West Asia News and Discussions
Re: West Asia News and Discussions
The co-culprits are the countries selling arms to other countries and groups, all for the sake of money. Without major weapons these groups would have taken number of years to cause this much damage. Now it is in weeks after the initial spade work.
Re: West Asia News and Discussions
Paul: US has been arming ISIS in Syria
http://thehill.com/policy/international ... aul-claimsSen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) said Sunday that the Sunni militants taking over Iraq have quickly gained power because the United States has armed their group in Syria.
“I think we have to understand first how we got here,” he said on CNN’s “State of the Union.” “We have been arming [the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria] ISIS in Syria.”
ISIS, an al Qaeda offshoot, has been collaborating with the Syrian rebels whom the Obama administration has been arming in their efforts to overthrow Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, Paul explained.
The administration has reportedly assisted the moderate opposition in Syria, but details about the dissemination of those resources are unclear.
“That is the real contradiction to this whole policy,” Paul said. “If we were to get rid of Assad,” it would become a “jihadist wonderland in Syria.”
Re: West Asia News and Discussions
There was a dialog in the Hollywood film, about the US training half the worlds terrorists.
It seems that the US is arming 100 % of the worlds terrorists today, 50 % directly, the other half through the subsidies provided to the MUNNA
It seems that the US is arming 100 % of the worlds terrorists today, 50 % directly, the other half through the subsidies provided to the MUNNA
Re: West Asia News and Discussions
The map doesn't also include Muslim Caucasus - strange considering the Chechen and other "hill-people" element.
And if the reconquista roll back is sought, apart from Spain, what about Italy, Ottoman Europe, Greece and the Ghazwat dreams of former Tatar Khanate territories (the latter originally sparked off the Chechen Islamism 20+ years ago)? Not fair.
And if the reconquista roll back is sought, apart from Spain, what about Italy, Ottoman Europe, Greece and the Ghazwat dreams of former Tatar Khanate territories (the latter originally sparked off the Chechen Islamism 20+ years ago)? Not fair.
Re: West Asia News and Discussions
shades of the stronger and pure factions of the afghan mujahideen cornering most of western aid, and also being the favourites of the KSA due to their purer belief system. some of the original syrian rebels have taken govt amnesty and gone home or have deserted and become dormant...all due to the ISIS takeover.
Re: West Asia News and Discussions
You'll avoid replying to me because you're too weak too defend your arguments. All I've ever seen you do is parrot idiotic state-dept or CNN releases. I'm most decidedly unimpressed. There may be some gora-worshipers on this forum that treat you with kid gloves because of your "special" status as an American poster, but I don't have to be one of them.TSJones wrote:Your comments are amusing considering the Maliki government has already asked the US to start bombing. Why don't you try actually reading some news rather than amazing me with your specious arguments? I will reply to you no more. It's not worth the bother.
On a related note, good article describing US deliberate policy of fomenting sectarian strife, chaos and civil war in the Middle East. Very damning stuff about CIA, Saudi & ISIS:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/us-sponsor ... st/5387653
Re: West Asia News and Discussions
TOI quoting NYT
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Worl ... 048581.cms
battle near kirkuk between baathist militia and ISIS leaving 17 dead.
so it appears the alliance is quite weak even now. sunni-purer sunni is on the cards apart from the usual sunni-vs-shia.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Worl ... 048581.cms
battle near kirkuk between baathist militia and ISIS leaving 17 dead.
so it appears the alliance is quite weak even now. sunni-purer sunni is on the cards apart from the usual sunni-vs-shia.
Re: West Asia News and Discussions
excerpt from NYT
Michael Knights, of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, wrote recently that 60 out of 243 Iraqi Army combat battalions “cannot be accounted for, and all of their equipment is lost.”
American officials said their assessment was that five of the Iraqi Army’s 14 divisions were “combat ineffective,” including the two that were overrun in Mosul. Remnants of shattered units and soldiers who were on leave when the ISIS offensive began have been sent to the military base at Taji, north of Baghdad, to be cobbled together into fresh units. But that, officials and experts underscored, is a process that is going to take time.
“It will be a mammoth task to put these units back together and rearm them,” Mr. Knights said. “Just as important, the defeated army needs to be turned around.”
Many of the American military advisers who are heading to Baghdad will be doing a detailed assessment of the army’s needs, American officials say.
But a measure of the military’s desperation is that its chief assistance now comes from hundreds of thousands of volunteers and a smaller number of highly trained militia members. For army units — and there are a number of them — that are fighting hard, often under difficult circumstances, adding volunteers who have little or no experience has been of questionable benefit. Hundreds of volunteers have been killed or wounded in ambushes on their way to the battlefield, for example. That is not true of the trained militias, which have far fewer fighters but are experienced and highly trained, mostly by the Iranians, and who augment the regular army’s morale, said commanders.
Strengthening Iraq’s air assets would also seem to be a necessity. Earlier this year, the military had just three Cessna
aircraft able to deliver American-made Hellfire missiles, but recently the army was down to two aircraft and was running out of missiles, officials said.
One bright spot, officials say, is Iraq’s elite counterterrorism force, which the United States has been quietly training at the Baghdad airport. Yet since the withdrawal of American troops at the end of 2011, the skills of Iraqi forces have atrophied, American officials said. The Iraqi military is not practiced at maneuvering on the battlefield and has become a “checkpoint army,” a force that is adept at checking identification but not at taking the fight to its enemy, Western officials said.
From the point of view of Iraqi Amy officers, they are in a desperate situation: ill-equipped against an enemy they say they were not trained to fight.
“We don’t have enough intelligence information, we don’t have good air coverage, we are battling very well-trained groups that have good experience in street fights, that are moving fast between cities and villages,” said one commander in Salahuddin.
“Our new volunteers are in big numbers, but they are all untrained, while ISIS are in small numbers, but they are well trained,” he said. “We must bring in real fighters — ISIS fighters have a will to die so they don’t show fear.”
Western officials describe ISIS as a far tougher enemy than the one the American military faced when it was battling Al Qaeda in Iraq from 2004 through 2009. Assessments of the militants’ capabilities vary, but there is a consensus that despite their small numbers they are well equipped, trained and financed. They also appear dedicated to their cause of vanquishing the forces of the modern world and returning the territory they take to an earlier form of Islam.
