War Against ISIS

[Boatteacher]

Maybe they should change their name again, ISIS, ISIL, Deash. How about Deadshit. Sorry...couldn't resist but the sooner this blight on humanity is exterminated, the better.:sniper

That might be nice, but it's not going to happen.

This has been developing since before Sadat was assassinated in Egypt and accelerated by the Russian invasion of Afghanistan and every western incursion into Muslim lands since. Every version of it has been more violent than the previous one and more and more focused on the 'far enemy' (the west).

A set back won't be an extermination and, like some hydra monster, will simply come back with another head.

It explicitly seeks nothing less than an entirely Muslim fundamentalist World and the death of all infidels. It might be a minority Muslim view (Sunni - since the extermination of the Shiite is part of the view), but with over one billion Muslims in the world it doesn't take a large percentage of followers to create havoc.

For immigrant countries it's a major problem to sort out those who really aspire to and will integrate into a western life and those who merely seek economic benefit while preserving all the hatreds and sectarian and tribal attitudes that have hamstrung the development of their home countries in the first place. And even if you get the first sorting right, the second generation can still be turned against their adopted society if they listen to the wrong voice.

I'm not one to suggest we ban all Muslim immigrants, but certainly think we need to more explicitly sort those who we take in and take steps to move towards a better integration of them than we do at the moment; for the sake of our own future.

 

[Strannik]

When I consider perspective for extreme movements like IS, I find it hard to see them as an independent force. They may develop degree of independence trough their extremity.
However in this world any force eventually find its master(s) .The bigger force(s) that is.

For years IS was allowed to grow because some forces attempted to make use of it. In fact they almost succeeded in overthrowing regime in Syria. But everybody can make a mistake and miscalculate the probable outcome. To be brutally honest, some make a habit of making miscalculation of this sort. There we go with game plan and perspective for IS-ilk, IS passed its used by date and going to be recycled in environmentally unfriendly manner.
Parties who making “plans” are going to stay around for very long time. In presence of suitable force, they will use and discard it. In absence of suitable force, they will create a condition for such force to appear, until such time when alfa-force(s) diminish and got superseded. There is nothing new under the moon.

 

[Ananda]

It's something that no one here can answer but what is IS's gameplan? How does the IS leadership intend to make up for all the recent reverses suffered? Or has IS reached a point where it's merely responding to moves undertaken by its enemies?

IS/Daesh end game is always 'instability'..remembered even in their own rank..DAESH is not the end game..they want to spread instability throughout Islamic Nations due to their view of only instability will bring the silent moderate moeslem to embrace order..which in their view will come in the form of order under their own syaria rule interpretation..

The current DAESH is only the transitional form of government during 'instability' period..they now that their form of DAESH will bring most of Islamic Nations ruler to reacted negatively to them..but they counting on young disfranchised moeslem that many in their view already distrust their rulers anyway..

By showing they are the 'anti' rulling regime on most Islamic Nation..they hope to bring those youth to find common ground with them..
DAESH is not short term game..it's part of longer term game to change the mind and hart of the moeslem youth..and not surprisingly they will find more followers to both moeslem youth which facing authoritarian regime in their own nation..and western moeslem youth which more and more fell scrutinised by western government simply because (they fell), they are youth and moeslem..

 

[Phildz]

Has it ever occurred to you that situation in Syria may evolve in quite unexpected way sort of this plan (quora.com/What-are-the-evidences-to-show-Turkeys-support-to-ISIS/answer/Mike-Stalwart?prompt_topic_bio=1) to be put into reality in Aleppo.
I was really shocked to read this scaring info that 'poisoned canned meat and vegetables have been stored up nearby the Turkish city of Kilis'. Rebels are said to have employed chemical weapons against civilians. Now this plan looks like having smth in common with it....

 

[STURM]

It took the West a couple years to get organized against them but it's happening now.

The West still has no long term strategy towards defeating IS ideologically. Even if Raqqa and other areas still held by IS fall, and another few thousand IS fighters are killed; IS will still not be totally defeated as long as there are those who fall in with its ideology.

