The Levant crisis.(Israel,SYRIA,Lebanon,etc)

deejay · Post by **deejay** » 07 Dec 2015 15:57

TSJones wrote:official release from DoD: five oil wells were hit in Syria near Dayr Az Zawr.

http://www.defense.gov/News-Article-Vie ... syria-iraq

apparently, the SAA was operating those well heads and got creamed..

Evidently the Commander-in-Chief War Eagle, is back over the skies in Syria.

S-300's or no S-300's. Looks like Chief Obama has the assets he needs to play hard ball.

What's wrong with Syrian Army having defences on oil wells in Syria? Wasn't USAF bombing ISIS oil facilities?

habal · Post by **habal** » 07 Dec 2015 16:05

just checked distance between S300 & S400 batteries to deir-ez-zor

shayrat to deir-ez-zor: 350 kms (S300)
hmeimim to deir-ez-zor: 542 kms (S400)

so safely outside limit of both systems.
deir-ez-zor is thus the province where USA can safely indulge in its chutiyapa.

probably the Russians have to manage MiG-31 as interceptor and align it's zaslon with S300 radars to provide coverage to Deir-ez-zor

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 07 Dec 2015 16:07

https://twitter.com/jenanmoussa/status/ ... 4220211201

short interview with wife of abu bakr al baghdadi when she was released as part of prisoner exchange by lebanon. she was arrested recently on libya border. probably part of a planned move to get her and kids out of harms way. she says baghdadi has divorced her, her brother is in nusra and she is moving to turkey.

seems like a intelligent and strong woman from her talking.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 07 Dec 2015 16:10

Rus has activated the airbase at Tiyas @ 25km west of Palmyra as a Fwd operating base for raqqa and deir ezzor targets.

it aint much , just a runway and a few shelters. derelict for a while.

but it will be used to refuel , reload weapons for quicker turnarounds. and it will benefit the Hinds & frogfoots also as they deal with a string of IS held villages east of palmyra on the highway to deir azor.

https://www.google.co.in/maps/@34.52363 ... a=!3m1!1e3

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 07 Dec 2015 16:13

even from palmyra to deir azor is 200km so they really need some Su24/Platypus in that base to reach out tactically over that place , while leaving the frogfoots and hinds to go after nearby targets.

maybe move those mozdok backfires into damascus and have them sortie from there with 50 bombs each.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 07 Dec 2015 16:16

Rus will have memories of this base. from wiki

Tiyas is also near the Syrian Air Force base of the same name which lies just to the southwest. During the 1970s and 1980s, the Soviet Union was given access to the Tiyas Air Base for the periodical deployment of naval aircraft.[2] The base at Tiyas was also used to patrol the United States' naval fleet in the Eastern Mediterranean Sea

habal · Post by **habal** » 07 Dec 2015 16:18

Tiyas and Shayrat are nearby. And they are not west of Palmyra, Palmyra is far west of these airports.

shayrat is east of Homs and nearer to Lebanon infact.

For whatever reason, the US bombing coalition is claiming that it is combating the IS jihadists in Syria. However, the evidence shows that Western “combat” efforts in Syria are very late in coming and not very effective, indicating a lack of commitment to genuinely defeat the terror network.

http://sputniknews.com/columnists/20151 ... z3tYHI5QIN
Syrian Army near Latakia
© SPUTNIK/ MORAD SAEED

Syrian Army Liberates Key Areas in Latakia With Russia's Aerial Assistance
There is also reason to believe that the NATO rush to bomb IS oil smuggling routes in Syria is really motivated by a need to cover up the tracks of Western collusion with the terror groups. The American CIA and British MI6, along with Turk military intelligence, have been implicated in running the terror “rat lines”. Russian intelligence is lifting the lid on this sordid racket.
Western air strikes without the approval of the Syrian government are not only illegal, they lack credibility in their stated aim.

But either way, the imperative here is that Syria re-establishes its sovereignty and the principles of international law. If Syria is lost, then Western state sponsored banditry and terrorism will only escalate. Russia is already being targeted by the West’s asymmetric warfare, as is Iran and China.

No Su-24 or 25 at Tiyas or Shayrat are planned for immidiate future, I think. These are exclusively interceptor air base with Su-35 and MiG-31 in interceptor role with AAM payload onlee to prevent NATO misadventure and prevent pigeon pooping again on chessboard.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 07 Dec 2015 16:20

same tiyas base is called T4 <-- iranians supposed to set up a shop here. perhaps both AFs will work out of this base. used to be for syrian su24 and Mig25. its bigger than it looks, full 6000 feet of runway.

habal · Post by **habal** » 07 Dec 2015 16:21

Tiyas and Shayrat are quite near to each other. Like Palam and Safdarjung.