With an estimated 10,000 fighters, ISIS has been able to seize stores of military equipment and plan small offensive missions that, when coupled with a propaganda campaign, have proved highly effective. When the militants overran Mosul they captured the second-largest ammunition storage site in Iraq, which one expert described as a “Walmart of ammunition.”
The militants also captured 52 artillery pieces, including Howitzers, which were abandoned by Iraqi troops as they fled south. It is unclear if ISIS can figure out how to use them, but if it did so that would add to its already substantial firepower.
So far the fighters seem impervious to combat losses, quickly replenishing their ranks with fighters from Syria, Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, Chechnya and Europe, who appear to be drawn by the successes in Iraq. They have also found recruits by freeing prisoners in brazen prison breaks, like one last July, in which 800 prisoners were helped to escape from Abu Ghraib. During the recent assault on Mosul, ISIS released some 2,500 inmates from Badoosh prison. A number of them were Sunni insurgent operatives and some almost certainly rejoined the fight, although it is impossible to know how many did so.
Added to the worries about ISIS’ assets are fears about growing sectarianism. The Samarra shrine, worshiped by Shiites and whose bombing in February 2006 set off a vicious cycle of bloodletting, is once again under siege. It is well guarded by Shiite militiamen, but the insurgents have lobbed mortars at it recently and any serious damage to it could unleash sectarian forces that would be hard to control.
“For now, we are just trying to protect those Shiite areas,” the commander in Diyala said. “And then we will figure out how to deal with them in the areas they have taken.”
Michael Knights, of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, wrote recently that 60 out of 243 Iraqi Army combat battalions “cannot be accounted for, and all of their equipment is lost.”
American officials said their assessment was that five of the Iraqi Army’s 14 divisions were “combat ineffective,” including the two that were overrun in Mosul. Remnants of shattered units and soldiers who were on leave when the ISIS offensive began have been sent to the military base at Taji, north of Baghdad, to be cobbled together into fresh units. But that, officials and experts underscored, is a process that is going to take time.
“It will be a mammoth task to put these units back together and rearm them,” Mr. Knights said. “Just as important, the defeated army needs to be turned around.”
Many of the American military advisers who are heading to Baghdad will be doing a detailed assessment of the army’s needs, American officials say.
But a measure of the military’s desperation is that its chief assistance now comes from hundreds of thousands of volunteers and a smaller number of highly trained militia members. For army units — and there are a number of them — that are fighting hard, often under difficult circumstances, adding volunteers who have little or no experience has been of questionable benefit. Hundreds of volunteers have been killed or wounded in ambushes on their way to the battlefield, for example. That is not true of the trained militias, which have far fewer fighters but are experienced and highly trained, mostly by the Iranians, and who augment the regular army’s morale, said commanders.
Strengthening Iraq’s air assets would also seem to be a necessity. Earlier this year, the military had just three Cessna
aircraft able to deliver American-made Hellfire missiles, but recently the army was down to two aircraft and was running out of missiles, officials said.One bright spot, officials say, is Iraq’s elite counterterrorism force, which the United States has been quietly training at the Baghdad airport. Yet since the withdrawal of American troops at the end of 2011, the skills of Iraqi forces have atrophied, American officials said. The Iraqi military is not practiced at maneuvering on the battlefield and has become a “checkpoint army,” a force that is adept at checking identification but not at taking the fight to its enemy, Western officials said.
From the point of view of Iraqi Amy officers, they are in a desperate situation: ill-equipped against an enemy they say they were not trained to fight.
“We don’t have enough intelligence information, we don’t have good air coverage, we are battling very well-trained groups that have good experience in street fights, that are moving fast between cities and villages,” said one commander in Salahuddin.
“Our new volunteers are in big numbers, but they are all untrained, while ISIS are in small numbers, but they are well trained,” he said. “We must bring in real fighters — ISIS fighters have a will to die so they don’t show fear.”
Western officials describe ISIS as a far tougher enemy than the one the American military faced when it was battling Al Qaeda in Iraq from 2004 through 2009. Assessments of the militants’ capabilities vary, but there is a consensus that despite their small numbers they are well equipped, trained and financed. They also appear dedicated to their cause of vanquishing the forces of the modern world and returning the territory they take to an earlier form of Islam.
With an estimated 10,000 fighters, ISIS has been able to seize stores of military equipment and plan small offensive missions that, when coupled with a propaganda campaign, have proved highly effective. When the militants overran Mosul they captured the second-largest ammunition storage site in Iraq, which one expert described as a “Walmart of ammunition.”
The militants also captured 52 artillery pieces, including Howitzers, which were abandoned by Iraqi troops as they fled south. It is unclear if ISIS can figure out how to use them, but if it did so that would add to its already substantial firepower.
So far the fighters seem impervious to combat losses, quickly replenishing their ranks with fighters from Syria, Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, Chechnya and Europe, who appear to be drawn by the successes in Iraq. They have also found recruits by freeing prisoners in brazen prison breaks, like one last July, in which 800 prisoners were helped to escape from Abu Ghraib. During the recent assault on Mosul, ISIS released some 2,500 inmates from Badoosh prison. A number of them were Sunni insurgent operatives and some almost certainly rejoined the fight, although it is impossible to know how many did so.
Added to the worries about ISIS’ assets are fears about growing sectarianism. The Samarra shrine, worshiped by Shiites and whose bombing in February 2006 set off a vicious cycle of bloodletting, is once again under siege. It is well guarded by Shiite militiamen, but the insurgents have lobbed mortars at it recently and any serious damage to it could unleash sectarian forces that would be hard to control.
“For now, we are just trying to protect those Shiite areas,” the commander in Diyala said. “And then we will figure out how to deal with them in the areas they have taken.”
Re: West Asia News and Discussions
Chaos in Iraq: A conversation with Senator John McCain and General Jack Keane
Re: West Asia News and Discussions
Nothing to do with China?anmol wrote:from ISIS's Planning Commission:
Just saw Tibet covered, strangely not much touched in Western provinces of China that border Central Asia.
