Now they are trying to sell you Hillary who has Huma at her side. A direct conduit to extremist Muslim Brotherhood forces intent on the destruction of our country.
Is it possible that Obama signal ISIS they would not be stopped by our air force? ... Think about it. They are not stupid to line up like the photo shows on Drudge just so that our air force could play target practice.
These guys, ISIS, are interesting. They're currently at war with al Qaeda, Syrian Kurds, Iraqi Kurds, the Syrian government and the Iraqi government. And they appear to be advancing on most fronts.
If what I read in the British papers are correct, they've got 17,000 fights and now control an area bigger (and richer) than the nation of Jordan. Increasingly they're attacking in company and battalion strength.
At this point, they're not a terrorist group, they're a small but very successful army. I'm suspecting they and their leader, some guy named al Baghdadi, are more interested in what they can rule than in bombing some, say, mall in America.
ISIS wants to create a caliphate in Iraq and Syria - a large country form which it can launch attacks on America, Europe and probably Israel.
The caliphate will be ISIS only, All others, including all other Muslim sects, will be (are being) killed. They are brutal. There are news reports this evening of them beheading thousands, shooting tens of thousands, and nailing living people - other Muslims - to crosses to die. They hate the west, and want it destroyed. They also hate the Turks because Ataturk abolished rule by calphiate in 1924 in favor a democratized government. Good luck Turkey.
Many of the most radical want the end of the world, as they believe that that will harken the twelfth and final Imam, who will rule an Islamic universe.
A shorthand to understand the type of person in ISIS is to think of an amoral, evil, paranoid schizophrenic psychotic with high-grade weapons and utterly no sense of right and wrong. Satan.
Haz, I'm finding the reports of them killing tens of thousands hard to believe. Do they really have enough forces to hold that large an area and kill on the scale of a Hitler, Stalin or Mao?
And good luck to them if they take on the Turks, who are a more numerous people, and historically much more accomplished. Plus theyll have a nuclear Iran to deal with soon enough.
All Republicans concerned that Obama isn't doing enough to protect (our?) world empire abroad are welcome to lead a fighting force of their own to, you know, "project power" and whatnot. Just make sure it's billed as a freelance sort of thing. Thanks -
Haz, that makes them look like a typical Muslim run country.
But this thing is great. If we rush to the Iraq government's aid, we will be siding with Bashar Assad and the Ayatollahs of Iran in order to go after the world's best killers of al Qaeda.
Simply fucking outstanding. I'm thinking Obama's natural indecisive incompetence make work to the US's ultimate advantage here.
Dang. If we can't let them get away with things like that in Syria or Iraq then what's North Korea's excuse for not being invaded yet?
This movement of weirdos in ski masks and semi-automatics, I'm afraid they're going to crop up from time to time. It's part of a spasm of immaturity in a part of the world 6 centuries of civilization behind the rest.
But when you step in to correct them, that's a form of parenting that requires a long-term commitment.
Better to keep a distance generally (not always) while they crawl around and throw tantrums. If they step on our toes we can kick them, but seeking to control their maldevelopment is a full-time task, pretty much thankless, costs a fortune and doesn't really get us much further than where we were.
Letting them grow up on their own usually just the best course. And if they don't, then deal with them then.
The more I read today the more I am of the opinion to stay out of it.
If we decide to save the government of Iraq that we left behind, we will be allying ourselves with Ba'athists, Ayatollahs and al Qaeda. I'm thinking that somewhere along the line out foreign policy has jumped the shark.
Icepick said... At this point, they're not a terrorist group, they're a small but very successful army. I'm suspecting they and their leader, some guy named al Baghdadi, are more interested in what they can rule than in bombing some, say, mall in America.
In other words they are rational actors advancing their own interests. Now there's a surprise.
Ritmo thinks it's all very funny, this concern about his Messiah's foulups.
Can't wait to see his reaction if somebody drives an SUV full of TNT into his gated community.