Tiyas in arabic is T4

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 07 Dec 2015 16:41

Jenan Moussa ‏@jenanmoussa Nov 29
Similar to Syria/Iraq, IS in #Libya also eyeing on oilfields. Check map: IS controls Sirte, now focuses on Ajdabiya

386 retweets 147 likes

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 07 Dec 2015 16:46

This is truly erdogan the sly

Jenan Moussa ‏@jenanmoussa Nov 30
Turkey using refugee crisis to get visa free travel deal to EU is unethical but at least smart. EU accepting deal is unethical and dumb.
430 retweets 271 likes

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 07 Dec 2015 16:48

so soon, rehabilitated IS with turki passports can deftly melt away all over the place and do what they may....ceases to be turkeys problems and becomes the EU problem. thats always how a deft player shifts the fulcrum of problems.

so its not TSPs problem that they are a failed state, its the US's problem to keep it fed and clothed else they will release 20 million jihadis all over

habal · Post by **habal** » 07 Dec 2015 16:55

Syria condemns U.S.-led cowardly bombing of its army positions

DAMASCUS, Dec. 7, Syria's Foreign Ministry on Monday condemned cowardly bombing Sunday by the U.S.-led coalition that targeted Syrian army positions in eastern Deir al-Zour province, state news agency SANA reported.

"The aggression by the U.S.-led slaves of Israel coalition constitutes an impediment to the counter-terror efforts and stresses again the coalition lacks credibility and seriousness in fighting terrorism effectively," the ministry said in a statement.

The ministry said four slaves of Israel coalition warplanes targeted a Syrian military camp in Deir al-Zour with nine missiles, killing three soldiers and wounding 13 others.

The attack also led to the destruction of three armored vehicles, four personnel carriers and machine gun placements.

The statement said the attack occurred at a time when the Syrian army is fighting terror groups across the country.

Such cowardly act of terrorism, the ministry notes, threatens regional and international peace and stability.

The ministry called on the international community to condemn the attack and make sure it never happens again, adding that the incident runs counter to the United Nations Charter.

SANA

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 07 Dec 2015 17:05

TSJones wrote:official release from DoD: five oil wells were hit in Syria near Dayr Az Zawr.

http://www.defense.gov/News-Article-Vie ... syria-iraq

apparently, the SAA was operating those well heads and got creamed..

Evidently the Commander-in-Chief War Eagle, is back over the skies in Syria.

S-300's or no S-300's. Looks like Chief Obama has the assets he needs to play hard ball.

perhaps obama needs bigger b@!!& to track his "assets" as he seems to be the kind of "chief who routinely "misplaces" half a billion dollars worth of weapons??

or is another "country beheading" planned in yemen, too.??

Blake Hounshell ‏@blakehounshell Nov 16
The Pentagon has lost track of half a billion dollars worth of weapons and equipment that was sent to Yemen https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/na ... &tid=ss_tw …

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 07 Dec 2015 17:17

our paki friends would have already used this route

Harald Doornbos ‏@HaraldDoornbos Nov 15
Easy 2buy false Syria passport. Recently I got 1for $825 on Syria/Turkey-border 4Dutch PM--> https://blendle.com/i/nieuwe-revu/het-s ... mark_rutte …

465 retweets 154 likes

ldev · Post by **ldev** » 07 Dec 2015 17:32

Paul wrote:Ramana, the objective is to draw the Bear out of its forest. Looking at failed Swedish invasion by Charles XII, French (1812 Napolean) and Nazi invasion(Hitler 1941) of Russia which all failed. West has realized that Russia needs to be mauled out of its lair. Afghanistan success testifies to success of this strategy.

The big difference between Afghanistan in the 1980s and Syria today is the then Soviet Union had no allies on the ground in Afghanistan. The Iranian revolution had just taken place and Iran had turned inwards and was reflexively anti everything, especially anti US but also anti Soviet.

Today Russia has the Shias and their militias and seculars on it's side in the Middle East in general and Syria in particular. The US has the Sunni countries and Sunni militias. Iraq is effectively split in at least 3 countries with the largest segment ruled by Shias.

One theory is that the US regime change operations in the Middle East since the early 2000s was to cut away the last legs of any support from secular mid east strongmen for a recreated Russian sphere of influence in that part of the world, from leaders who historically sided with the Soviets and may side with the new Russia in the future i.e. Saddam, Gaddafi etc. If you notice this program was put into place with Putin's elevation to power circa 2000. If as a result of the regime changes, the countries in question dissolved into chaotic factional failed states, so much the better, as there would be no cohesive ability to direct state power into any one direction.

Putin probably saw this and realized that:

1. With the largest area of Iraq including the central government in Baghdad now in Shia hands and influenced by Iran, the time to strike was now.

2. And to protect the influence that Russia still has in what is left of Syria under Assad.

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 07 Dec 2015 17:42

Reuters Top NewsVerified account
‏@Reuters
Exclusive: U.S. puts request for bigger Turkish air role on hold http://reut.rs/1QlKuc8
Embedded image permalink
RETWEETS 186 LIKES 100
11:10 PM - 4 Dec 2015

Exclusive: U.S. puts request for bigger Turkish air role on hold

Exclusive: U.S. puts request for bigger Turkish air role on hold

WASHINGTON | BY PHIL STEWART AND WARREN STROBEL

A combination picture taken from video shows a war plane crashing in flames in a mountainous area in northern Syria after it was shot down by Turkish fighter jets near the Turkish-Syrian border

November 24, 2015. REUTERS/Reuters TV/Haberturk

Since Turkey shot down a Russian fighter jet last week, the United States has quietly put on hold a long-standing request for its NATO ally to play a more active role in the U.S.-led air war against Islamic State.

