|
Any better photos of this mass migration?
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 07:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 21:09 |
|
|
redscare posted:Civilians fleeing violent conflict, you say? Well this is a new and unheard-of development! Umiapik posted:"On no account must we think about why ISIS is facing so little resistance in Sunni areas, or why ordinary Sunnis might welcome their takeovers! The only acceptable response to ISIS is to bravely defy them on the internet!" Can't have his cake and eat it too.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 07:39
|
|
|
Baloogan posted:Any better photos of this mass migration? IOM reported 500,000 total. A lot of them told media in Arbil that they were most afraid of Iraqi army shelling and bombing.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 09:52
|
|
|
Rumors flying about that the Battle of Samara might be happening soon. Reports of ISIS fighters massing to try and take the city. There's also some reports that Shia Militia men have poured into Samara and replaced the Iraqi security forces there, if ISIS decides tot try and take the city we're definitely looking at a bloodbath in the making. Al-Saqr fucked around with this message at 10:54 on Jun 13, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 10:35
|
|
|
Here's a list of what's supposedly official ISIS Twitter accounts http://justpaste.it/ISIS_wlyat
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 11:02
|
|
|
Al-Saqr posted:Rumors flying about that the Battle of Samara might be happening soon. Reports of ISIS fighters massing to try and take the city. Worth checking out this analysis too suggesting that such a move might be in part a feint for a strike on Baghdad. Scary stuff. http://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/battle-baghdad-scenarios
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 11:06
|
|
|
It seems like these ISIL are organizing and training in Turkey. Why didn't Turkey notice all those guys crossing the border with a truck full of ammunition. This has been going on since the beginning it seems with militia recruiters having tons of control in the refugee camps.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 11:35
|
|
|
These people can't really be insane enough to think that they can take the whole of the country, can they? Well, I mean, I'm sure the individual fighters are that insane, but their leadership must have some grounding in reality if they're competent enough to have taken what they have so far, right?
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 11:36
|
|
|
They're fanatics. I'm sure there are cool heads that will want to consolidate and get some sweet oil money from their territory but sooner or later they'll be pushing into shia territory.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 11:49
|
|
|
Sucrose posted:These people can't really be insane enough to think that they can take the whole of the country, can they? Well, I mean, I'm sure the individual fighters are that insane, but their leadership must have some grounding in reality if they're competent enough to have taken what they have so far, right? Napoleon was an exceptional general but his successes eventually went to his head so even if ISIS leaders are very capable they could have fallen to hubris. Military leaders have to act decisively on limited evidence in short time periods and sometimes if they act brazenly at the right time they can achieve 'impossible' victories. Other times doing the same can lead to disaster and infamy. Now in this case trying to invade Shia areas certainly looks like it'll end very poorly for ISIS but we don't the intelligence and strategy they're working from. In addition they could be saying they'll take Baghdad so as to get the Iraqi government to dig in rather than counterattack, to maintain their troops morale or for PR reasons to attract recruits and allies or for any number of other reasons. We won't know until it happens.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 12:12
|
|
|
What's going on in Iraq is criminally under reported at the moment. The first I heard of this was a mention in the news today that Australia may be sending troops back. So what's actually going on, has the country fallen into a heap of civil war along religious lines?
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 12:35
|
|
|
Sistani has declared a fatwa against ISIS. Expect the Shia militias to continue growing.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 12:48
|
|
|
Execu-speak posted:What's going on in Iraq is criminally under reported at the moment. The first I heard of this was a mention in the news today that Australia may be sending troops back. The Iraqi government/US failed to create a strong, effective/reliable military, and the major religious/tribal players didn't give up their guns when things quietened down, they simply decided to wait out till the US left. The US left. ISIS start leaning in more from Syria into easier ground in Iraq, and find that multiple divisions of IAR will run away at the sight of a thousand or so milita. Iraqi government are already so scared, they can't get enough people into Baghdad to meet quorum. ISIS exploit this and keep the momentum rolling. The Kurds have been largely sat biding their time for decades for a chance like this, and now largely have their own state in all but name. Iraqi government looks to the the only effective forces it has left available, various other religious militia and begging the US to start shock and awe. So yeah, things fell back into civil war along religious/tribal grounds as many predicted it would, but I think people are taken aback by just how quick ISIS have accelerated the collapse. I give the Iraqi government two months, less than a month if ISIS got a big bankroll recently and keep up the city seizing/defector soaking.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 12:49
|
|
|
Execu-speak posted:What's going on in Iraq is criminally under reported at the moment. The first I heard of this was a mention in the news today that Australia may be sending troops back. Violence in the country has been picking up for a while now but ISIS has decided it's time to expand to the east having got bored of the stalemate in syria. It's not quite open civil war yet but it won't be long  EDIT:vv okay now it's a civil war vv Loving Africa Chaps fucked around with this message at 13:00 on Jun 13, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 12:49
|
|
|
Ayatollah Sistani, the shithead occupation cleric who was the primary reason the Shia stayed mostly quiet against the americans (back when there was a modicum of a truly cross sectarian national uprising back in 2004), has now decided to call on his sect to take up arms against ISIS. I have nothing but contempt for this old doddering sectarian fuckhead collaborator cleric.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 12:51
|
|
|
ISIS has been expanding it's territory and openly challenging the Iraqi state for months now. They took Fallujah back in January and have killed hundreds of Iraqi soldiers since then. It's only in the last few days that the Western media have suddenly woken up and started writing zillions of "who are ISIS??" style articles.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 12:58
|
|
|
I know this will sound weird, but how the hell did the US plan iraq post the 2003 invasion? how did it slip into sectarianism? was there any effort to create something where all sects/ethnic groups could have a part in Iraq?
