Iraq and ISIS Discussion
- Thread starter Kraut783
- Start date
Brill
SOF Support
Tough to argue against the points made in this paper.
"In the 11 months since President Barack Obama committed the United States to “degrade and ultimately destroy” the so-called Islamic State of Iraq and al Sham (ISIS), the group has expanded its international reach, metastasized to form offshoots across multiple regions, and increased its perceived momentum.
Although U.S. government officials cite a reduction in the overall size of the group’s sanctuary in Iraq and Syria and the killing of thousands of ISIS fighters, the fall of Ramadi and much of Anbar province to the Islamic State served as a wake-up call that current efforts to counter ISIS are not adequate to the task.
Meanwhile, the threat posed by the terrorist group to Americans at home and abroad appears to be growing as ISIS-inspired individuals conduct attacks targeting Westerners around the globe, including here in the United States. And the U.S. intelligence community reportedly assesses that despite almost a year of airstrikes, the Islamic State remains no weaker and no smaller in number than it was at the campaign’s outset."
http://www.cnas.org/sites/default/files/publications-pdf/CNAS_Combatting-ISIS_Flournoy-Fontaine.pdf
"In the 11 months since President Barack Obama committed the United States to “degrade and ultimately destroy” the so-called Islamic State of Iraq and al Sham (ISIS), the group has expanded its international reach, metastasized to form offshoots across multiple regions, and increased its perceived momentum.
Although U.S. government officials cite a reduction in the overall size of the group’s sanctuary in Iraq and Syria and the killing of thousands of ISIS fighters, the fall of Ramadi and much of Anbar province to the Islamic State served as a wake-up call that current efforts to counter ISIS are not adequate to the task.
Meanwhile, the threat posed by the terrorist group to Americans at home and abroad appears to be growing as ISIS-inspired individuals conduct attacks targeting Westerners around the globe, including here in the United States. And the U.S. intelligence community reportedly assesses that despite almost a year of airstrikes, the Islamic State remains no weaker and no smaller in number than it was at the campaign’s outset."
http://www.cnas.org/sites/default/files/publications-pdf/CNAS_Combatting-ISIS_Flournoy-Fontaine.pdf
Brill
SOF Support
Unsure of their methods but not a bad bit of open source:
About Us - Independent Strategy and Intelligence Study Group
Soup Sandwich: Obama and His National Security Team Have no Plan to Combat ISIS - Independent Strategy and Intelligence Study Group
About Us - Independent Strategy and Intelligence Study Group
Soup Sandwich: Obama and His National Security Team Have no Plan to Combat ISIS - Independent Strategy and Intelligence Study Group
I'm not so sure. It looks to be more opinion than anything else, with the posted article anyway.
Brill
SOF Support
Are we really betraying the Kurds though? I thought the Turkey/Kurdish conflict resided between the host nation and PKK (Kurdistan Workers Union) aka the Guerilla faction that Barzani himself describes as an overbearing separatist organization that pushes Kurdish values using the wrong methods and ideologies. Barzani as well as the prime minister (right hand guy) even describes the actions by the PKK as potential disrupters of Kurdistan progress overall. The only catch here is that both the Peshmerga (led by Barzani) and the PKK are against ISIS, Turkey as well as Baghdad/Remenants of Iraqi forces are against ISIS, yet Turkey continues to strike PKK camps.
Even more odd, the PKK uses guerilla warfare / insurgency tactics against a nations force for influence on the government vice influence on the population. A total contradiction of IW.
Fucking weird and I personally can't comprehend it fully.
R/
H/A
Turkey hates the Kurds and maybe they will confine their strikes to "just" the PKK, but the Turks' history makes me skeptical. We've also either encouraged the PKK to fight ISIS or looked the other way. The PKK has detractors within the Kurdish community, but is also used at times when needed; the Kurds look the other way when it benefits them.
"One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter" I think we wouldn't bother to label the PKK as terrorists if we didn't need Turkey's support.
