Turkey must protect the Iraqi Kurds

[snip]

Turkey has a significant interest in protecting Iraqi Kurds, as it aims to protect the future of Turkey’s energy security and business ties between the Kurdistan Regional Government in northern Iraq (KRG) and Turkey. Moreover, if ISIL manages to beat the Kurds, Turkey could have a dangerous and unpredictable caliphate at its border. This would also cut off Turkey’s access to Iraqi oil and gas and ISIL could then threaten the 2,000 Turkish troops that are still deployed in small bases in northern Iraq under the 1997 agreement in the Duhok province.

Mostly likely ISIL would target Turkey in the future since it sees Turkey as part of its global Islamic Ummah. And Turkey could make the same mistakes as Iraqi Kurds in treating ISIL along the same line according to the famous proverb, “the enemy of my enemy is my friend.” ISIL has already branded the Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) head Abdullah Öcalan as “infidels” in its latest English glossy Dabiq.

[snip]

http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/Defaul ... sCatID=396

According to Jan Čuřík (Arabic studies specialist and expert on Islam ..), in interview for CT24, the top 5 who should be worried about IS/IL, according to IS/IL real or alleged priorities/frequency in media, are: Shias (except Iran), Baghdad regime, Saudis and Jordan, USA and Israel, in this order from imminent to future.

As anecdote, he also mentioned following:

---
Islamic State takes Akhtarin

[snip]

In addition to Akhtarin, IS took control of a number of surrounding villages, such as al-Masoudiya, Turkman Bareh, Dawabeq and al-Azizia. But IS didn’t stop there. It arrived yesterday afternoon to Dabiq, which holds special importance for IS. According to religious mythology, Dabiq is the location of end-of-times battles between good and evil.

[snip]

Read more: http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/securit ... owns.html##ixzz3AeR78dTE
---

where Dabiq is also ISIL's, recently issued, magazine:

---
Dabiq: What Islamic State’s New Magazine Tells Us about Their Strategic Direction, Recruitment Patterns and Guerrilla Doctrine

[snip]

The publication of the first issue of the Islamic State’s official magazine, Dabiq, went into further detail about the Islamic State’s strategic direction, recruitment methods, political-military strategy, tribal alliances and why Saudi Arabia’s concerns that the Kingdom may be the Islamic State’s next target are well-founded.

[snip]

http://www.jamestown.org/programs/tm/si ... _CeOe_lp9A
---

Dabiq, that's crazy.

They're having delusions of grandeur, I think they've had their moment. With not even 10,000 troops under their command IS should be stretched pretty thinly right now. They may be holding a lot of territory, but most of it is desert. They are holding two large cities, Mosul in Iraq and Raqqa in Syria, but I doubt they'd be able to hold those towns if there is a rebellion against them. Mosul has 2 million inhabitants, get the people angry enough and they will kick IS out.

And they want to take on the Saudi military? Good luck, the Saudis have one of the strongest military forces in the world (at least going by the amount of money poured into it).

Arjan Dirkse wrote:They're having delusions of grandeur, I think they've had their moment. With not even 10,000 troops under their command IS should be stretched pretty thinly right now. They may be holding a lot of territory, but most of it is desert. They are holding two large cities, Mosul in Iraq and Raqqa in Syria, but I doubt they'd be able to hold those towns if there is a rebellion against them. Mosul has 2 million inhabitants, get the people angry enough and they will kick IS out.

And they want to take on the Saudi military? Good luck, the Saudis have one of the strongest military forces in the world (at least going by the amount of money poured into it).

I do no think any of the articles suggest IS taking on Saudi military on Sep 11 2014 or something like that. IS does not use conventional tactics so conventional counter-tactics/military might not be as effective.

tuco wrote:
The Islamic State’s Strategic and Tactical Plan for Iraq - http://www.jamestown.org/single/?tx_ttn ... -pZmu_lp9A

This article mentions how it works, for example: suicide bombings as tactic was used more than 230 times. or what is called “Mumbai-style” - To achieve this goal, jihadists in Iraq resort to a tactic involves holding hostages, killing dozens of them and then engaging in an open clash with security forces. This kind of attack has been dubbed “Mumbai-style” after the storming of the historic Taj Hotel in Mumbai by the Kashmiri jihadist group Lashkar-e-Taiba in 2008. Although the preferred jihadist tactic in Iraq is suicide bombings, mostly due to the damage they cause, their lower cost, the ability of the perpetrators to bypass security checks and the increased media coverage they attract. [5] Although they are not cheap compared to suicide bombings, Mumbai-style attacks achieve other goals in addition to media coverage. Most importantly, they undermine confidence in the security services in the targeted country...

This is sad. This GUYS are morons and should NUKED. I read this. They beheaded an American journalist to send message?

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/k ... -1.1909374

Voltage wrote:This is sad. This GUYS are morons and should NUKED. I read this. They beheaded an American journalist to send message?

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/k ... -1.1909374

Are these type of journalist even necessary any more? I mean with how wide spread social media is... What gets added by having these people unnecessarily risk their lives on the ground? Pulitzer prizes?

Acetone wrote:

Voltage wrote:This is sad. This GUYS are morons and should NUKED. I read this. They beheaded an American journalist to send message?

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/k ... -1.1909374

Are these type of journalist even necessary any more? I mean with how wide spread social media is... What gets added by having these people unnecessarily risk their lives on the ground? Pulitzer prizes?

Higher quality photos for news magazines and websites

Arjan Dirkse wrote:They're having delusions of grandeur, I think they've had their moment. With not even 10,000 troops under their command IS should be stretched pretty thinly right now. They may be holding a lot of territory, but most of it is desert. They are holding two large cities, Mosul in Iraq and Raqqa in Syria, but I doubt they'd be able to hold those towns if there is a rebellion against them. Mosul has 2 million inhabitants, get the people angry enough and they will kick IS out.