Icepick said...
Haz, I'm finding the reports of them killing tens of thousands hard to believe. Do they really have enough forces to hold that large an area and kill on the scale of a Hitler, Stalin or Mao?
Like the SS in the Soviet Union, there are probably plenty of homegrown crazies willing to help.
The more I read today the more I am of the opinion to stay out of it.
We may be able to now, but, as Haz notes, these guys don't sound like they're going to stop at the Dardanelles.
They're not going to get to the fucking Dardanelles. You think the Turks are going to roll over for a bunch of Arab camel fuckers? Hardly.
Look at the demographics of the region, and then look at its history. They can't go much farther into Turkey than they have, or they will awaken the proverbial sleeping giant.
Iran isn't going to care for them much, either, and they'll likely have the bomb in a few years.
The Kurds in Iraq look to be a tough nut to crack, too.
ISIS has decided on an actual war of conquest. That means taking land and ruling it. Which will cut down on their will and ability to do much else.
Want to stop the next terrorist attack? Fine. Then do something to prevent it, instead of going to war on the side of our enemies. Shit, at this stage we share more enemies with ISIS than we do with our 'friends' in the region.
Icepick -- ISIS has 17,000 fighters? I thought the number was 7,000 -- that's what the Guardian says, and I've seen that figure elsewhere.
Oh, and its leader "believes that the world's Muslims should live under one Islamic state ruled by sharia law, the first step of which is establishing a caliphate spanning Syria and Iraq." No way getting there could ever endanger the U.S., right?
So many of our fellow Americans -- and our allies -- sacrificed so much to bring stability to Iraq. A few years ago, against all odds, it looked like they did it. They -- not me, not the President -- earned that.
Now it's all dissolving. The people of Iraq are fleeing in fear. It's all going down the drain.
Before someone goes off: I was against that war in the beginning. But once in, we had to do what we could to win it -- for our soldiers, and for the people whose land we invaded.
Assassination attempt On 26 October 2005, a US warplane struck a suspected insurgent safehouse near the Syrian border in an attempt to kill al-Baghdadi.
It seems unlikely that they would attempt to assassinate someone they already had in custody.
I don't think it fair to say Obama ordered his release. It was part of on-the-ground operations in Iraq, and all was pretty confusing, with some detention camps closing down (here's Wikipedia on the camp he was in), new ones set up, etc.
Plus this in the linked Telegraph article:
"Why such a ferocious individual was deemed fit for release in 2009 is not known. One possible explanation is that he was one of thousands of suspected insurgents granted amnesty as the US began its draw down in Iraq. Another, though, is that rather like Keyser Söze, the enigmatic crimelord in the film The Usual Suspects, he may actually be several different people.
'We either arrested or killed a man of that name about half a dozen times, he is like a wraith who keeps reappearing, and I am not sure where fact and fiction meet,' said Lieutenant-General Sir Graeme Lamb, a former British special forces commander who helped US efforts against al-Qaeda in Iraq. 'There are those who want to promote the idea that this man is invincible, when it may actually be several people using the same nom de guerre'.”
If there's a conflict between Wiki and anybody else, Wiki is more often wrong.
Lydia said...
I don't think it fair to say Obama ordered his release
On his watch. If this guy was that dangerous, he was probably informed.
As your quote says, "One possible explanation is that he was one of thousands of suspected insurgents granted amnesty as the US began its draw down in Iraq."
Lydia, they've got 7,000 in one country and 10,000 in the other. I forget which country, Syria or Iraq, has which amount. I'll try to link to the map I saw earlier when my wife goes to bed and I can get on my main computer.
Admittedly, the stakes of a successful conclusion in Iraq, are not as high as they were during the cold war.
However, imagine how the cold war, would have turned out, if both parties, once in the White House would not have follow in each others footsteps.