Ultimately, weakening the PKK undermines the Kurd's overall position or standing. We allow Turkey to bomb people indirectly helping us (we clearly weren't concerned about the bad, bad PKK when northern Iraq was being overrun) which weakens a group advocating for independence from Turkey. We come across as hypocrites and there will be a day when host nations think about the Hmong, Iraq 1991, Iraq 2011, Afghanistan 20-whatever, etc. and tell us to go pound sand.
Yup, Kamil Attaturk.... just saying. I agree with you.
Interesting development from Al-Monitor.
Tensions between Kurdish forces and the Iraqi military factor in as well. “If we go on the offense on our own, there will be problems,” Mara’an declared. "We need to avoid sensitivity between Arabs and Kurds." On Mosul, one of IS’ largest cities in Iraq, he had this to say: “If we attack Mosul, [the Iraqi government] will say it's Arab land. Therefore, we need coordination with the Iraqi army.”
Finally, concerns of friendly fire appear to compel the peshmerga and their allies to not move the front line forward. “There are other front lines. If we advance, we will be ahead of other lines. We have to be in one alignment,” said Samer Anwya, a Dwekh Nawsha soldier from the base in Baqofah.
Read more: Peshmerga 'ready' to advance on IS - Al-Monitor: the Pulse of the Middle East
Tensions between Kurdish forces and the Iraqi military factor in as well. “If we go on the offense on our own, there will be problems,” Mara’an declared. "We need to avoid sensitivity between Arabs and Kurds." On Mosul, one of IS’ largest cities in Iraq, he had this to say: “If we attack Mosul, [the Iraqi government] will say it's Arab land. Therefore, we need coordination with the Iraqi army.”
Finally, concerns of friendly fire appear to compel the peshmerga and their allies to not move the front line forward. “There are other front lines. If we advance, we will be ahead of other lines. We have to be in one alignment,” said Samer Anwya, a Dwekh Nawsha soldier from the base in Baqofah.
Read more: Peshmerga 'ready' to advance on IS - Al-Monitor: the Pulse of the Middle East
Brill
SOF Support
I hope this will cause hope & change within the USG.
Terrorist networks, such as al Qaeda, generally have only dozens or hundreds of members, attack civilians, do not hold territory, and cannot directly confront military forces. ISIS, on the other hand, boasts some 30,000 fighters, holds territory in both Iraq and Syria, maintains extensive military capabilities, controls lines of communication, commands infrastructure, funds itself, and engages in sophisticated military operations. If ISIS is purely and simply anything, it is a pseudo-state led by a conventional army. And that is why the counterterrorism and counterinsurgency strategies that greatly diminished the threat from al Qaeda will not work against ISIS.
ISIS Is Not a Terrorist Group
Terrorist networks, such as al Qaeda, generally have only dozens or hundreds of members, attack civilians, do not hold territory, and cannot directly confront military forces. ISIS, on the other hand, boasts some 30,000 fighters, holds territory in both Iraq and Syria, maintains extensive military capabilities, controls lines of communication, commands infrastructure, funds itself, and engages in sophisticated military operations. If ISIS is purely and simply anything, it is a pseudo-state led by a conventional army. And that is why the counterterrorism and counterinsurgency strategies that greatly diminished the threat from al Qaeda will not work against ISIS.
ISIS Is Not a Terrorist Group
Agreed, it is a state as described. It even raises taxes and provides utilities. Even if no other nation recognises it as a state, it still is. It should be wiped out to a man, but the appalling tragedy is that it's no-ones' priority to remove it.
pardus
Verified Military
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2006
- Messages
- 10,534
History tells me that if Obama is against it, then it's probably a good idea.
I, for one, am absolutely shocked that senior officials would do something like this. It is unprecedented for people well removed from the ground to rework the intel coming off the battlefield in order to paint a rosy picture for the bosses. I mean, everyone just wants the truth, regardless of how that makes some high-ranking personnel look after they have contradictory statements. The facts have ALWAYS been what mattered most to the brass.
Kraut783
SOF Support
Sorry, couldn't resist
Similar threads