And they want to take on the Saudi military? Good luck, the Saudis have one of the strongest military forces in the world (at least going by the amount of money poured into it).

I though they hold territory equal to the size of Jordan and are only expanding

Voltage wrote:I though they hold territory equal to the size of Jordan and are only expanding

Like Arjan said, they hold a lot of desert uncontested. Whether they can expand any further under threat of airstrikes remains to be seen. Murdering journos to get the US to stop bombing reeks of desperation to me.

IS has profited from the power vacuum in Iraq and the chaos in Syria. It's a total clusterfuck, but if Syria and Iraq get their act together IS will be swiftly defeated. According to the latest numbers, they have swelled to about 50,000 fighters, which is more than Al Qaeda ever had, but it is a mixed blessing for them I think, when they grow so quickly they can fall apart quickly.

There is an multi front offensive going on right now by the Iraqi army and the Peshmerga to push them back. If they can withstand that kind of pressure while they are also holding on to their gains in Syria, they are truly dangerous. I doubt it though. Nevertheless I think the US (and allied countries) should keep up the pressure as well. Bomb the bastards to hell.

Problem is there anyone in the region if they defeated ISIS wouldn't act just as badly as they do but against a different group of people. I do trust NATO not to randomly murder people (sometimes they are not so bothered about collateral damage but its not deliberate). It takes a really strong society not to repay mass murder with mass murder and I'm not sure there are any in the Middle East

Given the recent beheading video, I say we turn the desert to glass.

mrjonno wrote:Problem is there anyone in the region if they defeated ISIS wouldn't act just as badly as they do but against a different group of people. I do trust NATO not to randomly murder people (sometimes they are not so bothered about collateral damage but its not deliberate). It takes a really strong society not to repay mass murder with mass murder and I'm not sure there are any in the Middle East

I think the current Iraqi government, and even the terrible Syrian government, are by far preferable to having IS as a major power in the region, even if there will be some form of retribution. And if IS manages to take over Iraq or Syria, that pretty much guarantees a new full-scale war by the Western allied powers to drive them out of power, so it's best to defeat them now. I'm afraid to say I think Obama failed when he said "no boots on the ground". All options need to be open for this. I think it's good to keep in mind the Syrians and Iraqis are IS's greatest victims, IS has only a very small number of supporters. We would be doing the Middle East - and ultimately ourselves - a disservice if we failed to support the more moderate forces because we believe they would act just as badly.

I think there is an opportunity for the US to come to a whole new, better Middle East policy by uniting all factions, including Iran and maybe Assad, in the fight against IS.

Arjan Dirkse wrote:IS has only a very small number of supporters.

I would love to know to what extent that's true. Personally I think it might feasibly be true that a large number might want to see a caliphate in the Middle East. We're dealing with an ideology here so it behooves us to get into its mindset. What we're talking about here are religious zealots - people who view the prophet as the archetype of what a human should be - and he was a warrior who converted by the sword. I mean...look at the blood-soaked acts people committed in the name of Jesus. And he was a peace-loving hippy.

Might a large, silent mass not support the aims of ISIS whilst finding the actions unpleasant? Might they not begin to think that the means justify the ends if it brings people to Allah?

Arjan Dirkse wrote:IS has profited from the power vacuum in Iraq and the chaos in Syria. It's a total clusterfuck, but if Syria and Iraq get their act together IS will be swiftly defeated. According to the latest numbers, they have swelled to about 50,000 fighters, which is more than Al Qaeda ever had, but it is a mixed blessing for them I think, when they grow so quickly they can fall apart quickly.

There is an multi front offensive going on right now by the Iraqi army and the Peshmerga to push them back. If they can withstand that kind of pressure while they are also holding on to their gains in Syria, they are truly dangerous. I doubt it though. Nevertheless I think the US (and allied countries) should keep up the pressure as well. Bomb the bastards to hell.

Good post.

So far I've only seen evidence to support my initial judgement of this group. They really, really want to get to their virgins and somebody needs to help them along swiftly.

Cthulhu's Trilby wrote:

Arjan Dirkse wrote:IS has only a very small number of supporters.

I would love to know to what extent that's true. Personally I think it might feasibly be true that a large number might want to see a caliphate in the Middle East. We're dealing with an ideology here so it behooves us to get into its mindset. What we're talking about here are religious zealots - people who view the prophet as the archetype of what a human should be - and he was a warrior who converted by the sword. I mean...look at the blood-soaked acts people committed in the name of Jesus. And he was a peace-loving hippy.

Might a large, silent mass not support the aims of ISIS whilst finding the actions unpleasant? Might they not begin to think that the means justify the ends if it brings people to Allah?

What is "lots of people"? I don't think a majority of people in Iraq or Syria can be categorized as religious zealots. In Iraqi elections it's often the centrist, even secular parties that win the vote.

I think a lot of Sunni Arabs may understandably be nostalgic for the era of the Abbasid Caliphate since that was their Golden Age and the time Islam was powerful, but I really doubt a lot of them support the kind of barbarism IS represents.

There's a great map on wiki showing the developments on the battle field, I think it's updated regularly.

Andsimilarly for Syria.

Voltage wrote:This is sad. This GUYS are morons and should NUKED. I read this. They beheaded an American journalist to send message?

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/k ... -1.1909374

"NUKED"?? Good plan. We should nuke George Bush or the Israeli government before this lot. They cause(d) far more innocent deaths.

Well, I do consider the US bigger threat (liability?) to me than IS. Not that I think the US will attack me, but since Czech Rep is part of NATO I can imagine our soldiers being dragged into conflict instigated by the US. I do not think IS has any plans for Czech Rep as of now.