Yes, there may have been disparate degrees of emphasis as to how to conduct it, but, when push came to shove, both parties where committed to the idea that we needed to, at the very least face them.
My bigleapitocious conclusion that Obama may have signal ISIS to take Iraq has no takers on Twitter.
Is it that shocking to conclude that Obama would actively seek to undermine whatever lay in store regarding a Bush 43 legacy?
Remember, they, the democrats made Bush and Iraq one and the same.
If he, Obama, could not legitimately claim credit for Iraq's success, what business would he have preserving it?
I realize that in order to believe something like that, you would have to first conclude that Obama dislikes this country... intensely and immensely as he does his political opponents.
Lem, I tend to favor the easiest solution, which is that Obama is a hard-core leftist, and is indecisive, disinterested and incompetent as a leader. I think he's just fucking up. As pointed out, he and his Administration were eager to claim success for Iraq at the end of 2011. Two and a half years later....
It was not a very good idea for the Obama administration to arm the rebels in Syria. I have an idea that the a lot of the weapons and vehicles used for this incursion into Iraq are from what we gave the Syrian rebels.
Lydia, the map stated 10,000 in Iraq and 7,000 in Syria. It's buried in the info for those two countries. If they're doing it with less, they're even more impressive.
Just looked at the map; those legends are terribly unclear in their wording. In any case, most every source I've read puts ISIS's fighting force at around 7,000.
As to why it's been able to do so much damage with so few, it may be because "its numbers in Iraq appear to have been bolstered by other groups, including local Sunni militants and Ba'ath nationalists particularly in Tikrit."
59 comments:
We will be hit hard within the next couple years or so.
We have no intelligence now. Obama just droned all of them. No interrogations.
Maybe if the MB didn't have access to the White House and the head of the CIA wasn't Muslim.......
Maybe they'll just blow it all on sex and booze.
That is exactly right.
Now they are trying to sell you Hillary who has Huma at her side. A direct conduit to extremist Muslim Brotherhood forces intent on the destruction of our country.
Is it possible that Obama signal ISIS they would not be stopped by our air force? ... Think about it. They are not stupid to line up like the photo shows on Drudge just so that our air force could play target practice.
The Obama that freed top Taliban would.
Is it treason yet?
Look at that truck conboy photo on Drudge and tell me what does it remind you of.
Maybe if the MB didn't have access to the White House and the head of the CIA wasn't Muslim...….
St. Joseph of the Palisades HS is a madrassa?
Get ready for Saigon + Benghazi + the French and Indian War.
The Choom Gang has refused State Department personnel requests to leave Baghdad.
It took, what, six months from the time Obama backed down in regards tot the Ukraine until ISIS began its acquisition of Iraq?
Projecting is never a deterrent.
SOMEONE didn't get the memo.
C'mon folks, are we going to have more meetings here?
And this one too. Someone is not reading my memos, and I don't like that.
How did the ISIS know they would not become another 1991 Highway of Death? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highway_of_Death …
Are you sure George Clooney and Mark Wahlberg did not steal it?
I thought the conboy was posting onv every thread over here? Just sayn'
These guys, ISIS, are interesting. They're currently at war with al Qaeda, Syrian Kurds, Iraqi Kurds, the Syrian government and the Iraqi government. And they appear to be advancing on most fronts.
If what I read in the British papers are correct, they've got 17,000 fights and now control an area bigger (and richer) than the nation of Jordan. Increasingly they're attacking in company and battalion strength.
At this point, they're not a terrorist group, they're a small but very successful army. I'm suspecting they and their leader, some guy named al Baghdadi, are more interested in what they can rule than in bombing some, say, mall in America.
ISIS wants to create a caliphate in Iraq and Syria - a large country form which it can launch attacks on America, Europe and probably Israel.
