The Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant Megathread

[mongers]

So in Baghdad they say neither soda nor cola. 

[DGuller]

I think they call it Allahu Akbar.

[citizen k]

Kurds vs ISIS video- Gunfight to keep militants at bay in Jalula:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w_vmJpE2iOg

[CountDeMoney]

That's the US approach to most anything for the last 20 years.  Aside from air strikes.

It's obvious that the current situation requires us to be "strong" and show "strength" and blow the shit out of some monkey bar-training motherfuckers.

[MadImmortalMan]

Haven't read the whole thread, but are these guys the same ones McCain wanted to send arms to in Syria?

[Sheilbh]

Haven't read the whole thread, but are these guys the same ones McCain wanted to send arms to in Syria?

No. He wanted to arm the Free Syrian Army which is a ragbag of different opposition groups. Practically the only way ISIS would've gotten those arms would be the same way they got the Blackhawks and humvees they're riding around: by capturing them from US 'allies'. However included in the Free Syria Army is the al-Nusra group who are affiliated with al-Qaeda.

These guys were al-Qaeda in Iraq and then expanded into Syria. They had a huge falling out with al-Qaeda in general (largely over strategy: ISIS want to hold territory and build a state; ISIS are also far more anti-Shia). One of the other causes of that was that ISIS were starting to fight with and takeover al-Nusra areas. So basically they've become upstarts who started from al-Qaeda while the al-Qaeda loyalists are al-Nusra.

In Syria ISIS have been tolerated if not actually encouraged by Assad. This is because their strategy is to seize an area and then to 'cleanse' it of other opposition groups and then to start fighting Assad. From the regime's perspective they were discrediting the opposition and doing their dirty work for them.

It is worth saying however that ISIS are quite a small group - far smaller than, say, the FSA or Hezbollah - but they've managed to 'capture' the support of other groups. So in Iraq there are several Baathist groups who are fighting with them - such as the Naqshbandis led by King of Clubs and former VP Izzat al-Duri - though it's clear ISIS are very much in control. They ordered the Baathists to remove the pictures they put up and only allow their flag to be used for example (in a way they remind me of Communists).

Now they've got the money, the reputation and the (US provided) arms from the Iraqi collapse it's likely they'll grow and the groups who maybe thought they could use ISIS for their own purposes will be in for a surprise.

[jimmy olsen]

That map is a bit deceptive. It makes it look Baghdad's been encircled, but that's not true  when you read the labels.

[Sheilbh]

So it's only deceptive if you don't read it?

[jimmy olsen]

I think most people will just glance at it and assume the yellow bits are controlled by ISIS and that Baghdad is surrounded.

[garbon]

I think most people will just glance at it and assume the yellow bits are controlled by ISIS and that Baghdad is surrounded.

Well most people suck, so who gives a fuck?

[derspiess]

I still keep getting Kirkuk and Tikrit confused for some reason.

[CountDeMoney]

I still keep getting Kirkuk and Tikrit confused for some reason.

And you wanted to send these people weapons.

[citizen k]

So has Obama announced what he's planning to do yet so I can criticize him and take the opposite position?

He is using the Sir Humphrey Appleby approach to solving a crisis:

Bernard Woolley: What if the Prime Minister insists we help them?
Sir Humphrey Appleby: Then we follow the four-stage strategy.
Bernard Woolley: What's that?
Sir Richard Wharton: Standard Foreign Office response in a time of crisis.
Sir Richard Wharton: In stage one we say nothing is going to happen.
Sir Humphrey Appleby: Stage two, we say something may be about to happen, but we should do nothing about it.
Sir Richard Wharton: In stage three, we say that maybe we should do something about it, but there's nothing we *can* do.
Sir Humphrey Appleby: Stage four, we say maybe there was something we could have done, but it's too late now.

That's the US approach to most anything for the last 20 years.  Aside from air strikes.

[The Brain]

Puppy governments are so cute.

[PJL]

That's probably as good as any theory on how the US / West in general response to the crisis as anything else I've heard. It's not like he hasn't practiced the same thing before in Syria and Ukraine.

Yeah. At this point I'm not sure that's the wrong choice for Iraq/Syria.

Agreed. Sometimes doing nothing may be the best option. At least for now. Sure there may be a risk of a terrorist strike in the West, but I very much doubt it. They're too busy fighting each other. Other than making sure it doesn't affect the oil markets too much, and making sure the main oilfields are secure, it's probably best if the West stays out. Certainly Iraq is not Mali, there is no danger of it collapsing completely. Iran will make sure of that - there kind of doing what the French did in Mali.