• Current Events & Politics
    Welcome Guest
    Please read before posting:
    Forum Guidelines Bluelight Rules
  • Current Events & Politics Moderators: deficiT | tryptakid | Foreigner

The ISIS Megathread

bit_pattern

Ex-Bluelighter
Joined
Oct 17, 2008
Messages
8,127
So that whole PNAC thing is working out well...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...nd-became-the-worlds-richest-terrorist-group/

Of the many stunning revelations to emerge out of the wreckage of Mosul on Wednesday — 500,000 fleeing residents, thousands of freed prisoners, unconfirmed reports of “mass beheadings” — the one that may have the most lasting impact as Iraq descends into a possible civil war is that the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria just got extremely rich.

As insurgents rolled past Iraq’s second largest city, an oil hub at the vital intersection of Syria, Iraq and Turkey, and into Tikrit, several gunmen stopped at Mosul’s central bank. An incredible amount of cash was reportedly on hand, and the group made off with 500 billion Iraqi dinars — $425 million.

The provincial governor of Nineveh, Atheel al-Nujaifi, confirmed that the ISIS Islamists had lifted additional millions from numerous banks across Mosul, as well as a “large quantity of gold bullion,” according to the International Business Times, which called it the “World’s Richest Terror Force.”

The declaration isn’t an easy one to fact check. Not only is the definition of “terrorist” nebulous — are murderous but wealthy Mexican cartels terrorists? — it’s also exceedingly difficult to quantify a terrorist organization’s finances. One of the closest stabs anyone has made comes from the well-versed Money Jihad.

According to its analysis, which drew on journalistic and academic accounts, the cash seizure would make ISIS the richest terrorist organization in the world — at least for the time being.

The Taliban, the New York Times reported, had a one-time annual operating budget of somewhere between $70 million and $400 million. Hezbollah was working with between $200 million and $500 million. FARC in Colombia had annual revenues of $80 to $350 million. Al-Shabab had between $70 and $100 million socked away. And Al-Qaeda, meanwhile, was working with a $30 million operating budget at the time of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, according to the Council on Foreign Relations.

The newfound wealth at ISIS’s disposal now makes it richer than many small nations, including Nauru, Tonga, the Marshall Islands and the Falkland Islands.

For a terrorist group that operates more and more like a defacto state governing a huge swath of land spilling across Syria and Iraq, the potential impact could be huge. By nearly every measure, Iraq is embroiled in civil war. With lightning speed, not deterred by Iraqi soldiers running scared, the insurgency on Wednesday moved within 70 miles of Baghdad, which analysts say is “definitely vulnerable,” according to The Washington Post’s Liz Sly and Loveday Morris.

Iraq President Nouri al-Maliki called a national state emergency and said in a televised news conference that “Iraq is undergoing a difficult stage.” He called on everyone in the government “to confront this vicious attack, which will spare no Iraqi.”

Complicating that call to action, however, is ISIS’s money. It will “buy a whole lot of Jihad,” regional analyst Brown Moses wrote on Twitter. “For example, with $425 million, ISIS could pay 60,000 fighters around $600 a month for a year.”

According to research by the intelligence consultancy Soufan Group, ISIS may not have much trouble attracting that many fighters — if it doesn’t have that many already. Soufan Group said ISIS has attracted 12,000 militants from abroad already, 3,000 of whom are from the West.

Iraqi government forces, meanwhile, appear deflated and disillusioned. “The state is weak,” one infantryman told the New York Times. “This will be an endless battle.”

Another officer conceded to the Independent that “we can’t beat them. They’re trained in street fighting and we’re not. We need a whole army to drive them out of Mosul. They’re like ghosts; they appear to hit and disappear within seconds.”
 
And some context...

http://www.crikey.com.au/2014/06/12...-iraq-means-the-end-of-the-wes-as-we-know-it/

Rundle: Advance of militants in Iraq means the end of the West as we know it
GUY RUNDLE | JUN 12, 2014 1:02PM |

The recent arrival in Iraq of the ultra-Islamist group ISIS marks the end of the hegemonic West.

What fun it is stitching nations together, wrote Gertrude Bell in the 1920s, as she wove together the fabric of what would become the modern nation of Iraq (named for the city of Uruk, the oldest of the ancient city-states excavated in Mesopotamia).