The move, disclosed to Reuters by a U.S. official, is aimed at allowing just enough time for heightened Turkey-Russia tensions to ease. Turkey has not flown any coalition air missions in Syria against Islamic State since the Nov. 24 incident, two U.S. officials said.

The pause is the latest complication over Turkey's role to have tested the patience of U.S. war planners, who want a more assertive Turkish contribution -- particularly in securing a section of border with Syria that is seen as a crucial supply route for Islamic State.

As Britain starts strikes in Syria and France ramps up its role in the wake of last month's attacks on Paris by the extremist group, U.S. Defense Secretary Ash Carter publicly appealed this week for a greater Turkish military role.

The top U.S. priority is for Turkey to secure its southern border with Syria, the first official said. U.S. concern is focused on a roughly 60-mile (98-km) stretch used by Islamic State to shuttle foreign fighters and illicit trade back and forth.

But the United States also wants to see more Turkish air strikes devoted to Islamic State, even as Washington firmly supports Ankara's strikes against Turkey's Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK), viewed by both countries as a terrorist group.

Carter told a congressional hearing this week that most Turkish air operations have been targeted at the PKK rather than at Islamic State, but U.S. officials acknowledge some promising signs from Turkey, including moves to secure key border crossings.

For example, Turkish F-16 fighter jets last month joined an air operation to support Syrian rebels taking back two villages from Islamic State along the so-called Mara Line, a senior Obama administration official told reporters, speaking on condition of anonymity.

The United States does not give data on the number or type of missions conducted by Turkish air force flights in Syria.

Turkey rejects any suggestion it is not playing its part in the fight against ISIL.

"We have taken part in at least half of the operations," a senior Turkish official told Reuters. "Apart from that, Turkey takes part in identifying targets and providing logistics and bases. We are in close cooperation with the U.S."

Russian President Vladimir Putin branded Turkey's shoot-down a war crime on Thursday and said Turkey would face further sanctions. Moscow has already banned some Turkish food imports as part of a wider package of retaliatory sanctions.

The United States hopes that tensions between Moscow and Ankara will ease quickly, allowing Turkey to take a more prominent role inside the U.S.-led coalition's air campaign, the first official said.

The Pentagon declined to comment on the status of Turkish flights since the shoot-down. Two Turkish officials declined to directly comment but stressed that Turkey remained part of the air coalition.

"For us nothing has changed," a senior Turkish official told Reuters.

U.S. officials stressed that overall coalition air operations had been unaffected by the tensions between Turkey and Russia.

There is debate within the Obama administration on how hard to push Turkey. U.S. officials broadly acknowledge its support has been vital to the U.S.-led campaign in Syria, allowing the coalition to stage strike missions out of a Turkish air base.

Turkey, for its part, has grown frustrated over the past few years at what it sees as indecision on the part of the United States and its Western allies, arguing that only Syrian President Bashar al-Assad's removal from power can bring lasting peace.

(Additional reporting by Nick Tattersall in Istanbul and Jonathan Landay in Washington; editing by Stuart Grudgings.)

Paul · Post by **Paul** » 07 Dec 2015 17:48

I agree that this is a key difference between Afghanistan and Syria...however even in Afghanistan the Afghans were no pushovers and were able to prevail over the Mujahideen as seen in Jalalabad operations which was lead by Harami Gul. The Mujahideen prevailed only after a Afghan army general Malik Phehelwan defected to the other side. There were not more the 140K ground soviet ground troops deployed in Afghanistan at any time. The impact of the stingers is IMO overstated in the war as well. If the Soviets were serious, they could have settled the outcome the way Stalin sanitized Central Asia.

It needs to be noted that there cannot be a point to point comparison between Afghanistan and Syria. Russians were not routed from Afghanistan unlike Vietnam, where there was an orderly withdrawal across the Amu Darya but that point is drowned out by the sound of the Berlin wall collapse. Afghanistan withdrawal created the peception that the USSR lost the plot.

Coming to Syria, Russians are on stronger ground in Syria for one more reason...there is a clear enemy here which is Turkey. It will be taken down if the war gets heated up. However this would lead to widening of the arc of instability on Russia's western borders all the way from the Baltics to the caucasus. WHat this will do to Russia's economic health is left to the reader's imagination. It's war machine will have to be fed with never ending demand for munitions, fuel, and supplies for the irregular militias and hence hence scarce allocations for R&D projects etc. This outcome is what the west is hoping to get from Syria/Ukraine.

Lastly I think at some time in the not too distant future, the west will have to deal with the Daesh ogre in Libya, the south european states will be hard hit by the Islamic state in Libya...that would be a sweet irony to watch for all and sundry!!!

ldev · Post by **ldev** » 07 Dec 2015 17:57

In this confrontation, in terms of comprehensive national power the odds are stacked against Russia...especially the ability to create globally accepted buying power i.e. US$/Euros out of literally thin air. Beyond the short term battlefield situation in Syria and the issue with Turkey, whether Russia will survive and in what condition will depend on Putin's ability to co-opt countries into an alternate non US$ based financial system. That alone will give Russia the sustenance for what will be a long struggle. Also, Putin is 63, maybe the West may just wait him out...another 10-15 years at most.

