Iraq and ISIS Discussion

Daesh have no backing from a major power, they are in a spot with numbers as the Shia outnumber them. It's no wonder they're trying to grab every two bit punk wannabe from elsewhere to come and play. They'll go slowly, but they will be a glorious failure.
 
I'm thinking out loud: when the last wagons are in a circle, the glorious few who are left are preparing for their final whatever, some little nerd will pop up and say, "What about their human rights!":rolleyes:
 
Everyone's aware of Daesh's visible sources of income (taxes, extortion, black market oil trade) but I was wondering what this community thinks about the "dark money" they are receiving. Ghost Wars by Steve Coll had surprisingly comprehensive data in terms of who was funding Al Qaeda in their early days and how much they were "donating". My questions for this forum:

- Although highly unlikely, is it possible that ISIS is receiving very little outside funding and operating their "state" off of their visible sources of income?

- More likely, they are supported by dark money but any ballpark ideas of what percent of their operational expenses is supplemented by donors?

- For example, lets imagine a wealthy Sunni Saudi with a fairly radical agenda wants to donate to a jihadi cause. Is the average wealthy Saudi onboard with ISIS's establishment of a caliphate or more inline with Qaeda's opinion that the jihad is in too early of a stage to claim territory?

- And more specifically, how much does ISIS receive in comparison to the amount Al Qaeda received in their early days? How much has 2 decades of western war and the expanded media presence of jihad increased the market for potential sources of funding? Is it to the point where the complete eradication of a physical jihadi state is near impossible?
 
Mosul and Bayji produce plenty of oil wealth. The "important" folks in Iraq (post-Saddam) just didn't like much, if any, of it to going to the military. They thought the foreign aid would always be there, and now their two money makers are gone.
 
Last edited:
Interesting observation...

Former prime minister and defense minister Ehud Barak was interviewed by Russian media outlet RT on Friday. He stated that it is his belief that the Islamic State "is not strong" and with an appropriate response, it would be possible to suppress and destroy ISIS within a matter of days.

"I think that ISIS is successful to a certain extent because they are not facing a concentrated effort to destroy the organization," said Barak, adding "Technically they aren't that strong- they are made up of only about 30-40 thousand people."

http://www.jpost.com/Middle-East/Fo...ld-defeat-ISIS-in-a-matter-of-two-days-407229
 
Interesting observation...

Former prime minister and defense minister Ehud Barak was interviewed by Russian media outlet RT on Friday. He stated that it is his belief that the Islamic State "is not strong" and with an appropriate response, it would be possible to suppress and destroy ISIS within a matter of days.

"I think that ISIS is successful to a certain extent because they are not facing a concentrated effort to destroy the organization," said Barak, adding "Technically they aren't that strong- they are made up of only about 30-40 thousand people."

http://www.jpost.com/Middle-East/Fo...ld-defeat-ISIS-in-a-matter-of-two-days-407229

I tend to agree. Faced with a first world army they would crumble, and they are very vulnerable as they are not an insurgent group, they are effectively a standing army.
One western division could wipe them out give the time to cover the territory.
 
How many loses are we willing to take?
I also doubt you could clear a city like Ramadi in a matter of days?
Siege warfare to limit friendly KIA?
 
You could break ISIS, but you'd still have two semi-failed states and the ISIS ideology left behind. We'd have to destroy them and then go back to Occupation 2.0 to prevent a resurgence. We might be willing to do one, but I doubt Iraq, Syria, or the American people would sign off on the other.
 
I cannot get past this pic> not even trying to hide - fuck -

Serious question, if you happen to be on a beach in Minnesota see this, and happen to be carrying, what do you do? Take cover? Shoot?

Honestly my initial reaction is that he is some Starbucks/Chipotle asshole who wants to show that he can carry whenever/where ever he wants - til the bullets start flying.

Fuck. Those folks had no chance.

Screen Shot 2015-06-27 at 9.10.59 PM.png
 
Seems the people in the background were pretty brave.

Britain's Independent newspaper reported that Mr Yeoman's wife heard about the human barricade from another holidaymaker once they had returned to Manchester. That person, who had been on the beach at the time, also told Mrs Yeoman about the Tunisian chef who had tried to warn them of the unfolding horror.

"He was the one who told them that the line of people they could see ahead of them were staff from the hotel," Mrs Yeoman said.

"He said to this couple that they were telling the gunman: 'You'll have to get past us and we're Muslims.' Obviously I don't know the exact words but that was pretty much what they were saying.

"They'd actually made a human barricade - 'You're not going to get past us, you'll have to kill us.' "

Another British man on vacation at the beach wrote to Mr Yeoman to corroborate his account of the drama, the Independent reported.

"I'm with you - was on beach at Palm marina - whilst we were running to hide, hotel staff were running out to help, very brave," Ian Symes wrote.

A report in the British Telegraph newspaper identified jet-ski merchant Ibrahim el Ghoul as a local hero who had thrown stones at Rezgui.

According to the report, the 18-year-old ran up the beach towards where the attack was taking place, trying to bundle fleeing tourists into a boat before going after Rezgui on a jet-ski.

"The first thing I thought was: 'This is my work and I have to protect the guests,' " Mr el Ghoul told the paper.

http://www.smh.com.au/world/tunisia...h-terror-victims-reports-20150629-gi08fp.html
 
Sadly, this will kill their main source of revenue, their main way of earning an honest living. Not that I would have been holidaying there myself right now, but yeah...
 
Last edited:
Yes, in the short term as tourism is a big earner for them, as discussed. It looks to be a fairly open society though. The reaction to the event was swift. Govt closed all mosques, rolled out army reserves. Daesh looks for fault lines in communities. & IMO this for Daesh looks to be a poor choice. A stable govt., a standing army, it doesn't look like a failing state, their usual stock in trade.
 
Yes, the country will keep moving forward. The resorts affected by this... not so sure how they will fare for the next year or so. Thankfully for them, the Western public has a pretty short term memory... so hopefully they'll be able to tough it out for a few seasons.
 
Back
Top