The caliphate will be ISIS only, All others, including all other Muslim sects, will be (are being) killed. They are brutal. There are news reports this evening of them beheading thousands, shooting tens of thousands, and nailing living people - other Muslims - to crosses to die. They hate the west, and want it destroyed. They also hate the Turks because Ataturk abolished rule by calphiate in 1924 in favor a democratized government. Good luck Turkey.
Many of the most radical want the end of the world, as they believe that that will harken the twelfth and final Imam, who will rule an Islamic universe.
A shorthand to understand the type of person in ISIS is to think of an amoral, evil, paranoid schizophrenic psychotic with high-grade weapons and utterly no sense of right and wrong. Satan.
Well, their sense of right and wrong is justified by whether it gets them what they want.
Kind of like communists.
Or Democrats.
Haz, I'm finding the reports of them killing tens of thousands hard to believe. Do they really have enough forces to hold that large an area and kill on the scale of a Hitler, Stalin or Mao?
And good luck to them if they take on the Turks, who are a more numerous people, and historically much more accomplished. Plus theyll have a nuclear Iran to deal with soon enough.
All Republicans concerned that Obama isn't doing enough to protect (our?) world empire abroad are welcome to lead a fighting force of their own to, you know, "project power" and whatnot. Just make sure it's billed as a freelance sort of thing. Thanks -
What if a multinational war was held, and nobody showed up?
Here is what ISIS does for minor crimes in Syria.
link
Haz, that makes them look like a typical Muslim run country.
But this thing is great. If we rush to the Iraq government's aid, we will be siding with Bashar Assad and the Ayatollahs of Iran in order to go after the world's best killers of al Qaeda.
Simply fucking outstanding. I'm thinking Obama's natural indecisive incompetence make work to the US's ultimate advantage here.
Dang. If we can't let them get away with things like that in Syria or Iraq then what's North Korea's excuse for not being invaded yet?
This movement of weirdos in ski masks and semi-automatics, I'm afraid they're going to crop up from time to time. It's part of a spasm of immaturity in a part of the world 6 centuries of civilization behind the rest.
But when you step in to correct them, that's a form of parenting that requires a long-term commitment.
Better to keep a distance generally (not always) while they crawl around and throw tantrums. If they step on our toes we can kick them, but seeking to control their maldevelopment is a full-time task, pretty much thankless, costs a fortune and doesn't really get us much further than where we were.
Letting them grow up on their own usually just the best course. And if they don't, then deal with them then.
The more I read today the more I am of the opinion to stay out of it.
If we decide to save the government of Iraq that we left behind, we will be allying ourselves with Ba'athists, Ayatollahs and al Qaeda. I'm thinking that somewhere along the line out foreign policy has jumped the shark.
Icepick said...
At this point, they're not a terrorist group, they're a small but very successful army. I'm suspecting they and their leader, some guy named al Baghdadi, are more interested in what they can rule than in bombing some, say, mall in America.
In other words they are rational actors advancing their own interests. Now there's a surprise.
Ritmo thinks it's all very funny, this concern about his Messiah's foulups.
Can't wait to see his reaction if somebody drives an SUV full of TNT into his gated community.
Icepick said...
Haz, I'm finding the reports of them killing tens of thousands hard to believe. Do they really have enough forces to hold that large an area and kill on the scale of a Hitler, Stalin or Mao?
Like the SS in the Soviet Union, there are probably plenty of homegrown crazies willing to help.
The more I read today the more I am of the opinion to stay out of it.
We may be able to now, but, as Haz notes, these guys don't sound like they're going to stop at the Dardanelles.
Ritmo thinks it's all very funny, this concern about his Messiah's foulups.
Can't wait to see his reaction if somebody drives an SUV full of TNT into his gated community.
Hello? NSA... Are you listening? Google can probably provide you this "edutcher" guy's information.
So what if they push into Turkey?
I have heard for years that the Turks were great allies of the USA but when we needed them in the Iraq war they fucked us.
If they push to the Dardanelles? Then it is Putin's problem. Unlike Obama he will know what to do with them.