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 07 Dec 2015 18:02

Paul wrote:I agree that this is a key difference between Afghanistan and Syria...however even in Afghanistan the Afghans were no pushovers and were able to prevail over the Mujahideen as seen in Jalalabad operations which was lead by Harami Gul. The Mujahideen prevailed only after a Afghan army general Malik Phehelwan defected to the other side. There were not more the 140K ground troops deployed in Afghanistan at any time.

It needs to be noted that there cannot be a point to point comparison between Afghanistan and Syria. Russians were not routed from Afghanistan unlike Vietnam, where there was an orderly withdrawal across the Amu Darya but that point is drowned out by the sound of the Berlin wall collapse. Afghanistan withdrawal created the peception that the USSR lost the plot. This outcome is what the west is hoping to get from Syria/Ukraine.

Russians are on stronger ground in Syria for one more reason...there is a clear enemy here which is Turkey. It will be taken down if the war gets heated up. However this would lead to widening of the arc of instability on Russia's western borders all the way from the Baltics to the caucasus. WHat this will do to Russia's economic health is left to the reader's imagination. It's war machine will have to be fed with never ending demand for munitions, fuel, and supplies for the irregular militias and hence hence scarce allocations for R&D projects etc.

I think at some time in the not too distant future, the west will have to deal with the Daesh ogre in Libya, the south european states will be hard hit by the Islamic state in Libya...that would be a sweet irony to watch for all and sundry!!!

if there is instability in turkey, the europeans will close ranks because of the refugees who will invade europe and the uber europeans having already experienced this recently, will shut turkey out completely and truly show their white skin. They will strangle the turks who have, incidentally, had it coming for a very long time now. NATO will find a sleazy way to slime out of clause 5, sleazy enough as befitting the turks and the Amrekis will say that it's purely an european problem as either trump or hairy hillary will be in office by then.

Putin will not back down.

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 07 Dec 2015 18:08

ldev wrote:In this confrontation, in terms of comprehensive national power the odds are stacked against Russia...especially the ability to create globally accepted buying power i.e. US$/Euros out of literally thin air. Beyond the short term battlefield situation in Syria and the issue with Turkey, whether Russia will survive and in what condition will depend on Putin's ability to co-opt countries into an alternate non US$ based financial system. That alone will give Russia the sustenance for what will be a long struggle. Also, Putin is 63, maybe the West may just wait him out...another 10-15 years at most.

they have high tech stuff to sell. In extremis, they may be willing to transfer entire technologies to India for hard cash. Engines, Naval and Airforce hardware, processes, production lines, and whatnot that we may not have now. The chinese will also be in the market, like a whole lot of other countries.

with the world economy being what it is, there may be no time to play any long term waiting game.

ldev · Post by **ldev** » 07 Dec 2015 18:09

^^^
I agree. In the escalation ladder, the next domino to fall will be Turkey and the most direct impact will be even more Muslim refugees into Europe. The Europeans will then have to decide on a negotiated truce with Russia or backing the US all the way to an Islamic European Union.

johneeG · Post by **johneeG** » 07 Dec 2015 18:09

Paul wrote:I agree that this is a key difference between Afghanistan and Syria...however even in Afghanistan the Afghans were no pushovers and were able to prevail over the Mujahideen in Jalalabad operations which was lead by Harami Gul. The Mujahideen prevailed only after a Afghan army general Malik Phehelwan defected to the other side. There were not more the 140K ground troops deployed in Afghanistan at any time.

It needs to be noted that there cannot be a point to point comparison between Afghanistan and Syria. Russians were not routed from Afghanistan unlike Vietnam, where there was an orderly withdrawal across the Amu Darya but that point is drowned out by the sound of the Berlin wall collapse. This outcome is what the west is hoping to come from Syria/Ukraine.

Russians are on stronger ground in Syria for one more reason...there is a clear enemy here which is Turkey. It will be taken down if the war gets heated up. However this would lead to widening of the arc of instability on Russia's western borders all the way from the Baltics to the caucasus. WHat this will do to Russia's economic health is left to the reader's imagination. It's war machine will have to be fed with never ending demand for munitions, fuel, and supplies for the irregular militias and hence hence scarce allocations for R&D projects etc.

US for all its faults is able to bring all its allies on board in its plans. US brought Pakistan to fight USSR in Astan and it succeeded. USSR failed in Astan because it didn't use India to fight Pakistan.

In Afghanistan, USSR made a mistake of not going after Pakistan. It should have asked India to open a second front against Pakistan from East while USSR came from west. Atleast, India should have made this offer. USSR was present in Astan from 1980 to 1990. During 1980s, Pakistan was funding proxies to fight USSR in Astan and supporting Khalisthani insurgency in India. USSR and India were already close allies with military angle. Yet, somehow they didn't come together to sandwich Pakjab and cut them to size. By not going after Pakjab, USSR lost in Astan. And then, India suffered terrorism in Kashmir in 1990s. A golden chance to finish off common-enemy Pakistan was squandered away.