Re: West Asia News and Discussions
X-post from islamism thread
http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/t ... et%20Promo
The lost moral of Islam’s divide
With the exception of the Quran, there are no religious or historical references that the Sunnis and Shias agree on
The Sunni-Shia divide is increasingly engulfing Muslim societies in many parts of the world in spasms of internecine violence. The latest developments in Iraq with the Islamic State of Iraq and [Greater] Syria (ISIS) making rapid advances towards Baghdad are an ominous reflection of the deepening of sectarian animosities within contemporary Islam. The potential impact of the current turbulence will be felt far beyond West Asia and North Africa. The developments also indicate — especially in light of the marginalisation of the Muslim Brotherhood and other mainstream Islamist outfits in Egypt, Syria and to a limited extent in Tunisia — that political Islam or Islamism will now be championed with much more lethal effect by groups that profess allegiance to radical Salafism, such as the ISIS.
Islamism, defined broadly, is an ideological construct based on a political reading of Islam in both its history and textuality. It argues that the primary duty of a Muslim is to strive for the establishment of an Islamic state, without which Islam will remain a ‘house half-built.’ Salafism (or Wahhabism) is a theologically puritanical approach that argues for a literal reading of the scriptures, shunning all accretions in matters of faith and life. What is common between the two, however, is that they both operate on a binary notion of the world.
The coming together of Salafism and Islamism is nothing new as al-Qaeda perfectly represented the merger of the otherwise irreconcilable worldviews of the two radical streams. In fact, Osama bin Laden and Ayman Al-Zawahiri personified this coming together of radical Salafism and uncompromising Islamism. The former’s worldview can be traced to the atavistic theology of the 18th century Saudi theologian-activist Sheikh Mohamed bin Abdul Wahhab, while the latter inherited the nihilistic fanaticism of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood icon Syed Qutub. But it is with the outbreak of civil war in Syria that we saw the ‘coming out’ of this dangerous concoction from its hideouts in Afghanistan, Yemen and North Africa. The giant strides they are now making in Iraq are indicative of the changing contours of Islamism on the one hand and the new-found role that this brand of Islamism invented for itself against the portentous backdrop of the Sunni-Shia divide.
Origin of the divide
The origin of this divide — the principal fault line within Islam — goes back 14 centuries to the very beginning of Islam. Interestingly, there was nothing religious about it at the beginning as it was a purely political dispute over which an entire theological and jurisprudential edifice was superimposed later on in order to canonise and perpetuate it into a distinctive clerical order. At the core of the dispute was an impassioned argument over whether the principle of succession in the nascent Muslim state should be dynastic or meritorious. The majority of Muslims in the early years of the faith chose merit over dynasty and argued that the prophet’s temporal and spiritual successors should be selected on the basis of their competence, seniority, knowledge and experience. A minority disagreed and said the basis of succession should be familial rather than meritorious. They believed the temporal and spiritual leadership of Muslim society should remain confined to the descendants of the prophet forever.
They thought Ali — the younger cousin and son-in-law of the prophet — deserved the honour, as he was not only a staunch companion of the prophet but also his closest family member by virtue of birth and marriage. Shia is an abbreviation for Shia’t Ali, the party of Ali, and is built around the victimhood of the prophet’s family following his death. The Sunnis do not dispute the importance of Ali and do not disparage him in any way; they consider him one of the greatest companions of the prophet along with the others, including the three other caliphs who preceded Ali in the seat of power. In a way, the difference between Sunni and Shia approaches to Ali is comparable to the difference between Islamic and Christian approaches to Jesus Christ. While both the religions converge on the greatness of Jesus as a man of God, they diverge on questions of his divinity and deification. Just as no Muslim will ever disparage Jesus, no Sunni will ever speak ill of Ali. Like in the case of the two Semitic religions, it was the differences and not the commonalities that were given accent throughout history, resulting in an entrenched culture of de-sacralisation and demonisation of the other on both sides. The fact that the two sects chose to follow totally different references in their respective approaches to jurisprudence and theology widened the gulf further over the centuries. With the exception of the Quran, which in any case has been susceptible to multiple and often contradictory interpretations, there are no religious or historical references that the Sunnis and Shias agree on.
Point of agreement
What is most interesting in this context is that both the sects agree on the need for an Islamic political system on earth. While the Islamists on both sides argue for the primacy of an Islamic state, the others express minor disagreements on questions of prioritising an Islamic state over those of building an Islamic society. No known mainstream religious organisation among both the sects rejects the idea of an Islamic majoritarian state as a desired eventuality. There is total consensus among all that justice will flourish only in such a state where the Sharia would replace all other sources and methods of legislation. What about justice for those who belong to other faiths or no faiths is a minor detail glossed over by self-righteous rhetoric.
This brings us to one of the most exasperating paradoxes in Islamic history. While the only consensus that ever existed across the sects in Islam has been on the desirability of (an immediate or eventual) Islamic state governed according to the Sharia, the principal divide of all times in Muslim society happened because there was no clear concept of a state or political system in Islam. It goes without saying that the method of electing the ruler is the most basic part of any political system, the absence of clarity on which triggered the first and foremost split among the Muslims. The festering wounds of that split continue to bleed the community to this day.
The Quran and the Prophet’s rich traditions left the choice of political systems or the nature of the state to the wisdom of the people and their circumstances. The followers, however, persisted with their delusional search for a theocratic utopia, denuding a faith of its humane core in the process. The Quran stressed on persuasion in matters of faith while the Islamists saw coercion (with the state being its ultimate and most legitimate instrument) as the only method for preservation of the faith. Iran will do all it can to stop the ISIS warriors in their tracks. ISIS will be happy to eradicate the Islamic Republic of Iran. But both will marshal the same set of arguments for the establishment and perpetuation of an Islamic state as well as for the disempowerment of each other in their respective spheres of influence.
In Iraq, for instance, Prime Minister Nouri Al-Maliki and his cohorts will be perfectly happy to replicate the Iranian Vilayat-e-Faqih model of state in Iraq and disenfranchise the Sunni minority. The ISIS will be delighted to establish their model of Islamic state and disenfranchise the Shia majority. Both parties will advance the same arguments to justify and Islamise their brutalities. Creation of a hell here in the name of the hereafter is the fundamental objective of all varieties of Islamism, despite their invocation of justice and divine will in every other sentence they write or speak.
