Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

Ken Burch

(50,254 posts)
Sun Sep 7, 2014, 10:00 PM Sep 2014

What do YOU think "ISIS", "ISIL", or "ISLAMIC STATE" actually is?

Please offer supporting arguments for your answer in the thread below.


20 votes, 0 passes | Time left: Unlimited
A genuine, spntaneous "jihadi" movement of bloodcrazed nihilists.
7 (35%)
A "false flag" operation created by the prowar Right to force U.S. troops back into Iraq.
4 (20%)
Something al-Maliki put together to get payback for his forced resignation.
0 (0%)
Something else
9 (45%)
Not sure
0 (0%)
Show usernames
Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll
31 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
What do YOU think "ISIS", "ISIL", or "ISLAMIC STATE" actually is? (Original Post) Ken Burch Sep 2014 OP
I think it's a movement that the PNACers are helping to force U.S. troops back into Iraq. n/t woodsprite Sep 2014 #1
fyi, that's covered in option 2 in the poll. n/t. Ken Burch Sep 2014 #2
Sorry, took that as a wholly 'false flag', rather than woodsprite Sep 2014 #13
...Mercenaries who are being funded, trained and supplied weapons by the military industrial complex 951-Riverside Sep 2014 #3
Keep posting this! AND if you haven't seen it - watch it! grahamhgreen Sep 2014 #28
As two things: NuclearDem Sep 2014 #4
I don't see the answer I think is true in your poll. kwassa Sep 2014 #5
They were quietly armed by Sunni states all over the region Warpy Sep 2014 #7
Well said YoungDemCA Sep 2014 #9
al-Baghdadi armed himself through conquest ... and financed the same way. kwassa Sep 2014 #10
You're not really giving a broad or even good selection Scootaloo Sep 2014 #6
Going to have to disagree with you on your last two points Lurks Often Sep 2014 #19
As well as, a chunk of IS is ex-Iraqi military. grahamhgreen Sep 2014 #29
A few of my thoughts YoungDemCA Sep 2014 #8
False flag by republica s to draw us into another senseless war. ncjustice80 Sep 2014 #11
They aren't nihlists BainsBane Sep 2014 #12
It's very much a nasty jihadist movement with horrific aims. AverageJoe90 Sep 2014 #14
Jihadists AnalystInParadise Sep 2014 #15
I don't know. Blue_In_AK Sep 2014 #16
All of the above CJCRANE Sep 2014 #17
Blowback. nt bemildred Sep 2014 #18
The inevitable result of Junior's Big Adventure in Iraq, QC Sep 2014 #20
Winner, winner, chicken dinner gratuitous Sep 2014 #22
Thank you! QC Sep 2014 #25
A threat to liberal and moderate human beings though not to those residing in the US. n/t pampango Sep 2014 #21
My guess, and that's what it is, hifiguy Sep 2014 #23
It is nature abhoring a vacuum. Xithras Sep 2014 #24
+1. One thing is they likely have the names of many of the jihadi's since they gave em guns in grahamhgreen Sep 2014 #27
It's a cross between false flag and genuine jihadi's. Fairly common op, arm some whakos to do grahamhgreen Sep 2014 #26
If I had to guess, I'd say an assortment of thugs and political and/or religious zealots that Marr Sep 2014 #30
A social construct. ZombieHorde Sep 2014 #31

woodsprite

(11,911 posts)
13. Sorry, took that as a wholly 'false flag', rather than
Mon Sep 8, 2014, 12:19 AM
Sep 2014

A legit group that fell into PNAC's lap, who then decided to encourage, fund, etc.

 

951-Riverside

(7,234 posts)
3. ...Mercenaries who are being funded, trained and supplied weapons by the military industrial complex
Sun Sep 7, 2014, 10:12 PM
Sep 2014

The "founding fathers" would undoubtedly be proud of the mass genocide the MIC has been able to accomplish in just a few years against the indigenous people in the middle east using these mercenaries.

The plan has always been to supply them with training, weapons and money then set them loose to destabilize countries and slaughter millions for a few years then come in with tanks, drones and bombs to finish off whats left while making an insane profit from the weapons and conquered land.





and...



Video: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/syria-arming-the-rebels/

NARRATOR: But in recent weeks, they have been receiving more sophisticated weapons. It appears the Obama administration is now allowing select groups of rebels like them to receive U.S.-made anti-tank missiles, known as TOWs. Many of the fighters have filmed themselves firing the missiles. In addition to receiving weapons, the commander says he and his men were taken on a long journey to a secret training camp.

REBEL COMMANDER: [through interpreter] They asked for a group of 80 or 90 fighters from our command, and we headed towards the Turkish border.

NARRATOR: Based on their accounts, we retraced their journey across the border into Turkey. After a 14-hour drive, they say they arrived in the Turkish capital of Ankara and were brought to a hotel. They were kept inside and questioned by Americans, who would only say they were from the military. But the rebels believed they were from the CIA.

