Unity between the Shi'a government, Sunni minority, and increasingly autonomous minded Kurds. The lack of unity and general mismanagement within the government allowed Al-Qaeda/ISIS back into the game.
I remember reading an article which blamed a guy called Paul Bremer and it was something about how the US didn't leave a strong Iraqi military when they left. Will need to look it up as I can't remember what the article was about fully. The US surely has to take a large portion of blame for the mess in Iraq right now though...you would have thought they would have planned their leaving much better
 

Raoul

Admin
Staff
Joined
Aug 14, 1999
Messages
130,973
Location
Hollywood CA
I remember reading an article which blamed a guy called Paul Bremer and it was something about how the US didn't leave a strong Iraqi military when they left. Will need to look it up as I can't remember what the article was about fully. The US surely has to take a large portion of blame for the mess in Iraq right now though...you would have thought they would have planned their leaving much better
Those are two separate situations. Bremer disbanded the old Saddam era military and commissioned a new one to be trained by the US to avoid old loyalties. That was obviously a mistake since it put a lot of qualified military officers out of work, who were then radicalized by Al-Qaeda in Iraq and later ISIS. That could've been mitigated more recently by a more inclusive Iraqi government who reached out to Sunnis.
 

Attila

Full Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2013
Messages
11,073
Location
RIP Mino
Supports
Trad Bricks
Those are two separate situations. Bremer disbanded the old Saddam era military and commissioned a new one to be trained by the US to avoid old loyalties. That was obviously a mistake since it put a lot of qualified military officers out of work, who were then radicalized by Al-Qaeda in Iraq and later ISIS. That could've been mitigated more recently by a more inclusive Iraqi government who reached out to Sunnis.
Yeah ISIS has a lot of the old Baath Party generals now don't they...you would just think if you are going to invade a country and topple the government you would at least think about whats going to happen with old party leaders and to prevent something from going wrong again. I remember reading about how the US had all sorts of plans to ensure that Germany and Japan didn't fall back to its old ways once they left but it doesn't seem like Bush really put that much thought into the future of Iraq once the war was over.
 

Classical Mechanic

Full Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2014
Messages
35,216
Location
xG Zombie Nation
It was relatively stable when the US left in 2011. Trouble is, the Iraqis didn't have a sense of national Unity between the Shi'a government, Sunni minority, and increasingly autonomous minded Kurds. The lack of unity and general mismanagement within the government allowed Al-Qaeda/ISIS back into the game.
Would the West have been better off with Saddam still in power though?
 

Raoul

Admin
Staff
Joined
Aug 14, 1999
Messages
130,973
Location
Hollywood CA
Yeah ISIS has a lot of the old Baath Party generals now don't they...you would just think if you are going to invade a country and topple the government you would at least think about whats going to happen with old party leaders and to prevent something from going wrong again. I remember reading about how the US had all sorts of plans to ensure that Germany and Japan didn't fall back to its old ways once they left but it doesn't seem like Bush really put that much thought into the future of Iraq once the war was over.
Bush clearly didn't think it out properly and was replaced by someone who is an anti-interventionist and wanted to bring all US troops home. Bush, Cheney, Bremer, Wolfowitz and that mob have a lot to answer for.
 

Raoul

Admin
Staff
Joined
Aug 14, 1999
Messages
130,973
Location
Hollywood CA
Would the West have been better off with Saddam still in power though?
Short term yes, as Saddam would've repelled AQ and ISIS, who probably wouldn't exist without the botched invasion of Iraq. Long term, hard to say as Saddam was an unpredictable guy and his sons were even crazier. If he passed on and his sons took over, it would've meant instability for another 20-30 years.
 

Attila

Full Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2013
Messages
11,073
Location
RIP Mino
Supports
Trad Bricks
It's pretty insane to think how the world would probably be a better place with.....Saddam Hussain. The west would definitely be a lot safer with no ISIS and no islamic lunatics traveling to Iraq/Syria and possibly traveling back to their european countries to commit terrorism.
 

Raoul

Admin
Staff
Joined
Aug 14, 1999
Messages
130,973
Location
Hollywood CA
It's pretty insane to think how the world would probably be a better place with.....Saddam Hussain. The west would definitely be a lot safer with no ISIS and no islamic lunatics traveling to Iraq/Syria and possibly traveling back to their european countries to commit terrorism.
Trouble is, Saddam would still be in charge but Syria would be in turmoil. There's nothing to say he wouldn't have attempted something in Syria or short of that, that Al-Qaeda wouldn't have set up camp there much like ISIS have. The Syrian civil war happened because of Assad's dictatorship, which is independent of the invasion of Iraq.
 