(Shajahan Madampat is a cultural critic and commentator.)
http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/t ... et%20Promo
The lost moral of Islam’s divide
With the exception of the Quran, there are no religious or historical references that the Sunnis and Shias agree on
The Sunni-Shia divide is increasingly engulfing Muslim societies in many parts of the world in spasms of internecine violence. The latest developments in Iraq with the Islamic State of Iraq and [Greater] Syria (ISIS) making rapid advances towards Baghdad are an ominous reflection of the deepening of sectarian animosities within contemporary Islam. The potential impact of the current turbulence will be felt far beyond West Asia and North Africa. The developments also indicate — especially in light of the marginalisation of the Muslim Brotherhood and other mainstream Islamist outfits in Egypt, Syria and to a limited extent in Tunisia — that political Islam or Islamism will now be championed with much more lethal effect by groups that profess allegiance to radical Salafism, such as the ISIS.
Islamism, defined broadly, is an ideological construct based on a political reading of Islam in both its history and textuality. It argues that the primary duty of a Muslim is to strive for the establishment of an Islamic state, without which Islam will remain a ‘house half-built.’ Salafism (or Wahhabism) is a theologically puritanical approach that argues for a literal reading of the scriptures, shunning all accretions in matters of faith and life. What is common between the two, however, is that they both operate on a binary notion of the world.
The coming together of Salafism and Islamism is nothing new as al-Qaeda perfectly represented the merger of the otherwise irreconcilable worldviews of the two radical streams. In fact, Osama bin Laden and Ayman Al-Zawahiri personified this coming together of radical Salafism and uncompromising Islamism. The former’s worldview can be traced to the atavistic theology of the 18th century Saudi theologian-activist Sheikh Mohamed bin Abdul Wahhab, while the latter inherited the nihilistic fanaticism of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood icon Syed Qutub. But it is with the outbreak of civil war in Syria that we saw the ‘coming out’ of this dangerous concoction from its hideouts in Afghanistan, Yemen and North Africa. The giant strides they are now making in Iraq are indicative of the changing contours of Islamism on the one hand and the new-found role that this brand of Islamism invented for itself against the portentous backdrop of the Sunni-Shia divide.
Origin of the divide
The origin of this divide — the principal fault line within Islam — goes back 14 centuries to the very beginning of Islam. Interestingly, there was nothing religious about it at the beginning as it was a purely political dispute over which an entire theological and jurisprudential edifice was superimposed later on in order to canonise and perpetuate it into a distinctive clerical order. At the core of the dispute was an impassioned argument over whether the principle of succession in the nascent Muslim state should be dynastic or meritorious. The majority of Muslims in the early years of the faith chose merit over dynasty and argued that the prophet’s temporal and spiritual successors should be selected on the basis of their competence, seniority, knowledge and experience. A minority disagreed and said the basis of succession should be familial rather than meritorious. They believed the temporal and spiritual leadership of Muslim society should remain confined to the descendants of the prophet forever.
They thought Ali — the younger cousin and son-in-law of the prophet — deserved the honour, as he was not only a staunch companion of the prophet but also his closest family member by virtue of birth and marriage. Shia is an abbreviation for Shia’t Ali, the party of Ali, and is built around the victimhood of the prophet’s family following his death. The Sunnis do not dispute the importance of Ali and do not disparage him in any way; they consider him one of the greatest companions of the prophet along with the others, including the three other caliphs who preceded Ali in the seat of power. In a way, the difference between Sunni and Shia approaches to Ali is comparable to the difference between Islamic and Christian approaches to Jesus Christ. While both the religions converge on the greatness of Jesus as a man of God, they diverge on questions of his divinity and deification. Just as no Muslim will ever disparage Jesus, no Sunni will ever speak ill of Ali. Like in the case of the two Semitic religions, it was the differences and not the commonalities that were given accent throughout history, resulting in an entrenched culture of de-sacralisation and demonisation of the other on both sides. The fact that the two sects chose to follow totally different references in their respective approaches to jurisprudence and theology widened the gulf further over the centuries. With the exception of the Quran, which in any case has been susceptible to multiple and often contradictory interpretations, there are no religious or historical references that the Sunnis and Shias agree on.
Point of agreement
What is most interesting in this context is that both the sects agree on the need for an Islamic political system on earth. While the Islamists on both sides argue for the primacy of an Islamic state, the others express minor disagreements on questions of prioritising an Islamic state over those of building an Islamic society. No known mainstream religious organisation among both the sects rejects the idea of an Islamic majoritarian state as a desired eventuality. There is total consensus among all that justice will flourish only in such a state where the Sharia would replace all other sources and methods of legislation. What about justice for those who belong to other faiths or no faiths is a minor detail glossed over by self-righteous rhetoric.
This brings us to one of the most exasperating paradoxes in Islamic history. While the only consensus that ever existed across the sects in Islam has been on the desirability of (an immediate or eventual) Islamic state governed according to the Sharia, the principal divide of all times in Muslim society happened because there was no clear concept of a state or political system in Islam. It goes without saying that the method of electing the ruler is the most basic part of any political system, the absence of clarity on which triggered the first and foremost split among the Muslims. The festering wounds of that split continue to bleed the community to this day.
The Quran and the Prophet’s rich traditions left the choice of political systems or the nature of the state to the wisdom of the people and their circumstances. The followers, however, persisted with their delusional search for a theocratic utopia, denuding a faith of its humane core in the process. The Quran stressed on persuasion in matters of faith while the Islamists saw coercion (with the state being its ultimate and most legitimate instrument) as the only method for preservation of the faith. Iran will do all it can to stop the ISIS warriors in their tracks. ISIS will be happy to eradicate the Islamic Republic of Iran. But both will marshal the same set of arguments for the establishment and perpetuation of an Islamic state as well as for the disempowerment of each other in their respective spheres of influence.