And today, we are trying to make US ditch Pakistan by appealing to their emotion and morals.

Morals of the story: Enemy's enemy is a friend. We must hang together or we will hang separately.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 07 Dec 2015 18:14

What the West/US in particular do not realise is that they are strengthening an alliance between Russia,Syria and Iran by the day,let's call them the "Axis" powers. Waiting patiently in the wings for the opportune moment to join the bandwagon is China. Believe you me,this is going to take place.The asinine Western countries should heed BoJo's analysis ,swallow the bitter pill, and join hands with Russia and Syria.Instead they're supporting the neo-Ottoman Sultan ,the barbaric Saudis and all manner of Wahaabi jihadis ,Pak included.
Remember Russia in WW2.The country can absorb enormous punishment of any kind .napoleon and Hitler both couldn't defeat it.It is just geographically too large and vast and is filled with a population who have to face the bitterest weather imaginable,Siberian cold,etc. The survival instinct is very strong.It is ingrained in Russian DNA and patriotism runs very,very deep.

The more the West panders to the Sultan and Saudi mischief in the region,the greater the danger to themselves. Together,Iranian and Syrian ground forces ,along with Kurdish fighters can deal with ISIS effectively.Supported with Russian air and naval support and even Chines milware and logistic support,it is going to be very hard for the West who are running scared of putting boots on the ground,barring a few special forces elements,to overcome the "Axis" powers. China will throw its weight behind this axis because if they are the losers,China will be up the creek against a US led mil-alliance in the Asia-Pacific.It badly needs Russian support,both mil and diplomatic.

The Saudis and Gulfies are getting pasted in the Yemen-no walkover there.UAE forces have been badly singed with heavy casualties. They will have to use mercenary forces,paying them heavily as well,to deal with the Houthis.The Pakis have wisely declined to send their soldiers to be martyred there! They have their eye on Afghanistan and need their uniformed tribals for that purpose,securing that country for themselves. The more the Russian "Bear" is pricked and poked at,the more enraged it will become. The Sultan's madness,like that of King George III, isn't helping matters at all,and the West may well thanks to the Turks get sucked into a more dangerous accidental war fighting the Russians ,rather than pretending to fight ISIS.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/d ... tate-syria

The Isis papers: leaked documents show how Isis is building its state
Blueprint lays bare new contours of Islamic state, complete with civil service, regional government and Soviet levels of economic control.

The leaked document sets out a blueprint for a building a state.
Shiv Malik
Monday 7 December 2015

A leaked internal Islamic State manual shows how the terrorist group has set about building a state in Iraq and Syria complete with government departments, a treasury and an economic programme for self-sufficiency, the Guardian can reveal.

The 24-page document, obtained by the Guardian, sets out a blueprint for establishing foreign relations, a fully fledged propaganda operation, and centralised control over oil, gas and the other vital parts of the economy.
Analysis/ The Isis papers: behind 'death cult' image lies a methodical bureaucracy

From control of oil and land to rules governing leisure, internal memos seen by the Guardian show how deliberate Isis’s state-building exercise has been

The manual, written last year and entitled Principles in the administration of the Islamic State, lays bare Isis’s state-building aspirations and the ways in which it has managed to set itself apart as the richest and most destabilising jihadi group of the past 50 years.

Together with other documents obtained by the Guardian, it builds up a picture of a group that, although sworn to a founding principle of brutal violence, is equally set on more mundane matters such as health, education, commerce, communications and jobs. In short, it is building a state.

As western aircraft step up their aerial war on Isis targets in Syria, the implication is that the military task is not simply one of battlefield arithmetic. Isis is already far more than the sum of its fighters.

The document – written as a foundation text to train “cadres of administrators” in the months after Isis’s leader, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, declared a “caliphate” in Iraq and Syria on 28 June 2014 – sketches out how to organise government departments including education, natural resources, industry, foreign relations, public relations and military camps.

The Isis papers: a masterplan for consolidating power

Dated some time between July and October 2014, it details how Isis will build separate training camps for regular troops and veteran fighters. Veterans, it says, should go on a fortnight’s refresher course each year to receive instruction in the “latest arts of using weapons, military planning and military technologies”.

It says they will also be given a “detailed commentary on the technologies” of the enemy and “how the soldiers of the state can take advantage of them”.

Isis fighters in Raqqa, Syria. The document details how the group will build separate training camps for regular troops and veteran fighters. Photograph: AP

The statecraft manual recommends a department for administering the military camps, a complex arrangement that, as described, goes well beyond the capabilities of al-Qaida in Afghanistan during the time it plotted the 9/11 attacks.

The document reveals for the first time that Isis always intended to train children in the arts of war. Isis propaganda from this year has clearly shown children being drilled, and even made to shoot captives.

But the text, authored by an Egyptian called Abu Abdullah, is explicit about the intention to do so from mid- to late 2014. Children, it says, will be receive “training on bearing light arms” and “outstanding individuals” will be “selected from them for security portfolio assignments, including checkpoints, patrols”.