IS has survived so long because its enemies remain divided and this still hasn't changed. Will the next U.S. administration, the EU and Russia be able to agree on what happens next in Syria? What will the reaction of the West be if Assad's troops make significant advances against not only against IS but also the so call ''moderates''? The good news is Trump has made it clear that focus will be on defeating IS not Assad. This is a major improvement over the previous gaga land thinking that Assad should be dealt with before IS is defeated and that everything will turn well; with the so call ''moderates'' taking power and bringing in peace.

I do find the tone of the the OpEds from the Independent and Eric Margolis to be highly opinionated acted and generally not fact based.

I enjoy reading them as they often contain stuff not mentioned elsewhere and provide news from a different perspective. Sure, they might contain some stuff I might not personally agree with but I haven't found anything that's not ''fact based''. As for being opinionated yes, but which reports aren't?

 

[Boatteacher]

The West still has no long term strategy towards defeating IS ideologically. Even if Raqqa and other areas still held by IS fall, and another few thousand IS fighters are killed; IS will still not be totally defeated as long as there are those who fall in with its ideology.

I agree with you on two levels; although it is understandable why the west has reached this position.

On the ground in Syria and Iraq here and now, it is the unfortunate case that a lot of people have to die for them to be defeated; many of them innocents. They are holed up in crowded cities and intermingled with a civilian population who for their very survival have to act as sympathizers. There is probably a full spectrum between genuine and even enthusiastic (until recently) sympathizers and those who do so for mere survival. Winkling them out will take a lot of blue and civilian casualties; with the former able to be reduced by bombing at the cost of increasing the latter.

The west has little stomach left for this; they've been through too much of it. I can't say Russia seems to be getting it right. They still seem to have their hands dirty with too many poorly directed (or malevolently deliberately directed) explosive rounds. And they are likely to find it difficult to escape the quagmire even if someone is silly enough to put up a "Mission Accomplished" sign (in Russian this time). The specific policy of IS is to wait out and exhaust the enemy and then come back.

And that's before the west had to deal with the choking sensation that comes with the possibility they actually had to support Assad to defeat IS. Admittedly, in looking to support "anyone but Assad", the west seems to have made a lot of misjudgments.

But the harder question is how you defeat an ideology. With our open immigration programs and liberal societies, were not even very good at quarantining it to its origins. The ideology is uncompromising and not given to negotiated outcomes. It is inherently incapable of being snuffed out. It may expand and contract from time to time but in the end has to be dealt with by the very people who are presently feeding it with their sectarian and tribal feuds; the Islamic world.

 

[STURM]

I can't say Russia seems to be getting it right. They still seem to have their hands dirty with too many poorly directed (or malevolently deliberately directed) explosive rounds .

Actually, my opinion is that Russia from the very start got it right : it realised that focus must be on defeating IS and that a premature departure of Assad would be a disaster for not only the Syrian people but also for the region. Sure, like the West Russia has its own selfish interests to watch out for but unlike the West it's policy over Syria wasn't governed by cloud cuckoo land thinking.

But the harder question is how you defeat an ideology.

For a start, the West should use all the influence it has to ensure that Saudi and other Gulf states do more to openly distance themselves from IS. After all, IS's warped ideology is based on Saudi wahhabism. How is it in the national interests of the U.S. to be providing intel and logistical support to Saudi in Yemen when the Saudi should be involved in Syria and Iraq? Arms sales to Saudi and other Gulf states are always followed with the usual ''the sales will contribute to regional security'' ..... After all the billions spent on arms, it's preposterous that the Gulf states are doing next to nothing to help defeat IS and instead are bogged down in Yemen for the sole purpose of weakening Iran which BTW is actually doing something to help role back IS. In Iraq, the West should pressure the Shiite led Iraqi government to ensure that in newly liberated Sunni areas; there's development and job opportunities. It's a known fact that many Sunnis only joined or collaborated with IS because of fears of what would happen when they were ''liberated'' by Shiite army/militia units. As long as the sectarian issue in Iraq is not resolved, IS will continue to benefit.

 

[2007yellow430]

The commentary here seems to focus on thew military effect of the fight. The reality is that the military solution is short term solution at best. What causes this is the abject poverty in the area, which makes recruiting an easy task. We got it right in Europe in 1945, and if we want to avoid this in the future, a new Marshall Plan is necessary, and a real one, not aid to allow poor nations to buy our arms, but real aid giving a higher standard of living to the folks there.

Anything else and you've got never ending war.

Art

 

[STURM]

The commentary here seems to focus on thew military effect of the fight.