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 13:03
|
|
|
Fizzil posted:I know this will sound weird, but how the hell did the US plan iraq post the 2003 invasion? how did it slip into sectarianism? was there any effort to create something where all sects/ethnic groups could have a part in Iraq?  There was no planning for the post-invasion of Iraq. Bush apparently didn't even realize the issue of the Sunni-Shiite divide in the runup to the war. Speaking of Bush, some papers are having making jokes at his expense https://twitter.com/Georg_Heil/status/477356405067120640/photo/1 New Division fucked around with this message at 13:36 on Jun 13, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 13:13
|
|
|
New Division posted:
In Imperial Life in the Emerald City there is significant discussion of how complete a fuckup post-invasion "planning" was. Essentially the entire Iraqi army was disbanded and not given new jobs or responsibility for security, state run factories and other businesses had all of their workers given pinkslips, and their foremen were replaced with graduates from Regent University. Obviously, this didn't work well because you can't just replace all your skilled workers overnight, and you can't replace experienced foremen with 20 somethings who spent their college years actively making themselves stupider.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 13:37
|
|
|
Fizzil posted:I know this will sound weird, but how the hell did the US plan iraq post the 2003 invasion? how did it slip into sectarianism? was there any effort to create something where all sects/ethnic groups could have a part in Iraq? I can't think of any other, more complete, thorough and accessible walkthrough of the Iraq War than this documentary by Frontline: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/bushswar/ There are also loads more here, although the above one incorporates elements from a lot of the earlier ones. Still great resources, though: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/gsearch.html?q=iraq&submit=Search+%C2%BB
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 13:37
|
|
|
I've heard the Iraqi army recieved, at the least, adaquete training from the US military. Problem is, they're badly paid, badly armed, lacking in good leadership, lacking support, and predominately Shiite so they don't get along well with the Sunni population, and dying for a government that many, especially non-Shiites, see as having no legitimacy. Why fight and die for a government that can't even pay you, to defend people that hate you? Training alone isn't going to get people to risk their lives. At least thats what I've picked up from radio interviews regarding the past few events. Its one side of the story, at least; I imagine the sectarian tensions ran both way enough that the army managed to piss away whatever goodwill they might have started with the sunnis.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 13:51
|
|
|
Grand Theft Autobot posted:In Imperial Life in the Emerald City there is significant discussion of how complete a fuckup post-invasion "planning" was. Essentially the entire Iraqi army was disbanded and not given new jobs or responsibility for security, state run factories and other businesses had all of their workers given pinkslips, and their foremen were replaced with graduates from Regent University. Obviously, this didn't work well because you can't just replace all your skilled workers overnight, and you can't replace experienced foremen with 20 somethings who spent their college years actively making themselves stupider.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 14:04
|
|
|
I remember the press lionizing Sistani as a reasonable elder statesman, it seems he was just biding his time to make a foray into sectarian war. Also holy poo poo I think Tom Friedman has lost it. I was just minding my own business reading that paragraph then BAM ENVIRONMENTALISTS out of loving nowhere.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 14:28
|
|
|
Some Internet dude I follow is trying to tie ISIS' ascent to weapons proliferating in post-Gaddafi Libya. That's pretty much bullshit, right? I know they made it to Mali, but have they actually made it east in considerable numbers?
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 14:34
|
|
|
Grand Theft Autobot posted:In Imperial Life in the Emerald City there is significant discussion of how complete a fuckup post-invasion "planning" was. Essentially the entire Iraqi army was disbanded and not given new jobs or responsibility for security, state run factories and other businesses had all of their workers given pinkslips, and their foremen were replaced with graduates from Regent University. Obviously, this didn't work well because you can't just replace all your skilled workers overnight, and you can't replace experienced foremen with 20 somethings who spent their college years actively making themselves stupider. It's also generally a bad idea to put a bunch of military guys out of work at the start of a decade-long occupation, because they'll walk away from their posts with their weapons and do exactly what they did, which was kick off the insurgency.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 14:37
|
|
|
So I'm studying abroad for another two weeks, but I just picked up on this and I'm not sure how to feel. On the one hand, I really REALLY really don't want Obama to backpedal on getting out of Iraq. On the other hand, I'm really irritated we did so lovely a job the first time that we've essentially made/let this happen right in front of us. God dammit, I would poo poo into Bush and Cheney's open mouths if I ever got the chance. How the gently caress did they manage to get our army, which apparently was retardedly managed, across the ocean?