The Turks voted for a corrupt fundie by that time.
That's the sort of country we should be interested in. Not these backwaters who lack any consistent history of modernity whatsoever.
They're not going to get to the fucking Dardanelles. You think the Turks are going to roll over for a bunch of Arab camel fuckers? Hardly.
Look at the demographics of the region, and then look at its history. They can't go much farther into Turkey than they have, or they will awaken the proverbial sleeping giant.
Iran isn't going to care for them much, either, and they'll likely have the bomb in a few years.
The Kurds in Iraq look to be a tough nut to crack, too.
ISIS has decided on an actual war of conquest. That means taking land and ruling it. Which will cut down on their will and ability to do much else.
Want to stop the next terrorist attack? Fine. Then do something to prevent it, instead of going to war on the side of our enemies. Shit, at this stage we share more enemies with ISIS than we do with our 'friends' in the region.
Icepick -- ISIS has 17,000 fighters? I thought the number was 7,000 -- that's what the Guardian says, and I've seen that figure elsewhere.
Oh, and its leader "believes that the world's Muslims should live under one Islamic state ruled by sharia law, the first step of which is establishing a caliphate spanning Syria and Iraq." No way getting there could ever endanger the U.S., right?
The Guardian link: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jun/12/baghdadi-abu-bakr-iraq-isis-mosul-jihad
Am I the only one who's just sad?
So many of our fellow Americans -- and our allies -- sacrificed so much to bring stability to Iraq. A few years ago, against all odds, it looked like they did it. They -- not me, not the President -- earned that.
Now it's all dissolving. The people of Iraq are fleeing in fear. It's all going down the drain.
Before someone goes off: I was against that war in the beginning. But once in, we had to do what we could to win it -- for our soldiers, and for the people whose land we invaded.
And now it all seems to be gone.
More than anything, I'm sad. I am profoundly sad.
Right with you Father Fox.
InSadness.
Rhythm and Balls said...
Ritmo thinks it's all very funny, this concern about his Messiah's foulups.
Can't wait to see his reaction if somebody drives an SUV full of TNT into his gated community.
Hello? NSA... Are you listening? Google can probably provide you this "edutcher" guy's information.
They couldn't stop 9/11 or Benghazi.
What makes you think they can save you?
Icepick said...
For that matter, the Russians, even in the Soviet era, couldn't get to the Dardanelles. Really think these towel heads will?
I don't recall the Russians ever trying, except maybe the Crimean War.
OTOH, the Turks were backed by the Hun in WWI and the Limeys ignored every rule of amphibious warfare known at Gallipoli.
The leader of ISIS was in US captivity. Barack Obama ordered his release in 2009.
http://weaselzippers.us/189620-isis-leader-abu-bakr-al-baghdadi-released-from-u-s-detention-by-obama-admin-in-2009/
Profound sadness - there's plenty of that today. For those lost, for those who will be lost, for the never ending of hatred.
Wow, Haz. Now there is something the MSM will hide from the public in order to protect Obama.
Right. Why would anyone worry about releasing dangerous terrorists?
They just want to go home and do yoga and raise bees to make honey.
Michael Haz said...
The leader of ISIS was in US captivity. Barack Obama ordered his release in 2009.
http://weaselzippers.us/189620-isis-leader-abu-bakr-al-baghdadi-released-from-u-s-detention-by-obama-admin-in-2009/
This appears to be wrong.
From Wiki:
Assassination attempt
On 26 October 2005, a US warplane struck a suspected insurgent safehouse near the Syrian border in an attempt to kill al-Baghdadi.
It seems unlikely that they would attempt to assassinate someone they already had in custody.
I don't think it fair to say Obama ordered his release. It was part of on-the-ground operations in Iraq, and all was pretty confusing, with some detention camps closing down (here's Wikipedia on the camp he was in), new ones set up, etc.