In Iraq, for instance, Prime Minister Nouri Al-Maliki and his cohorts will be perfectly happy to replicate the Iranian Vilayat-e-Faqih model of state in Iraq and disenfranchise the Sunni minority. The ISIS will be delighted to establish their model of Islamic state and disenfranchise the Shia majority. Both parties will advance the same arguments to justify and Islamise their brutalities. Creation of a hell here in the name of the hereafter is the fundamental objective of all varieties of Islamism, despite their invocation of justice and divine will in every other sentence they write or speak.
(Shajahan Madampat is a cultural critic and commentator.)
Re: West Asia News and Discussions
What is the Indian response to any harm done to the 'abducted' Indians by the ISIS? Somehow I don't feel this is going to end very well.
Re: West Asia News and Discussions
probably more oil contracts for good old KSA.
we must after all take care not to 'offend minority sentiments' by reducing and eliminating our dependence on gulf job market by developing internally.
to some extent we are allowed to bark at even the USA / cheen for what they do to spoil our neighbourhood, but KSA has always had zero consequences.
we must after all take care not to 'offend minority sentiments' by reducing and eliminating our dependence on gulf job market by developing internally.
to some extent we are allowed to bark at even the USA / cheen for what they do to spoil our neighbourhood, but KSA has always had zero consequences.
Re: West Asia News and Discussions
Even the brave, bearded army of Arrah would need some time to cover Yindia's vast terrain. Then it would take a while to kill the way-too-many kaffirs there and enslave the wimmens. All this after making short work of the yindoo pipsqueak army, of course.Virendra wrote:Nothing to do with China?anmol wrote:from ISIS's Planning Commission:
Just saw Tibet covered, strangely not much touched in Western provinces of China that border Central Asia.
I am sure China and Russia will get their just desserts in ISIS's next 5-year plan.
Re: West Asia News and Discussions
This should be the Leitmotif of Indian policy in Middle-east and elsewhere dealing with the islamic states. There were some on social media empathizing with Shia sect and how far from the truth they are.Singha wrote:Point of agreement
What is most interesting in this context is that both the sects agree on the need for an Islamic political system on earth.
-
UlanBatori
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 14045
- Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14
Re: West Asia News and Discussions
Wonder if JoKerry is going to Bagdad to act out the final chapter of
fighting to the death at the door of US Embassy as the latest Mahdi comes in with the hacksaw.With Gordon in Khartoum
Re: West Asia News and Discussions
U.S. Embassy in Ankara Headquarter for ISIS War on Iraq – Hariri Insider
http://nsnbc.me/2014/06/22/u-s-embassy- ... i-insider/
http://nsnbc.me/2014/06/22/u-s-embassy- ... i-insider/
Re: West Asia News and Discussions
Singha wrote:once the dust settles on the shia graves, this Takiya will however inevitably end and a power struggle between the political baathists and the ISIS on who should get the ruling mandate . it will be the trans-national and ultra-pure ISIS vs the sunni tribal militias and chieftains. no prizes on guessing who will win the race to prove themselves more pure and undiluted and who has the more $$ and arms.
Bravo Singha garu ! Bravo !
As Fighting Spreads, Sunni Rebels Turn on Each Other, Reports Say
At the same time, the Sunnis reportedly faced their own challenges. An Iraqi security official and witnesses said a deadly gun battle near Kirkuk had broken out between two of the most powerful Sunni militant groups fighting the Shiite-dominated government. The battle pitted the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, which is leading the offensive, against its Baathist allies and left 17 dead, according to the official.
The fighting between Sunni militants near Kirkuk, if confirmed, could pose a challenge to the militant coalition, which was able to advance so quickly into Iraq in part because of the combined forces.
According to the security official, who was in Kirkuk and spoke on the condition of anonymity, the Sunnis battling the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant were from the Men of the Army of Naqshbandia, a group made of former Saddam Hussein loyalists, or Baathists. The two groups are allies of convenience with very different ideologies; the Baathists' nationalistic, Sufi philosophy is completely at odds with the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant's extreme Islamist beliefs.
The battles reportedly took place in Hawija, one of the strongholds of the Naqshbandia, which was formed by former army officers from the ousted government of Saddam Hussein. The security official said the fighting had broken out when the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant tried to disarm the Naqshbandia, but a witness from Hawija said they had been fighting over control of gasoline and oil tanker trucks captured from a refinery at Beiji.
The Naqshbandia group has become a major component of the extremist Sunni coalition, at least partly because of its military experience and the Baath Party's deep roots in the Sunni community.
On its website, the Naqshbandia group denied any problems with its allies. "We deny such news, we are in battle only with the occupiers of Iraq (Iran and the government)," the statement said. "It is clear that the government is doing this to get our army in an internal battle that will take us away from our main goal."
Re: West Asia News and Discussions
makes sense. Maliki shia regime punished for overt and covert support via Iran to assad.gandharva wrote:U.S. Embassy in Ankara Headquarter for ISIS War on Iraq – Hariri Insider
http://nsnbc.me/2014/06/22/u-s-embassy- ... i-insider/
the us seems hell bent on making sunnis the top dogs in mid east. Sunni leaders don't seem to be nationalist at this point...they r either korrupt elites like ksa or Islamists. Nationalism is a grave danger to any western plan ....
Re: West Asia News and Discussions
U.S. Embassy in Ankara Headquarter for ISIS War on Iraq – Hariri Insider
http://nsnbc.me/2014/06/22/u-s-embassy- ... i-insider/
-------------
UB some posts back in this you wondered if BRF is the only place that says ISIS is US incubated entitiy.
http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 7#p1676117
Here is Haririri saying same thing...
BRF ahead as usual and all that etc. etc...
http://nsnbc.me/2014/06/22/u-s-embassy- ... i-insider/
-------------
UB some posts back in this you wondered if BRF is the only place that says ISIS is US incubated entitiy.
http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 7#p1676117
Here is Haririri saying same thing...
BRF ahead as usual and all that etc. etc...
-
UlanBatori
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 14045
- Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14
Re: West Asia News and Discussions
So the White House is explicitly funding and backing the worst form of Islamic extremism? Sounds like impeachment time...
Iran-Contra pales into insignificance in comparison: this is directly supporting the people responsible for the deaths of over 4500 American soldiers and traumatizing over 250,000.
Wonder if there are any mainstream-media talking-heads who will ask this question flat out to the WHOTUS and SD. And report it on the nightly news.