This is something I've pointed out several times before. It's harder to rebuild nations and enforce peace; easier to resort to military means. We saw this in Afghanistan, in Iraq and now the same mistakes are being made again.
Apart from resorting to military means the West appears to have no other strategy on how to defeat IS. The same can be said of Russia but at least Russia has got its priorities right : Assad might not be a liberal democrat but the alternative is far worse.

We got it right in Europe in 1945,

With regards to defeating Germany, yes. But with regards to having a ''good'' peace, no. Half of Europe went to the Soviets. The biggest irony is that Britain and France declared war on Germany because Germany refused to withdraw from Poland. Yet the Soviets later went into eastern Poland and after the war, the very same Poland that the democratic free world went to war over, became a Soviet satellite state.

 

[Waylander]

The commentary here seems to focus on thew military effect of the fight. The reality is that the military solution is short term solution at best. What causes this is the abject poverty in the area, which makes recruiting an easy task. We got it right in Europe in 1945, and if we want to avoid this in the future, a new Marshall Plan is necessary, and a real one, not aid to allow poor nations to buy our arms, but real aid giving a higher standard of living to the folks there.

Anything else and you've got never ending war.

Art

The problem with this is that many radical islamists don't come out of poor environments. Just look at all the Saudis fighting overseas to further their version of radical islam.

And why is it our duty to pump some sort of Marshall plan into the region. It's not as if there isn't lots of money available in the region. It's just not used to improve the lot of the masses.

And I also don't see Russia providing even a fraction of the funds needed to bring Syria back to it's feed after they defeated the last rebels. Why should the West. Just so that the Arabs and Russians can go on telling us how we get everything wrong?

 

[Feanor]

The problem with this is that many radical islamists don't come out of poor environments. Just look at all the Saudis fighting overseas to further their version of radical islam.

And why is it our duty to pump some sort of Marshall plan into the region. It's not as if there isn't lots of money available in the region. It's just not used to improve the lot of the masses.

And I also don't see Russia providing even a fraction of the funds needed to bring Syria back to it's feed after they defeated the last rebels. Why should the West. Just so that the Arabs and Russians can go on telling us how we get everything wrong?

There was a time when the Soviets poured immense resources into Syria. It helped but only somewhat. Modern day Russia isn't going to do it.

 

[swerve]

The biggest irony is that Britain and France declared war on Germany because Germany refused to withdraw from Poland. Yet the Soviets later went into eastern Poland and after the war, the very same Poland that the democratic free world went to war over, became a Soviet satellite state.

It wasn't because of Poland. It was clear, after Czechoslovakia (where Hitler had broken his word & carved up the rest of the country, not stopped at the Sudetenland), that Poland was just the next one on the list, & it was because the UK & France were worried about where it would end.

Leaving Poland to the USSR was because the alternative was even worse. Nobody was in a mood to start a new war with the USSR. And a satellite state of the USSR didn't seem as bad as slaves of the Nazis, destined to be a permanent underclass.

 

[STURM]

And why is it our duty to pump some sort of Marshall plan into the region. It's not as if there isn't lots of money available in the region. It's just not used to improve the lot of the masses.

The countries that should do it are Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the U.A.E. but this is as likely as North Korea getting State Department and Pentagon approval to buy pre used F-16s stored at AMARG. They would rather spend - to curry favour with the West - trillions on arms but still depend on the West for regime survival and for protection against external threats [against the ''evil'' Iranians]. As long as Syria is ruled by an Alawi and is close to Iran; the Gulf states will not help and they won't with Iraq [never mind that it's led by a Shia dominated government] either as long as Iraq is close to Iran. When will the Arabs be able to solve their own mess without depending on the West? Or perhaps the question should be : does the West really want the Arabs to be dependent - to some extent - on Western support?

 

[STURM]

It wasn't because of Poland.

If I'm not mistaken, I read somewhere that both Britain and France had a secret clause that committed both to declare war on Germany in case of an invasion but not against the Soviets. Churchill was very aware that Stalin has designs on eastern Poland but it wasn't in Britain's interest to provide the Poles with a guarantee of help against both German and Russian aggression. Personally, I find it so ironic that Poland [over which Britain and France went to war over to safeguard Polish sovereignty] ended up without the freedom the Poles so wanted.

it was because the UK & France were worried about where it would end.