Bell, born as a decent English lass and disappointed in love, had studied Arabic and then Persian in England. By the time she added Turkish to her accomplishments, she was one of the most significant linguists in Edwardian England. That wasn’t enough for her, and she added archaeology to her skills, and then set off on expeditions to explore the empty quarter of the Arabian peninsula. The first westerner to do so, Sheikhs treated her with courtesy for the simple reason that she was so far out of their experience and understanding that they could not summon hostility against her. More pertinently, she was less full of western supremacist bullshit than the men they encountered, listened to what they said and established real relationships with them.

Like everyone in the Middle East at the end of World War I, she was pressed into service in trying to carve out a system for the region after the collapse of the Ottoman empire. The Brits and the French had promised the Arabs nationhood in return for rising up against the Turks (as our brave boys died at Gallipoli to keep Turkey out of the South Pacific) and promised the Zionists a homeland, partly to keep bank credit flowing for the war effort. Behind that they had drafted the Sykes-Picot agreement, detailing how the French and British would carve up Arabia along the current Syria-Iraq border. But in 1919, after the British had spent 18 months trying to destroy the Russian Bolshevik government, the British embassy in Moscow was invaded and a draft document of Sykes-Picot was found and published to the world. The modern pan-Arabist movement began from there, and that would yield Baathism, Nasser, Suez, the Palestinian resistance — and its opposition, embodied in Sayyad Qutb and the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas and Hezbollah.

History records that Bell — who also founded the National Museum of Iraq, the repository of the West’s heritage, which the Bush administration allowed to be destroyed — created Iraq by combining the Ottoman provinces of Basra (Sunni), Baghdad (Shia) and Mosul (Kurd), with the late thought that it might be easier if Mosul was just given to the new Turkish Republic. But it was more than that — through years of meetings, she signed up hundreds of sheikhs and clans to the new project, promised them an evolving independence and created a nation-state out of clan affiliations. She was eventually seen as too pro-Arab and was bumped off by a cabal of friends and enemies, not least among them St John Philby, father of Kim. Bumped off literally. She was “erratic” — read, manic depressive — and Britain’s post World War I Arab role was shaped by her wild over-enthusiasm and optimism. Squeezed out, she took an overdose.

The recent arrival in Mosul of the ultra-Islamist group, the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS), marks the final collapse of that dream. It is impossible to overstate its significance — it marks not merely the end of the Iraq War, but of World War I. It is as much a death-knell for the pious hopes of Marxist pan-Arabism, as it is for the naïve triumphalism of the neocons.

At the heart of a region, with Turkey, Iran and Russia in easy ambit, there has been the triumph of a group whose beliefs are as incommensurable and uncompromising as the movements of the 20th century, Bolshevism, Fascism, Maoism and Western neoconservatism. They have hollowed out Iraq, which now does not functionally exist. They could march on to the boutique statelet of northern Iraq, run by the Kurds for the US. That puts them in direct contact with Turkish troops, representatives of a state run by a party that wants to restore Ottoman era regional dominance.

Russia cannot now be indifferent to their progress; nor can Shia Iran, since ISIS detach from Al-Qaeda — the moderates! — by their determination to bring violence to the Shia, whom they see as the ultimate apostates. Syria no longer exists, really; Afghanistan is the hinterland of Kabul and little more. Pakistan is bankrupt, corrupt, and its state apparatuses both fight and aid the Taliban. The whole region has been de-stated, and the US has decidedly renounced any intention of playing its usual role of re-stating it. That’s over, the projection of British power is over, and the Right of both states is so riven by pro- and anti- “intervention” factions that they are unable to mount a coherent line. Western publics are with the Obama line, no matter how dithery it seems: under no circumstances contribute troops to the debacle.

Small beer, but this is the final and utter discrediting of the neocon project. From Wolfowitz to Dubya to John Howard to Greg Sheridan and lower orders of tame flunkies (and no I do not include assistance to the Libyan revolution in this ambit), it is clear now that their role was to speed up western loss of unipolar power by a decade or more, and kill half a million or so into the bargain. That’s what they did with their lives.