If this is true, then all CTs about Diego Garcia/MH270 come to the forefront again.
Iran-Contra pales into insignificance in comparison: this is directly supporting the people responsible for the deaths of over 4500 American soldiers and traumatizing over 250,000.
Wonder if there are any mainstream-media talking-heads who will ask this question flat out to the WHOTUS and SD. And report it on the nightly news.
If this is true, then all CTs about Diego Garcia/MH270 come to the forefront again.
Re: West Asia News and Discussions
From the above link ...ramana wrote:U.S. Embassy in Ankara Headquarter for ISIS War on Iraq – Hariri Insiderhttp://nsnbc.me/2014/06/22/u-s-embassy- ... insider/me posts back in this you wondered if BRF is the only place that says ISIS is US incubated entitiy.Here is Haririri saying same thing...BRF ahead as usual and all that etc. etc...
“Who exactly pressured Obama? I don’t know who delivered the message to Obama. I suspect Kerry had a word. It’s more important from where the message came, Kissinger, Scowcroft, Nuland and the Keagan clan, Stavridis, Petreaus, Riccardione, and the neo-con crowd at the [Atlantic] Council. … As far as I know ´someone` told Obama that he’d better pressure al-Maliki to go along with Kurdish autonomy by November or else. Who exactly ´advised` Obama is not as important as the fact that those people let him know that they would go ahead, with, or without him”.
Is not this Auntlunatic Kaunncil the Adda of our own Track 2 Tattus talking To Terrorist ISISHITS next door ?
-
UlanBatori
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 14045
- Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14
Re: West Asia News and Discussions
ACUS is probably a PRC-funded entity - a way to channel PLA funds to SD babus. Way back circa 2002 I remember their Prejident getting his undies in a knot when certain ppl I know, suggested that we would all write to Con-Gress exposing the number and ranks of the PLA serving officers on their payroll.
Re: West Asia News and Discussions
ISIS is US creation. It is very good for US in the long run. In any model you run this is going to help US to keep its dollah in prominence even if it is just a printed hot stuff with no real value behind it. Why would anyone impeach or call it treachery. 4000 dead brings another 50 years of domination.UlanBatori wrote:So the White House is explicitly funding and backing the worst form of Islamic extremism? Sounds like impeachment time...
Iran-Contra pales into insignificance in comparison: this is directly supporting the people responsible for the deaths of over 4500 American soldiers and traumatizing over 250,000.
Wonder if there are any mainstream-media talking-heads who will ask this question flat out to the WHOTUS and SD. And report it on the nightly news.
If this is true, then all CTs about Diego Garcia/MH270 come to the forefront again.
It was drilling Iran oil until Shah is overthrown via Islamic revolution. End of a fifty year cycle. Second 50 years was Sunni oil using princelets of Saudi. Now when princelets are the problem create a Islamic revolution of Sunni variety. It needs more power to engulf Saudi, Syria, Egypt etc. Shia oil will be more nice for the next 50yrs.
When we think in these lines, folks keep thinking of backfiring etc. What backfiring at all happened in the past 100 years. Few Americans were kidnapped here and there. Few terror attach and major one was 911. It may have cost-ed a max of 10,000 American lives in over 70 years but it got prosperity to multi-generations of Americans. This is a good plot to change the order in West Asia again. Saudi was making a miniscule noise of selling oil with other denominations.
Re: West Asia News and Discussions
Shia organisation offers young boys Rs 40 lakh to fight ISIS militants in Iraq: Reports
http://www.news18.com/news/uttar-prades ... 20963.html
http://www.news18.com/news/uttar-prades ... 20963.html
Re: West Asia News and Discussions
This sound familiar?
Now replace India with Iraq/Vietnam and it becomes clear what the GOTUS is doing."[Clive] gave peace, security, prosperity and such liberty as the case allowed of to millions of Indians, who had for centuries been the prey of oppression
Re: West Asia News and Discussions
Judge who ordered Saddam's death executed by ISIS
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/worl ... 103790.cms
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/worl ... 103790.cms
Re: West Asia News and Discussions
The emotional and psychological impact on the world's Sunnis of the proclamation of new Caliphate in Syria-Iraq should not be under-estimated.
Re: West Asia News and Discussions
What is that exactly. Though most sunnis around the world may not express, it is a victory/enjoyable moment for the Sunnis.A_Gupta wrote:The emotional and psychological impact on the world's Sunnis of the proclamation of new Caliphate in Syria-Iraq should not be under-estimated.
-
UlanBatori
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 14045
- Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14
Re: West Asia News and Discussions
They could send Hilary Clinton as the first US Ambassador to the Caliphate, with Mr & Mrs Mays and Paco to provide able support.
Re: West Asia News and Discussions
Daniel Pipes, president of the Middle East Forum and a former official in the U.S. departments of State and Defense, briefed the Middle East Forum in a conference call on June 16, 2014.
The implications of the fall of the key city of Mosul to the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIS), a designated terror group, can be understood in three ways:
Iranian influence over the Iraqi government: Shiite Prime Minister Nouri Maliki's oppression of Sunnis set the stage for the vastly outnumbered ISIS militia to take Mosul with little resistance from Iraqi government forces, bringing the Sunni-Shiite conflict to a new height.
Dissolution of the modern Middle Eastern political order: The post-WWI European-created Middle Eastern system based on territorial states has been transformed into a regional battlefield with national governments controlling only portions of their territories.
Limits of U.S. influence and defeat of American policy: The folly of George W. Bush's campaign to remake the Middle East is now fully exposed as the U.S. failed to invest the time and effort necessary to solidify its gains prior to the 2011 withdrawal.
Washington should protect its interests in the Middle East, not attempt to fix the region. In the short term, it should let its adversaries and enemies battle it out among themselves with neither side winning. Over the long run, America should endeavor to end the kind of political systems that produced despots like Hafez Assad and Saddam Hussein. The large territorial states built on the ruins of the Ottoman Empire have run their course and should be replaced with smaller ethnic states that are more in tune with regional realities. An independent Kurdistan in northern Iraq would be far less oppressive and aggressive than an Iraqi or Syrian state. So would an Alawite state in northwest Syria, a Sunni state in Iraq's triangle, and a Druze state in southwest Syria.