Plus this in the linked Telegraph article:
"Why such a ferocious individual was deemed fit for release in 2009 is not known. One possible explanation is that he was one of thousands of suspected insurgents granted amnesty as the US began its draw down in Iraq. Another, though, is that rather like Keyser Söze, the enigmatic crimelord in the film The Usual Suspects, he may actually be several different people.
'We either arrested or killed a man of that name about half a dozen times, he is like a wraith who keeps reappearing, and I am not sure where fact and fiction meet,' said Lieutenant-General Sir Graeme Lamb, a former British special forces commander who helped US efforts against al-Qaeda in Iraq. 'There are those who want to promote the idea that this man is invincible, when it may actually be several people using the same nom de guerre'.”
If there's a conflict between Wiki and anybody else, Wiki is more often wrong.
Lydia said...
I don't think it fair to say Obama ordered his release
On his watch. If this guy was that dangerous, he was probably informed.
As your quote says, "One possible explanation is that he was one of thousands of suspected insurgents granted amnesty as the US began its draw down in Iraq."
A little too eager to get out, mayhap?
Lydia, they've got 7,000 in one country and 10,000 in the other. I forget which country, Syria or Iraq, has which amount. I'll try to link to the map I saw earlier when my wife goes to bed and I can get on my main computer.
I understand what you mean father Fox.
Admittedly, the stakes of a successful conclusion in Iraq, are not as high as they were during the cold war.
However, imagine how the cold war, would have turned out, if both parties, once in the White House would not have follow in each others footsteps.
Yes, there may have been disparate degrees of emphasis as to how to conduct it, but, when push came to shove, both parties where committed to the idea that we needed to, at the very least face them.
We had no such unity of commitment in Iraq.
My bigleapitocious conclusion that Obama may have signal ISIS to take Iraq has no takers on Twitter.
Is it that shocking to conclude that Obama would actively seek to undermine whatever lay in store regarding a Bush 43 legacy?
Remember, they, the democrats made Bush and Iraq one and the same.
If he, Obama, could not legitimately claim credit for Iraq's success, what business would he have preserving it?
I realize that in order to believe something like that, you would have to first conclude that Obama dislikes this country... intensely and immensely as he does his political opponents.
Like somebody wiser than me said... I could be wrong.
There is always that possibility.
Lydia, here's the link where I saw the strength of ISIS listed as 10,000 for Iraq and 7,000 for Syria.
Link
Note the map in the middle of the article. The area controlled of 'influenced' by ISIS is about the size of Jordan and Israel together, eyeballing it.
Lem, I tend to favor the easiest solution, which is that Obama is a hard-core leftist, and is indecisive, disinterested and incompetent as a leader. I think he's just fucking up. As pointed out, he and his Administration were eager to claim success for Iraq at the end of 2011. Two and a half years later....
It was not a very good idea for the Obama administration to arm the rebels in Syria. I have an idea that the a lot of the weapons and vehicles used for this incursion into Iraq are from what we gave the Syrian rebels.
Toyota: the truck of choice for terrorists and jihadists.
Seriously, whenever they show pictures of insurgents, they're always driving around in white Toyota pickups.
Toyota trucks are known around the world for their great durability. Top Gear did a famous bit in which they tried and failed to kill a Toyota Hilux.
Icepick -- that article you linked to says it's estimated ISIS has 10,000 fighters total.
The 17,000 number in the article was for the number of Iranian pilgrims who are in Iraq at any given time.
Lydia, the map stated 10,000 in Iraq and 7,000 in Syria. It's buried in the info for those two countries. If they're doing it with less, they're even more impressive.
Just looked at the map; those legends are terribly unclear in their wording. In any case, most every source I've read puts ISIS's fighting force at around 7,000.
As to why it's been able to do so much damage with so few, it may be because "its numbers in Iraq appear to have been bolstered by other groups, including local Sunni militants and Ba'ath nationalists particularly in Tikrit."
Post a Comment