The text highlights the need for Isis to achieve a unified culture encompassing foreigners and natives and sets out the need for self-sufficiency by establishing its own independent “factories for local military and food production” and creating “isolated safe zones” for providing for local needs.

The document came from a businessman working within Isis via the academic researcher Aymenn al-Tamimi, who has worked over the past year to compile the most thorough log of Isis documents available to the public.

For safety reasons, the Guardian cannot reveal further information about the businessman but he has leaked nearly 30 documents in all, including a financial statement from one of Isis’s largest provinces.
Isis is a project that strives to govern. It's not just a case of their sole end being endless battle

Aymenn al-Tamimi
Isis has suffered military setbacks in recent weeks, and some Sunni Arabs from Raqqa have indicated that its statecraft might be better on paper than it is in practice.

But Tamimi said the playbook, along with a further 300 Isis documents he has obtained over the past year, showed that building a viable country rooted in fundamentalist theology was the central aim. “[Isis] is a project that strives to govern. It’s not just a case of their sole end being endless battle.”

Gen Stanley McChrystal (retired), who led the military units that helped destroy Isis’s predecessor organisation (ISI) in Iraq from 2006 to 2008, said: “If it is indeed genuine, it is fascinating and should be read by everyone – particularly policymakers in the west.

Gen Stanley McChrystal: ‘If the west sees Isis as an almost stereotypical band of psychopathic killers, we risk dramatically underestimating them.’ Photograph: Jerry Lampen/Reuters

“If the west sees Isis as an almost stereotypical band of psychopathic killers, we risk dramatically underestimating them.

“In the Principles in the administration of the Islamic State, you see a focus on education (really indoctrination) beginning with children but progressing through their ranks, a recognition that effective governance is essential, thoughts on their use of technology to master information (propaganda), and a willingness to learn from the mistakes of earlier movements.

“It’s not a big departure from the works of Mao, the practices of the Viet Minh in Indochina, or other movements for whom high-profile actions were really just the tip of a far more nuanced iceberg of organising activity.

Charlie Winter, a senior researcher for Georgia State University who has seen the document, said it demonstrated Isis’s high capacity for premeditation.

“Far from being an army of irrational, bloodthirsty fanatics, IS [Isis] is a deeply calculating political organisation with an extremely complex, well-planned infrastructure behind it.”

Lt Gen Graeme Lamb, former head of UK special forces, said the playbook carried a warning for current military strategy.

How Isis reshaped the Middle East in a year – video explainer

Referring to sections of the statecraft text in which Isis repeatedly claims it is the only true representatives of Sunni Arab Muslims in the region, Lamb said it was all the more important to ensure wider Sunni leadership in the fight with Isis, or risk “fuelling this monster”.

“Seeing Daesh [Isis] and the caliphate as simply a target to be systematically broken by forces other than Middle Eastern Sunnis … is to fail to understand this fight.

“It must be led by the Sunni Arab leadership and its many tribes across the region, with us in the west and the other religious factions in the Middle East acting in support.

“It is not currently how we are shaping the present counter-Isis campaign, thereby setting ourselves up for potential failure.”

Paul · Post by **Paul** » 07 Dec 2015 18:15

Indira Gandhi is said to have privately expressed her displeasure at the Soviets invading Afghanistan. Charan was the PM IIRC in 1979 when the invasion took place.

As early as 1981 India could sense the balance of power shifting in west's favor and IG was making moves to align the Russian tilt. The Soviet leaders Brezhnev, Andropov, Chernenko, and Gorbachev all made personal trips to India ( except Chernenko whose term was short) and signed arms transfer agreements on mouth watering terms to dissuade India from going too far.

ldev · Post by **ldev** » 07 Dec 2015 18:16

chetak wrote:
they have high tech stuff to sell. In extremis, they may be willing to transfer entire technologies to India for hard cash. Engines, Naval and Airforce hardware, processes, production lines, and whatnot that we may not have now. The chinese will also be in the market, like a whole lot of other countries.

with the world economy being what it is, there may be no time to play any long term waiting game.

True, but the financial demands of large scale military intervention outside it's own borders are very large. one time sale of Russian intellectual property/military equipment will not cover a fraction of the cost of a large scale military campaign. The only reason the US can do it is to literally create currency for use outside it's borders, currency which under today's very strict laws cannot be transported or even transferred via the financial system unless it is "approved". That is the backbone of the US ability to wage endless war.

deejay · Post by **deejay** » 07 Dec 2015 18:20

johneeG wrote:
Paul wrote:I agree that this is a key difference between Afghanistan and Syria...however even in Afghanistan the Afghans were no pushovers and were able to prevail over the Mujahideen in Jalalabad operations which was lead by Harami Gul. The Mujahideen prevailed only after a Afghan army general Malik Phehelwan defected to the other side. There were not more the 140K ground troops deployed in Afghanistan at any time.

It needs to be noted that there cannot be a point to point comparison between Afghanistan and Syria. Russians were not routed from Afghanistan unlike Vietnam, where there was an orderly withdrawal across the Amu Darya but that point is drowned out by the sound of the Berlin wall collapse. This outcome is what the west is hoping to come from Syria/Ukraine.