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 14:39
|
|
|
GuyinCognito posted:It seems like these ISIL are organizing and training in Turkey. Why didn't Turkey notice all those guys crossing the border with a truck full of ammunition. This has been going on since the beginning it seems with militia recruiters having tons of control in the refugee camps. I've heard this accusation elsewhere and I have no real idea on this. ISIS apparently occupies a border crossing town with Turkey. The allegation was that the line of advance in Iraq is basically a straight drive. If Turkey is supporting ISIS it seems like a gambit that isn't paying off.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 14:45
|
|
|
Torpor posted:I've heard this accusation elsewhere and I have no real idea on this. ISIS apparently occupies a border crossing town with Turkey. The allegation was that the line of advance in Iraq is basically a straight drive. If Turkey is supporting ISIS it seems like a gambit that isn't paying off. Erdogan's gotten pretty crazy though, to the point that its actually anyone's guess what he will do or say next.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 14:49
|
|
|
Shinjobi posted:So I'm studying abroad for another two weeks, but I just picked up on this and I'm not sure how to feel.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 14:54
|
|
|
MothraAttack posted:Some Internet dude I follow is trying to tie ISIS' ascent to weapons proliferating in post-Gaddafi Libya. That's pretty much bullshit, right? I know they made it to Mali, but have they actually made it east in considerable numbers? I doubt it but I'm sure at least some of them floated over to the Syrian war and now to Iraq.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 14:54
|
|
|
Shinjobi posted:So I'm studying abroad for another two weeks, but I just picked up on this and I'm not sure how to feel. Its probably too late to do much about it at this point. We would have to somehow get the shiites and sunnis to back away from the brink, and at least get them to believe that the government of Iraq is going to be impartial in the whole thing and not be beholden to one group or the other. Good luck there.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 15:00
|
|
|
Tiler Kiwi posted:Its probably too late to do much about it at this point. We would have to somehow get the shiites and sunnis to back away from the brink, and at least get them to believe that the government of Iraq is going to be impartial in the whole thing and not be beholden to one group or the other. Good luck there. I don't think it would be terribly difficult, actually. Obama cannot really stand to let ISIS develop a state, like at all. It looks like the Shiites' call to arms is largely a creature of necessity rather than a calculated escalation. The Sunnis do not appear to really want ISIS in control out of anything other than necessity. Get rid of ISIS and separate the factions and that'll go a long way to stabilizing things. Divide Iraq.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 15:06
|
|
|
Al-Saqr posted:Ayatollah Sistani, the shithead occupation cleric who was the primary reason the Shia stayed mostly quiet against the americans (back when there was a modicum of a truly cross sectarian national uprising back in 2004), has now decided to call on his sect to take up arms against ISIS. Calling for political unity and support for the army while condemning the takeover of Nineveh is a bit less than what your inferring. Plus, he's a quietist twelver and the situation was/is more complicated than you make it sound? Despite your irrationally violent rage over a situation your not in, the Americans taking Iraq are hardly comparable to Takfiris swooping down giving promises that they will wipe out all Shiites.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 15:30
|
|
|
The Brown Menace posted:Not incorrect. I mean sure we'd all love to pretend that ISIS is the worst poo poo ever, and they actually are a strong contender, but ISIS is also very good at keeping up (sharia) law and order. They don't just randomly gently caress with people, and many of the freedoms they restrict are ones which the people they govern never used or intended to use anyway. For some, the crazy roaming sharia wannabe-caliphate is a better option than constantly being hounded by thieves and rapists, who effectively get scared away by ISIS' "scary motherfucker" aura. "The UN said hundreds have been killed - with militants carrying out summary executions of civilians in Mosul, including 17 civilians in one street. A dozen Iraqi security personnel were also killed and four women committed suicide after being raped. " I like how rape is perfectly ok but don't you dare listen to music Drunk & Ugly fucked around with this message at 16:09 on Jun 13, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 16:07
|
|
|
Grand Theft Autobot posted:In Imperial Life in the Emerald City there is significant discussion of how complete a fuckup post-invasion "planning" was. Essentially the entire Iraqi army was disbanded and not given new jobs or responsibility for security, state run factories and other businesses had all of their workers given pinkslips, and their foremen were replaced with graduates from Regent University. Obviously, this didn't work well because you can't just replace all your skilled workers overnight, and you can't replace experienced foremen with 20 somethings who spent their college years actively making themselves stupider.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 16:20
|
|
|