Until that happens, America should channel its energies to remedying the humanitarian disaster occasioned by the Arab upheavals and to diminishing the flow of arms from Turkey, Russia, Iran, and China. This may help turn the upheavals' tragic short-term consequences to a catalyst for a long term regional transformation.
Summary account by Marilyn Stern, Associate Fellow with the Middle East Forum.
Re: West Asia News and Discussions
Yes, remarkable, isn't it, that at the scenes of this fighting, people come to lack food, water, medicine, petrolbut there is never any shortage of arms.
Re: West Asia News and Discussions
This ISIS was created for Assad Syria. They got no where. So they were let loose on Shia Iraq. Or else they would have eaten up KSA and the other humpty dumpties.
Re: West Asia News and Discussions
Its Mujahideen of Afghan redux. In that case after Soviets left they were directed to Cashmere. In this case the Iraq's Sunni areas are best bet to be engaged. In the end all the puppets and princelets have to fall to create a grand sunni-Islamic revolution. It started with Egypt, Tunasia and failed in Syria but can comeback later. Meanwhile why to idle just take over the Iraq.ramana wrote:This ISIS was created for Assad Syria. They got no where. So they were let loose on Shia Iraq. Or else they would have eaten up KSA and the other humpty dumpties.
We may all be alive to see Ralph peters map coming true.
Re: West Asia News and Discussions
it is headed in this direction per ralph peters map
Re: West Asia News and Discussions
I think all of this talk about Iraq breaking up is premature. I remember these very same "experts" saying back in 2012 that Assad would fall, Syria would break up, etc. BTW, the Syrian Army (SAA), which has repeatedly whipped the jihadists, is largely Sunni.
I recommend reading "Syrian Perspective." www.syrianperspective.com
I don't care for the editor's sense of humor, but he's been proven right repeatedly over the past two years.
I recommend reading "Syrian Perspective." www.syrianperspective.com
I don't care for the editor's sense of humor, but he's been proven right repeatedly over the past two years.
Re: West Asia News and Discussions
Calls for Tony B.Liar to quit as ME Peace envoy,thanks to his catastrophic legacy as co-architect of this global mil-diplomatic-humanitarian catastrophe. In fact BLiar should be put on trial at the Hague as a war criminal.
Diplomats call on Tony Blair to quit as Middle East peace envoy over Iraq legacy
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world ... 58299.html
Diplomats call on Tony Blair to quit as Middle East peace envoy over Iraq legacy
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world ... 58299.html
Ha!Ha! Tony BLIar's "credibility" is now in tatters after events in Iraq have blown away everything that he attempted to put into place.A takeover of Iraqi oil and establishment of a western puppet regime,whose puppet has turned out to be a sectarian cretin,partly responsible for the ISIS blitzkrieg. One wonders why Dubya Bush of "mission accomplished" fame is so silent these days.Has he forgotten where Iraq is? His attack dog,"Dick-the-Pr*ck" Cheney has broken wind,justifying the invasion,now looking like a pell mell retreat with special forces being sent not to fight ISIS but to organise the flight from the US embassy! Saigon redux?Tony Blair is facing calls to step down from his role as Middle East envoy after a scathing letter signed by former British ambassadors and politicians that accuses him of trying to “absolve himself” of responsibility for the crisis in Iraq.
Kunal Dutta Monday 23 June 2014
The letter, with signatories including his former ambassador to Iran Sir Richard Dalton and former London Mayor Ken Livingstone – comes weeks after he published an essay in which he claimed that the 2003 invasion was not to blame for the current crisis.
But the letter rejects this, saying: “We believe that Mr Blair, as a vociferous advocate of the invasion, must accept a degree of responsibility for its consequences.”
The letter, addressed to foreign ministers in the US, Russia and the EU as well as UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, adds that the former prime minister’s achievement as Middle East envoy are “negligible” .
Read more: Isis jihadists 'have recruited at least 1,500 young Britons'
Islamists sweep towards Baghdad
Blair admits 'removal of Saddam' partly to blame for uprising
A spokesperson for Mr Blair’s office dismissed the letter, saying: “These are all people viscerally opposed to Tony Blair with absolutely no credibility in relation to him whatsoever.”
Tony Blair should be sacked as Middle East envoy, say former ambassadors
Former UK prime minister is tainted by Iraq war and his achievements for quartet are negligible, signatories of letter say
Nicholas Watt, chief political correspondent
The Guardian, Monday 23 June 2014
Tony Blair and Mahmood Abbas
'The impression of activity created by [Blair's] high-profile appointment has hindered genuine progress towards a lasting peace,' the letter says. Photograph: Peter Macdiarmid/Getty Images
A group of former British ambassadors have joined a campaign calling for Tony Blair to be removed from his role as Middle East envoy after his recent attempt to "absolve himself" of responsibility for the crisis in Iraq.
The letter, organised by the makers of George Galloway's film The Killing of Tony Blair, says the 2003 invasion of Iraq was to blame for the rise of "fundamentalist terrorism in a land where none existed previously".
The signatories, led by Blair's former ambassador to Iran Sir Richard Dalton, describe the former prime minister's achievements as Middle East envoy as "negligible".
Other former diplomats to sign the letter are Oliver Miles, who was ambassador to Libya when diplomatic relations were severed in 1984 after the killing of WPC Yvonne Fletcher, and Christopher Long, ambassador to Egypt between 1992-95.
Other signatories include former London mayor Ken Livingstone, the human rights barrister Michael Mansfield QC, the former Liberal Democrat peer Lady Tonge – who resigned her party's whip in 2012 after declaring that Israel would not last forever – the former Tory prisons minister Crispin Blunt, George Galloway, the Green MP Caroline Lucas and the Daily Telegraph columnist Peter Oborne.
A spokesperson for Blair dismissed the letter on the grounds that it had been drawn up by an "alliance of hard-right and hard-left" whose members are "viscerally opposed" to the former prime minister.
The letter, written before Friday's seventh anniversary of Blair's appointment as the representative of the "quartet" on the Middle East, says the former prime minister's achievement as Middle East envoy are "negligible" and he is guilty of seeking to please the Israelis. The quartet consists of the UN, the EU, Russia and the US.