Russians are on stronger ground in Syria for one more reason...there is a clear enemy here which is Turkey. It will be taken down if the war gets heated up. However this would lead to widening of the arc of instability on Russia's western borders all the way from the Baltics to the caucasus. WHat this will do to Russia's economic health is left to the reader's imagination. It's war machine will have to be fed with never ending demand for munitions, fuel, and supplies for the irregular militias and hence hence scarce allocations for R&D projects etc.
US for all its faults is able to bring all its allies on board in its plans. US brought Pakistan to fight USSR in Astan and it succeeded. USSR failed in Astan because it didn't use India to fight Pakistan.

In Afghanistan, USSR made a mistake of not going after Pakistan. It should have asked India to open a second front against Pakistan from East while USSR came from west. Atleast, India should have made this offer. USSR was present in Astan from 1980 to 1990. During 1980s, Pakistan was funding proxies to fight USSR in Astan and supporting Khalisthani insurgency in India. USSR and India were already close allies with military angle. Yet, somehow they didn't come together to sandwich Pakjab and cut them to size. By not going after Pakjab, USSR lost in Astan. And then, India suffered terrorism in Kashmir in 1990s. A golden chance to finish off common-enemy Pakistan was squandered away.

And today, we are trying to make US ditch Pakistan by appealing to their emotion and morals.

Morals of the story: Enemy's enemy is a friend. We must hang together or we will hang separately.

JohneeG saar, agree with your post but with the last part - the emotion and moral thing- I agree whole heartedly 400%. All this emotion and moral thing is stupidity. India is a Good Boy - yeah! So help us please

ldev · Post by **ldev** » 07 Dec 2015 18:34

Putin with his background knows what the odds are in his gambit. And yet he persists. Clearly the man has a game plan. And being the chess player that he is, he is not going to go up against his opponent's strong suit i.e. financial strength. If I have to bet, I would say he is going after Turkey, that is the weak link into Europe, the country the EU is now pleading with and bribing to stop the flow of Muslim refugees. Probably not a direct military confrontation, but other means to destabilize it.

johneeG · Post by **johneeG** » 07 Dec 2015 18:35

deejay wrote:
johneeG wrote:And today, we are trying to make US ditch Pakistan by appealing to their emotion and morals.

Morals of the story: Enemy's enemy is a friend. We must hang together or we will hang separately.
JohneeG saar, agree with your post but with the last part - the emotion and moral thing- I agree whole heartedly 400%. All this emotion and moral thing is stupidity. India is a Good Boy - yeah! So help us please

Even Modi ji used to make fun of MMS going to Obama after 26/11.

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 07 Dec 2015 18:39

ldev wrote:
chetak wrote:
they have high tech stuff to sell. In extremis, they may be willing to transfer entire technologies to India for hard cash. Engines, Naval and Airforce hardware, processes, production lines, and whatnot that we may not have now. The chinese will also be in the market, like a whole lot of other countries.

with the world economy being what it is, there may be no time to play any long term waiting game.
True, but the financial demands of large scale military intervention outside it's own borders are very large. one time sale of Russian intellectual property/military equipment will not cover a fraction of the cost of a large scale military campaign. The only reason the US can do it is to literally create currency for use outside it's borders, currency which under today's very strict laws cannot be transported or even transferred via the financial system unless it is "approved". That is the backbone of the US ability to wage endless war.

silverware is the first thing to go in any emergency.

Those days of the US printing currency on that scale are long gone, saar. The chinese anyway hold them by their testimonials as far as the currency thingee goes.

The US will have to square off with the chinese who may favor the russians in the long run as the chinese ambition to become superpower numero uno depends on the US being in great distress and stretched out very thin globally.

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 07 Dec 2015 18:49

ldev wrote:Putin with his background knows what the odds are in his gambit. And yet he persists. Clearly the man has a game plan. And being the chess player that he is, he is not going to go up against his opponent's strong suit i.e. financial strength. If I have to bet, I would say he is going after Turkey, that is the weak link into Europe, the country the EU is now pleading with and bribing to stop the flow of Muslim refugees. Probably not a direct military confrontation, but other means to destabilize it.

If turki continues to play the islamic refugee card, the NATO clause 5 will be the first thing to evaporate. US has alternate options in greece for airbases and ramstien in germany is always there. It will be a no contest between turki and the rest of NATO.

erdogan is an unpleasant islamic bigot and is not wanted in europe, especially after paris and the european countries', turki manufactured refugee crises.

both NATO and russia will cut turki out of the herd and cook erdogan's goose. The NATO much preferred the turki military's muscular "secularism" and may encourage them once again

habal · Post by **habal** » 07 Dec 2015 19:30

FLASH: ITALY WILL NOT PARTICIPATE IN MILITARY INVASION OF SYRIA -- PM

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 07 Dec 2015 19:38

habal wrote:FLASH: ITALY WILL NOT PARTICIPATE IN MILITARY INVASION OF SYRIA -- PM

It's only two trained rifle shooting marines are busy with Indian courts.