Bait and Swatch posted:Calling for political unity and support for the army while condemning the takeover of Nineveh is a bit less than what your inferring. Plus, he's a quietist twelver and the situation was/is more complicated than you make it sound? Despite your irrationally violent rage over a situation your not in, the Americans taking Iraq are hardly comparable to Takfiris swooping down giving promises that they will wipe out all Shiites. this is the report, it's quite clear what he's calling for:-  Oh there is no doubt at all that ISIS are the worst in everything and are horrible human beings in every respect, The situation now is as horrible as it could ever be, if I were a Shiite Iraqi I would definitely fight ISIS with everything I've got. But let's not forget that in the spring of 2004, the U.S. military found itself with a sudden uprising of BOTH Sunni and Shia Iraqis against their occupation (to the point that mehdi army people actually went to fallujah to participate in the first battle over there) but sistani decided to side with the occupation and used his religious position to that effect, because him and his cronies and pay masters in Iran were the ones who were going to win out of that deal. Of course after that the whole thing turned sectarian, Alqaeda destroyed the Iraqi national resistance from within, and the Mehdi army (along with the thugs of Maliki) turned to mass ethnic cleansing and sectarian death quad behavior. Overall the occupation benefited immensely from Sistani's sectarian agenda and acquiescence, but I think for a short window in 2004 had sistani been someone of greater moral and nationalistic fibre we would be seeing a vastly different Iraq today. So excuse me, if I happen to have a problem with this 'quietest' dude who did not have any problems with his countrymen getting destroyed by a foreign occupation suddenly deciding that force was a good idea as long as his sectarian agenda called for it. Also, I am in no way irrationally violent or in 'rage' I'm simply stating my opinion on the tragedy of what's happening on the ground and I am angry at these sectarian killers on both sides, of course I use colorful language because that's what I do, so I would appreciate it if you did not call me things like 'irrationally violent'. Al-Saqr fucked around with this message at 17:05 on Jun 13, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 16:57
|
|
|
This was originally from an ISIS propaganda video, claiming they were ambushing Iraqi soldiers on their way to report for duty. They also showed people at checkpoints checking names vs a list, and leading away people on that list to get shot.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 16:59
|
|
|
I know this is pretty basic stuff, but it's really strange to me watching mainstream US coverage how they use "terrorist" to describe ISIL. They're very clearly engaging in open warfare for territory, and they have aspirations for creating a state: clearly it would be way more descriptive to call them rebels, militants, or an army. On top of that, there's this obsession with tying them to Al-Qaeda - every commercial break teaser has "meet the group that was considered Too Extreme for Even Al-Qaeda", "meet the guy who fancies himself the next bin Laden." It seems like a really useful tactic to justify re-invasion of Iraq on the grounds of a renewed Global War on Terror. Like, the reactions that the American public has to "a seperatist force of anti-Shia rebels is establishing an independent, islamic state in Iraq" is very, very different to "the Al-Qaeda affiliated terrorist group ISIL, led by a man who fancies himself the next bin Laden, are forming an enclave in Iraq." And cable news, as far as I've seen, has leaned far more heavily toward the latter interpretation than the former. The language being used has seemed to me to be specifically chosen to enflame American's fears about international terrorism. Periodiko fucked around with this message at 17:23 on Jun 13, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 17:17
|
|
|
Perhaps reading too much into it? American cable news has a tendency to dumb things down.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 17:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 21:09 |
|
|
Al-Saqr posted:
That statement from Sistani is shockingly unexpected and different from what I first saw reported on the Karbala prayers. That being said, why would Sistani call for support of: Sunni fighters who had already killed Bakr al Hakim in 2003 (Zarqawi and his TWJ) and killed 200 pilgrims during Arbayeen in early 2004. Not to mention numerous other attacks. Just because America didn't recognize them for what they were doesn't mean Iraqis didn't. As for MAS, he had bucked Sistani's advice and was latgely disowned following his establishment of JAM and his issuance of a fatwa saying looting was okay and that everyone could keep what they stole as long as they gave his organization 1/5 of the price as a tax. Expecting any prominent person in Iraq to stand up and call for attacks on the coalition authority a year in is a pipe dream. No one knew what the next 9 years held and everyone was of the mindset of "surely this can't get worse." Sistani had no reason to call for an uprising when the Shia finally had a chance to gain power. What would the end game have been? The Shia still get power but without CF? We'd be in the exact same situation. Who would have led at that time if CF was pushed out? Jaafri? He's more of an Iranian puppet than Maliki or Sistani. There was simply no reason for Sistani to support the militanta, especially the Salafi and Baathist insurgents, who had no love lost for him or the Shia either.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2014 17:35
|
|