Among the offers made to appease Hitler were colonies in Africa and pressure on the Poles to compromise over Danzig and ethnic Germans. Hitler of course wasn't interested as his focus was always eastwards. A large segment of the Polish military actually welcomed a war with Germany; there were even plans for the Poles to march to Berlin.

And a satellite state of the USSR didn't seem as bad as slaves of the Nazis, destined to be a permanent underclass.

In return for handing over land to the Ukraine the Poles received a large part of East Prussia. What was really sad was the fate of the Poles who fought alongside the Allies and couldn't return to the country they had fought so hard for [for some reason quite a few settled in Scotland].

 

[Toblerone]

Today I have been reading about the turks shelling the SAA in northern Latakia in defence of some rebels and about the syrian air force striking turkish forces in northern Aleppo! Meanwhile the Kurd, Turkey/FSA, ISIS love triangle escalates.

Is this thing going kinetic soon? Turkish aircraft and syrian/russian air defence systems? Or will the leaders reign their forces in?

 

[Feanor]

Today I have been reading about the turks shelling the SAA in northern Latakia in defence of some rebels and about the syrian air force striking turkish forces in northern Aleppo! Meanwhile the Kurd, Turkey/FSA, ISIS love triangle escalates.

Is this thing going kinetic soon? Turkish aircraft and syrian/russian air defence systems? Or will the leaders reign their forces in?

It's a big question whether the shelling from inside Turkey was done by the Turks or by the non-state fighters, and whether it was sanctioned by the Turkish government from Erdogan or an attempt to escalate tensions by a faction within Turkey that doesn't like Erdogan's rapprochement with Moscow. Either way further escalation seems unlikely but there have been surprises in this conflict before so I guess it remains to be seen. With the Kuznetsov deployed and Strategic Aviation on high readiness this seems like a bad time for someone to escalate against Russia.

On a sidenote, an ancient 19th century cannon still being used, from the back of a truck, in Syria. Amazing. It belongs in a museum.

http://panzerbar.livejournal.com/3698744.html

 

[Toblerone]

https://southfront.org/photos-and-n...-killed-in-syrian-air-raid-appeared-in-media/
Well, there were some dead and wounded turkish soldiers. The turkish prime minister threatened with retaliation.

The turks have been emboldened to a dangerous degree for years, the negative results have been shown again and again. Now Erdogan is flapping his mouth about the turkmen people, their brothers in other countries and other such revanchist ideas. Talking about renegotiating century-old treaties ... I partly blame US politics for this state of affairs.

That cannon gave me some good laughs. Maybe if this war goes on for a few more years, we may see swordfighting, too.

 

[Feanor]

https://southfront.org/photos-and-n...-killed-in-syrian-air-raid-appeared-in-media/
Well, there were some dead and wounded turkish soldiers. The turkish prime minister threatened with retaliation.

The turks have been emboldened to a dangerous degree for years, the negative results have been shown again and again. Now Erdogan is flapping his mouth about the turkmen people, their brothers in other countries and other such revanchist ideas. Talking about renegotiating century-old treaties ... I partly blame US politics for this state of affairs.

That cannon gave me some good laughs. Maybe if this war goes on for a few more years, we may see swordfighting, too.

Yeah the Kurds are pushing together with the SAA right now north of Aleppo. They're rapidly taking ISIS ground as they roll back to defend al-Bab. It will be interesting to see what happens when the Turkish fighters meet with the SAA. And how they will separate them from the Kurds.

Битва за Ðлеппо. 24.11.2016 - Colonel Cassad

 

[Feanor]

It looks like almost the entire fixed wing air group from the Kuznetsov is currently at Hmeimeem. Why exactly is unclear, but some sources have speculated that the bulk of their sorties have been flown from Hmeimeem rather then from Kuznetsov.

Су-33 Ñ "Ðдмирала Кузнецова" на авиабазе Хмеймим - bmpd

 

[Waylander]

At first I thought it might be because of the incident in which they lost a MiG-29K due to it running out of fuel while waiting or a fouled deck to clear.

But on the other hand they might just have planned that right from the beginning.

A show run down the european coast, then some carrier ops for the media and finally the real ops out of Hmeimeim. The Russians know best about the ordonance limitations their fast movers face when operating from the Kutznezov.