Attila

Full Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2013
Messages
11,073
Location
RIP Mino
Supports
Trad Bricks
Trouble is, Saddam would still be in charge but Syria would be in turmoil. There's nothing to say he wouldn't have attempted something in Syria or short of that, that Al-Qaeda wouldn't have set up camp there much like ISIS have. The Syrian civil war happened because of Assad's dictatorship, which is independent of the invasion of Iraq.
Didn't the US arm those Syrian rebels as well? I'm not sure about the situation exactly but wouldn't have Assad probably have faired a lot better without the rebels being armed by the US and without having ISIS roll in during the conflict. The Saudi's hated Saddam too I think(not sure) so they probably wouldn't have been giving all the support to the rebel/terrorist groups either if it was playing into Saddam's hands in getting control of Syria too. Too many what if's :lol:
 

Raoul

Admin
Staff
Joined
Aug 14, 1999
Messages
130,973
Location
Hollywood CA
There was a bit of that but the fundamental reasons why the Syrian civil war is taking place are domestic and related to the Assad regimes authoritarian ways.
 

antihenry

CAF GRU Rep
Joined
Sep 12, 2004
Messages
7,401
Location
Chelsea FC
Didn't the US arm those Syrian rebels as well? I'm not sure about the situation exactly but wouldn't have Assad probably have faired a lot better without the rebels being armed by the US and without having ISIS roll in during the conflict. The Saudi's hated Saddam too I think(not sure) so they probably wouldn't have been giving all the support to the rebel/terrorist groups either if it was playing into Saddam's hands in getting control of Syria too. Too many what if's :lol:
There are no what ifs. The US government carries the biggest responsibility for that mess in the Middle East. It was always bad, but they made it million times worse. All that idiocy, from invading Iraq to sponsoring those Syrian "freedom fighters", they just can't help themselves.
 

Vooon

Full Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2012
Messages
2,600
Location
Hal Institute for Criminally Insane Robots
Now this is good. Both of them just needs to get in full blooded war so IDF and IS blows each others heads off and the world would be a safer place.
IDF going gung ho into Sinai and Syria probably isn't such a bad idea at this point. Not a big fan of the Israelis, but this might just be an occasion where their ruthlessness could be of some use.
 

2cents

Historiographer, and obtainer of rare antiquities
Scout
Joined
Mar 19, 2008
Messages
16,396
Israel going into Sinai or Syria would make things ten times worse. Fortunately I believe the Israelis have learned the lesson of their 1982 Lebanese adventure.
 

Kaos

Full Member
Joined
May 6, 2007
Messages
32,061
Location
Ginseng Strip
Short term yes, as Saddam would've repelled AQ and ISIS, who probably wouldn't exist without the botched invasion of Iraq. Long term, hard to say as Saddam was an unpredictable guy and his sons were even crazier. If he passed on and his sons took over, it would've meant instability for another 20-30 years.
Disagree, vehemently.

Saddam will have passed the mantle on to most likely Qusay, but there's no knowing if he would have survived his tenure.

What happened instead has probably Iraq destablised for another 20 years.
 
Last edited:

Kaos

Full Member
Joined
May 6, 2007
Messages
32,061
Location
Ginseng Strip
Nothing will happen if Israel pass into the Sinai.

Egypt will do feck all and Al-Sisi will probably fetch them hot towels himself. ISIS will be all like "these aren't Muslims, how can we kill them?!" and scurry back to beheading women and children who cannot defend themselves. All the other Arab countries won't care, the Turks will kick up a fuss but do feck all about it as they usually do and Iran wil piss themselves with laughter.

Its no longer 1973.
 
Last edited:

syrian_scholes

Honorary Straw Hat
Joined
Jan 10, 2011
Messages
14,027
Location
Houston
Nothing will happen if Israel pass into the Sinai.

Egypt will do feck all and Morsi will probably fetch them hot towels himself. ISIS will be all like "these aren't Muslims, how can we kill them?!" and scurry back to beheading women and children who cannot defend themselves. All the other Arab countries won't care, the Turks will kick up a fuss but do feck all about it as they usually do and Iran wil piss themselves with laughter.

Its no longer 1973.
Really man why keep talking about Morsi? the guy is in prison most likely going to die there, Al-Sisi is even worse.
 

Godfather

Full Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2007
Messages
30,114
Location
Austria
So the West standing and watching one of the few times a proper military intervention would be justified. This after beeing one of the main reasons for this chaos. Congratulations. Also I don't think there can be any question whatsoever that the west AND the middle east would have been off with Saddam still in regime.
 

Godfather

Full Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2007
Messages
30,114
Location
Austria
Of course the west is interested in long term democracy as it enhances global commerce and creates a more suitable climate for trade and the promotion of values democratic societies espouse.
Trying to force countries that are clearly not ready yet into western democracy with armed force was alwas going to be a brilliant idea...
 

holyland red

"Holier-than-thou fundamentalist"
Joined
Oct 19, 2001
Messages
19,098
Location
Haifa, Israel
So the West standing and watching one of the few times a proper military intervention would be justified. This after beeing one of the main reasons for this chaos. Congratulations. Also I don't think there can be any question whatsoever that the west AND the middle east would have been off with Saddam still in regime.
Even better, there are some on here (albeit not all Westerners) expecting Israel to clear the mess for them. Weird stuff.
 