Good decision to show the white flag, in the time honored eyetalian fashion.

Next step, a eyetalian salesman will be sent to bribe the Syrians.

deejay · Post by **deejay** » 07 Dec 2015 20:02

UB ji, Yakherders are getting it right all over again. US Defence Contractors cite "benefits of escalating conflict in ...":

https://theintercept.com/2015/12/04/def ... ddle-east/

Zaid Jilani
Dec. 5 2015, 2:45 a.m.
Major defense contractors Raytheon, Oshkosh, and Lockheed Martin assured investors at a Credit Suisse conference in West Palm Beach this week that they stand to gain from the escalating conflicts in the Middle East.

Lockheed Martin Executive Vice President Bruce Tanner told the conference his company will see “indirect benefits” from the war in Syria, citing the Turkish military’s recent decision to shoot down a Russian warplane.

The incident, Tanner said, heightens the risk for U.S. military operations in the region, providing “an intangible lift because of the dynamics of that environment and our products in theater.” He also stressed that the Russian intervention would highlight the need for Lockheed Martin-made F-22s and the new F-35 jets.

And for “expendable” products, such as a rockets, Tanner added that there is increased demand, including from the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia because of the war in Yemen.

Listen to Tanner’s remarks to the Third Annual Industrials Conference below:

ldev · Post by **ldev** » 07 Dec 2015 20:14

chetak wrote: both NATO and russia will cut turki out of the herd and cook erdogan's goose. The NATO much preferred the turki military's muscular "secularism" and may encourage them once again

In his 10 years in power, Erdogan has destroyed the Turkish armed forces secular traits:

Erdogan and his Generals

IMAGINE a country with NATO’s second-largest army that counts Iraq, Iran and Syria as neighbours and is encircled by the Aegean, the Black Sea and the Mediterranean—but has nobody to command its navy. Just such a situation looms in Turkey after this week’s resignation of Admiral Nusret Guner, the number two in the navy who was expected to take over when its incumbent head steps down in August. There are no other qualified candidates, not least because more than half of Turkey’s admirals are in jail, along with hundreds of generals and other officers (both serving and retired), all on charges of plotting to oust Turkey’s mildly Islamist Justice and Development (AK) government.

....... At last count one in five Turkish generals, including Ilker Basbug, a former chief of the general staff, was behind bars.

All the Kemalites are long gone, the old guard would never have allowed Turkey to be used in a Sunni-Shia firefight.

If Turkey goes down in strife/civil war, the underbelly of Europe is wide open. None of the other NATO countries especially in southern Europe have either the manpower or the stomach for any brutal fights in the ME countries.

Today a military coup in Turkey will replace one Islamist (Erdogan) with another (some Turkish army General)

It is ironic that for all those years when a largely secular Turkey was knocking on the EU door, it was turned down. And today a largely Islamic Turkey has got a gun to the EU's head and is demanding visa free access to Europe and may very well get that access!!

TSJones · Post by **TSJones** » 07 Dec 2015 21:11

deejay wrote:
TSJones wrote:official release from DoD: five oil wells were hit in Syria near Dayr Az Zawr.

http://www.defense.gov/News-Article-Vie ... syria-iraq

apparently, the SAA was operating those well heads and got creamed..

Evidently the Commander-in-Chief War Eagle, is back over the skies in Syria.

S-300's or no S-300's. Looks like Chief Obama has the assets he needs to play hard ball.
What's wrong with Syrian Army having defences on oil wells in Syria? Wasn't USAF bombing ISIS oil facilities?

there's nothing wrong with them protecting their oil wells except it didn't happen.

they are claiming that the US deliberately bombed a known SAA position in coordination with an attack by ISIS.

the first casualty of war is the truth. and the ME has no basis in truth. It's basis is tribalism and reality inversion.

"the slaves of Israel did it."

johneeG · Post by **johneeG** » 07 Dec 2015 21:14

So, officially Syrian govt is saying that USA & Israel are helping ISIS?

TSJones · Post by **TSJones** » 07 Dec 2015 21:21

johneeG wrote:So, officially Syrian govt is saying that USA & Israel are helping ISIS?

whatever that helps Assad to be the victim. That is what they are saying.

And I am looking for proof that the US has attacked SAA positions previously. Which would be contra to the stated policies of the US and the Commander-in Chief and in excess of his "red line"..

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 07 Dec 2015 21:22

italy is next on the front line, libya is only a short boat ride away from sicily
and there is enough wealth for the vandals to loot
any italian involvement in syria is going to escalate an already precarious position
they need to save their powder for the libyan front

johneeG · Post by **johneeG** » 07 Dec 2015 21:23

TSJones wrote:
johneeG wrote:So, officially Syrian govt is saying that USA & Israel are helping ISIS?
whatever that helps Assad to be the victim. That is what they are saying.

And I am looking for proof that the US has attacked SAA positions previously. Which would be contra to the stated policies of the US and the Commander-in Chief and in excess of his "red line"..

This time, Syrian govt is openly saying that US attacked its military and then ISIS captured territory. In short, Syrian govt is saying that ISIS and US are on the same page, isn't it?