The letter says: "We, like many, are appalled by Iraq's descent into a sectarian conflict that threatens its very existence as a nation, as well as the security of its neighbours. We are also dismayed, however, at Tony Blair's recent attempts to absolve himself of any responsibility for the current crisis by isolating it from the legacy of the Iraq war.
"In reality, the invasion and occupation of Iraq had been a disaster long before the recent gains made by the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (Isis). The sectarian conflict responsible for much of the war's reprehensible human cost was caused in part by the occupying forces' division of the country's political system along sectarian lines."
It added: "In order to justify the invasion, Tony Blair misled the British people by claiming that Saddam had links to al-Qaida. In the wake of recent events it is a cruel irony for the people of Iraq that perhaps the invasion's most enduring legacy has been the rise of fundamentalist terrorism in a land where none existed previously. We believe that Mr Blair, as a vociferous advocate of the invasion, must accept a degree of responsibility for its consequences."
The signatories say that Blair has failed to achieve any breakthrough as the quartet's representative, though they acknowledge his limited mandate that involves building the governance of the Palestinian Authority.
The letter says: "It is our view that, after seven years, Mr Blair's achievements as Envoy are negligible, even within his narrow mandate of promoting Palestinian economic development. Furthermore, the impression of activity created by his high-profile appointment has hindered genuine progress towards a lasting peace.
"Seven years on there are still over 500 checkpoints and roadblocks in the West Bank. The Gaza Strip, severely damaged by Israel's 2009 bombing, remains in a humanitarian crisis, with 80% of its population reliant on foreign aid for survival. Israel continues to build settlements that are illegal under international law. According to the Palestinian Authority's former Chief Negotiator, Nabil Shaath, Tony Blair has "achieved so very little because of his gross efforts to please the Israelis".
The letter is also critical of Blair's business interests. "Tony Blair's conduct in his private pursuits also calls into question his suitability for the role. Mr Blair has been widely criticised for a lack of transparency in the way he organises his business dealings and personal finances, and for blurring the lines between his public position as Envoy and his private roles at Tony Blair Associates and the investment bank JPMorgan Chase."
The letter is addressed to John Kerry, the US secretary of state; Sergei Lavrov, the Russian foreign minister; Ban Ki-moon, the UN secretary general; and Cathy Ashton, the EU's foreign policy chief.
The retired ambassador Oliver Miles, who noted in 2009 that two members of the Chilcot inquiry into the Iraq war "are Jewish", said: "Tony Blair is the wrong man in the wrong job. The wrong man because he is identified with the war in Iraq; criticism has concentrated on his misreading of intelligence and his lies, but equally important was his failure to plan for the peace, with the result we see today. The wrong job because patching up the Palestine economy sounds good but avoids the real issue, the repression and misery of the occupation; that is what the quartet should tackle. Seven years on it's time to blow the whistle."
Crispin Blunt said: "It's time to end Tony Blair's personal calvary as quartet envoy following his disastrous statesmanship in office on the Middle East. His role as envoy was neutered politically almost as soon as it began, and is now a distraction from the increasingly desperate need for a comprehensive peace deal."
George Galloway said: "I have begun the process of parliamentary impeachment of Tony Blair. The House of Commons will vote on that later this year. His position is collapsing along with the state of Iraq he helped destroy. His tenure as Quartet envoy is now untenable"
A spokesperson for Blair said: "These are all people viscerally opposed to Tony Blair with absolutely no credibility in relation to him whatsoever. Their attack is neither surprising nor newsworthy. They include the alliance of hard right and hard left views which he has fought against all his political life. Of course he completely disagrees with them over the Middle East. He believes passionately in the two state solution but also believes that can only be achieved by a negotiation with Israel."
The spokeperson said of Blair's role as the Middle East envoy: "The truth, and anybody who knows anything about the situation in respect of Palestine knows this, is that transformational change is impossible unless it goes hand in hand with a political process. There was hope that this could progress with the recent US led talks which were underpinned by a hugely ambitious economic plan spearheaded by Mr Blair."
The spokesperson said of the criticisms of Blair's business interests: "Mr Blair has done no work for JP Morgan in the Middle East – he is the chair of their International Advisory Council – where he provides advice on global political issues."
Re: West Asia News and Discussions
Looking at the Ralph peters map of the ME, does it not appear that the west knew that Iraq was going to trifurcate into three states as early as the eve of invasion of Iraq. So their predictions are on the dot here. At the very least it is clear that there are thinkers among the neo con thinkers who are as sharp as any in the world.
Question is what about the other shoe in pakistan and ksa. When will it drop and what will it take for it to come to fruition. And what makes them Jordan will survive these cataclysmic changes.
Several years ago I had said that once the islamic world gets it's act together israel will find it very difficult to survive the changes. The storm that will envelop israel will not be unlike the mameluke invasion of the levant under sultan baybars who wiped out the crusader strongholds in these regions.
Question is what about the other shoe in pakistan and ksa. When will it drop and what will it take for it to come to fruition. And what makes them Jordan will survive these cataclysmic changes.
Several years ago I had said that once the islamic world gets it's act together israel will find it very difficult to survive the changes. The storm that will envelop israel will not be unlike the mameluke invasion of the levant under sultan baybars who wiped out the crusader strongholds in these regions.
Re: West Asia News and Discussions
Israel is looking to me more and more like the doomed kingdom of vijaynagar, powerful and seemingly indestructible but doomed to failure once the islamic states got their ducks in a row.
Re: West Asia News and Discussions
the idea probably is have the two powerful formations sunni-shia fight each other down to weakness, while western trained elites control the oil and gas on both sides deftly. israel will be kept funded as a crusader and squatter on hallowed ground just to keep the khujli alive and tie up the western shias from other adventures.
the kurds i feel are the real UK style munna in the region. well funded, well armed and very pro-american from the looks of it, as only america can guarantee the turks wont come across again and put boots on their throat.
the kurds i feel are the real UK style munna in the region. well funded, well armed and very pro-american from the looks of it, as only america can guarantee the turks wont come across again and put boots on their throat.