Adzzz

Astrophysical Genius - Hard for Grinner
Staff
Joined
Jan 13, 2008
Messages
32,781
Location
Kebab Shop
@Godfather

ISIS actively want Western boots on the ground so they can ramp up their fervor and support ten-fold. To create a caliphate they need more behind them then they have, and it's easy to bastardise the other and at the moment a clearly defined, already hated other isn't present and that's the way we should keep it.
 

Godfather

Full Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2007
Messages
30,114
Location
Austria
@Godfather

ISIS actively want Western boots on the ground so they can ramp up their fervor and support ten-fold. To create a caliphate they need more behind them then they have, and it's easy to bastardise the other and at the moment a clearly defined, already hated other isn't present and that's the way we should keep it.
I undestand where you are coming from but what to do with them? Just let them be and let them murder pretty much everybody different to their believes? I'm not sure this can be the solution. It should have been the solution in the past. Way too often the west intervened when there was absolutley no need to. But it seems they don't deem an intervention as profitable enough this time.
 

Adzzz

Astrophysical Genius - Hard for Grinner
Staff
Joined
Jan 13, 2008
Messages
32,781
Location
Kebab Shop
I undestand where you are coming from but what to do with them? Just let them be and let them murder pretty much everybody different to their believes? I'm not sure this can be the solution. It should have been the solution in the past. Way too often the west intervened when there was absolutley no need to. But it seems they don't deem an intervention as profitable enough this time.
If we did launch a ground invasion, they would just dissolve, no way they want to fight western ground forces. I genuinely don't know what to do with them but it's not as if it's a new problem they've just got a new name, we haven't fixed it before and we won't fix it now.
 

sun_tzu

The Art of Bore
Joined
Aug 23, 2010
Messages
19,536
Location
Still waiting for the Youthquake
I undestand where you are coming from but what to do with them? Just let them be and let them murder pretty much everybody different to their believes? I'm not sure this can be the solution. It should have been the solution in the past. Way too often the west intervened when there was absolutley no need to. But it seems they don't deem an intervention as profitable enough this time.
I'm not sure there is a solution - certainly not a simple one - cutting off funding would be a good start and one that may not give the obvious call to arms / mass suicide attacks on troops that a boots on the ground policy would - but that would require letting the situation carry on for a while and probably deteriorate before it could improve - and if they do succeed in triggering a more widespread sunni vs shia conflict and you start to see iran and saudi get involved then all bets are off as to how messed up it could all get.
 

carvajal

Full Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2015
Messages
11,182
Location
Spain
Supports
Real Madrid
A good documentary although a bit old about the life in Raqqa
 

Kaos

Full Member
Joined
May 6, 2007
Messages
32,061
Location
Ginseng Strip
45 of the vermin poisoned during a Ramadan meal in Mosul:cool:

They're soon learning that taking over a city is the easy part, maintaining an unpopular occupation on the other hand..
 

VidaRed

Unimaginative FC
Joined
Aug 23, 2007
Messages
29,612
45 of the vermin poisoned during a Ramadan meal in Mosul:cool:

They're soon learning that taking over a city is the easy part, maintaining an unpopular occupation on the other hand..
A lot more of them need to be killed before they start fleeing the cities.
 

cyberman

Full Member
Joined
May 26, 2010
Messages
37,331
45 of the vermin poisoned during a Ramadan meal in Mosul:cool:

They're soon learning that taking over a city is the easy part, maintaining an unpopular occupation on the other hand..
Theyll pin in it on some poor innocent soul, parade him in front of the townsfolk as a PR stunt and inflict a very public and brutal death as to ward off copycats.
Poor bastard
 

LeChuck

CE Specialist
Supposedly, IS banned Eid prayers in Mosul.

The Islamic State group has banned residents of the occupied northern Iraqi city of Mosul from praying on the Muslim holy day of Eid al-Fitr, claiming that the practice is not part of the Islamic religion, according to a local report on Friday.

Eid al-Fitr, known as "Feast of Breaking the Fast," marks the end of the 30-day Ramadan period and is celebrated by Muslims across the world. Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP) official Ismat Rajab reportedly said that the militant group claims the practice was not "originally an Islamic practice" and was not followed by ancient Muslims. ISIS has issued a warning to all the residents to refrain from prayers on the day, Kurdish news source Rudaw reported.
These guys clearly aren't Muslim, and as a consequence should kill themselves (if they follow their own ideology).
 

Kaos

Full Member
Joined
May 6, 2007
Messages
32,061
Location
Ginseng Strip
Alleged Islamic group ban Islamic custom of praying on most holy Islamic day. Proceeds to make a spectacle of torturing and executing Muslim people in the name of Islam instead.

Seem like a legit bunch.
 

Desert Eagle

Punjabi Dude
Joined
Sep 25, 2006
Messages
17,566
That obama clip is going to be on all the conspiracy sites and is probably being edited into some illuminati montage as I type this.