This is a day as significant as 9/11 in its way. We are faced with a force inimical to all modern values, but whose legitimacy has been created by the chaos we brought to their region. Now the threads have been pulled apart, and it is all to do again, but not in the same way. Today, you lived through the end of World War I, the Iraq War and the hegemonic west. It will be something to tell your grandkids, whatever country they find themselves citizens of. Ask not for whom the Bell tolls…
 
Twitter is where it's at - that's where all the cool kids do regional analysis these days - dontchya know?
 
Wow...just wow.
I knew this was serious, but I hadn't realised how bad this was.
Thanks again for keeping us (well, me at least) up to date, b_p.
 
And some context...

http://www.crikey.com.au/2014/06/12...-iraq-means-the-end-of-the-wes-as-we-know-it/

Rundle: Advance of militants in Iraq means the end of the West as we know it
GUY RUNDLE | JUN 12, 2014 1:02PM |

This is a day as significant as 9/11 in its way. We are faced with a force inimical to all modern values, but whose legitimacy has been created by the chaos we brought to their region.

i thought that part needed to be emphasized.
Everyone who supports and participates in the political and economic System that brought this on is complicit to some degree.

I'm also surprised that one person, Gertrude Bell, had so much influence in carving up the Ottoman Empire.
 
Last edited:
The president is saying nothing is off the table in regards to military intervention. Air strikes are a strong possibility. It makes me wonder how many times one can invade a country and expect drastic stability to occur. What did Einstein say about doing something repeatedly and expecting different results?
 
RIP to the 4,486 young Americans who never left Iraq; 58,300 who never left South Vietnam.

Fuck the politicians.
 
i thought that part needed to be emphasized.
Everyone who supports and participates in the political and economic System that brought this on is complicit to some degree.

I'm also surprised that one person, Gertrude Bell, had so much influence in carving up the Ottoman Empire.

How do you bring chaos to a religion? Logic? :p

(Seriously though.. how?)
 
RIP to the 4,486 young Americans who never left Iraq; 58,300 who never left South Vietnam.

Fuck the politicians.
Lets not forget the unknown numbers of Vietnamese and Iraqi people killed in those failed acts of imperialism.
How do you bring chaos to a religion? Logic? :p

(Seriously though.. how?)

I think you misread that.
The quote article does not say "religion"
This is a day as significant as 9/11 in its way. We are faced with a force inimical to all modern values, but whose legitimacy has been created by the chaos we brought to their region.
 
Last edited:
How do you bring chaos to a religion? Logic? :p

(Seriously though.. how?)

You strike financial towers? You forget that our very fabric of existence relies on belief itself. Religion is just like a spice, a flavor. These guys have had some training and weaponry from some super power. Religion didn't conjure it.
 
You strike financial towers? You forget that our very fabric of existence relies on belief itself. Religion is just like a spice, a flavor. These guys have had some training and weaponry from some super power. Religion didn't conjure it.

I don't follow..
 
"How do you bring chaos to [an] religion economy?" This is what the article is saying by comparing it to 9/11. They struck our religious belief system, we struck over there, and now there's a powerful insurgency. Armed and trained by...God knows who. Does that help? Usually it would be helpful if you say how it is you are unable to follow rather than just saying 'I do not follow'.
 
Well I was responding to his post. With the logic of the argument being compared to 9/11.

is a day as significant as 9/11 in its way. We are faced with a force inimical to all modern values, but whose legitimacy has been created by the chaos we brought to their region.

The substance of that quote to which he was referring has significance when compared to "faced with a force inimical to all modern values". Which would sum up the chaos in itself, because it indirectly asks "what is the force that is inimical? What is "modern values"? Religion and economy. Honestly I am glad he made the mistake of reading over "region".
 
The incredibly retarded decision to disband the ENTIRE Iraqi army and civil service (including the police) in the days and weeks following the equally retarded U.S./British invasion of Iraq set the wheels turning for what is now taking place at the hands of ISIS in Iraq this week.

The much underrated movie "Green Zone" (2010) and the awesome documentary "No End In Sight" (2007) are required viewing for all who wish to better understand what's happening in Iraq right now.

We (the U.S./Brits) behaved in Iraq in 2003 as if we were defeating Nazism or some equally loathsome ideology when we disbanded the entire Iraqi armed forces AND made them essentially unemployable over night. No sane person would consider treating 500 000 men with military training in such a disdainful fashion and not expect some huge blowback from such a decision. I am very worried for the future.
 
Top