REBEL COMMANDER: [through interpreter] We met them for six to seven hours a day. It was medical examinations, questions for each person individually, like, “When did you join the uprising?” And “What was your profession or military rank?”

They had tracked our work and asked us to verify information about attacks we carried out, such as who was present and how many men were martyred. Your responses have to match the entire group’s.

NARRATOR: A week later, the rebels say they were surprised by what happened next.

REBEL COMMANDER: [through interpreter] We only found out where we were going to be trained on the last day in Ankara, when the Americans said goodbye and that, “Tomorrow, we’ll see you in Qatar.”

NARRATOR: They were flown 1,500 miles away to Doha, the capital of Qatar, which is a key U.S. ally in the Persian Gulf.

REBEL COMMANDER: [through interpreter] We drove for about two, two-and-a-half hours to reach the training ground. It was close to the Saudi border. We didn’t know where we were because it was desert all around.

NARRATOR: Over the course of three weeks, they say they were trained by Americans at a base in the desert guarded by Qatari soldiers. Like many of the rebels who were sent to Qatar, 21-year-old Hussein had never had any previous military training.

HUSSEIN: [through interpreter] They trained us to ambush regime or enemy vehicles and cut off the road. They also trained us on how to attack a vehicle, raid it, retrieve information or weapons and munitions, and how to finish off soldiers still alive after an ambush.

NARRATOR: The rebels were outfitted with brand-new uniforms and boots.

MUHAMMAD ALI: [subtitles] Those trousers are from them, right?

HUSSEIN: [subtitles] Yeah. We got these boots in training.

MUHAMMAD ALI: The Americans were warning the fighters not to tell this story at all. And even at one point, they told them, “If in any case this story will be published, we will stop funding you or arming you.”

NARRATOR: The CIA and the State Department declined to comment on the fighters’ accounts of arming and training, though the Obama administration has said it plans to step up support to the rebels, and there have been other reports the CIA is running covert training out of Jordan.

 

NuclearDem

(16,184 posts)
4. As two things:
Sun Sep 7, 2014, 10:12 PM
Sep 2014

First, immense blowback.

Second, yet another chapter in the long bitter history of Islamic fundamentalist violence.

kwassa

(23,340 posts)
5. I don't see the answer I think is true in your poll.
Sun Sep 7, 2014, 10:15 PM
Sep 2014

It is not spontaneous jihadi, but the ambitious, ruthless Abu Bakr al-Bhaghdadi making his grab for absolute power in Iraq. In many ways, it reminds me of Saddam Hussein's rise to power by murdering all his opposition, real or perceived. What is really reminiscent is the idea of striking terror into your opposition by blatant and public viciousness. Both men are very smart paranoid dictators. Hussein was very influenced by Josef Stalin, and had a library of books on Stalin.

Al-Baghdadi has great organizational skill, and imaginative tactics. He is also psychopath.

Warpy

(111,243 posts)
7. They were quietly armed by Sunni states all over the region
Sun Sep 7, 2014, 10:27 PM
Sep 2014

while the rage at being snubbed by the mostly Shi'a government continued to increase.

They started with enough weapons to get going. They stole the rest when troops panicked and ran because either they sympathized with the Sunnis or they'd just lost all appetite for fighting by the time we got done with them.

The best psychopath organizer in the world can't do this in a vacuum. He needs help funding his ambition and especially help from a completely tone deaf political structure.

At best, they will redraw the maps of the region the way they should have been done by the retreating British Empire. At worst, they'll enjoy slaughter so much that the world will have to unite to slap them down. My best guess says it will be somewhere in the middle.

kwassa

(23,340 posts)
10. al-Baghdadi armed himself through conquest ... and financed the same way.
Sun Sep 7, 2014, 10:39 PM
Sep 2014

ISIS is plundering banks in Mosul, and extorting money from everyone they conquer.

ISIS has all types of American equipment captured from Iraqi troops that cut and ran.

He is a creative opportunist, and vastly smarter than any al-Qaeda leader seen so far.

 

Scootaloo

(25,699 posts)
6. You're not really giving a broad or even good selection
Sun Sep 7, 2014, 10:18 PM
Sep 2014

i believe that the men behind IS are actually very earnest about who and what they are - they're seeking to establish an Islamic state that destroys the artificial borders imposed in 1919 and replaces secular governance with a religious Caliphate. And that for all the barbarism in their methods, they are actually quite popular in the region they've claimed - because they're seen as better than either competing government... and as pertains to the Sunni Arabs who make the majority in these areas, that's probably actually true, disgustingly enough.

Now of course there's a lot of very interesting threads that are involved in weaving this situation.

- Why isn't IS going after Jordan? A Belgian soccer team could topple Amman and take control of that country, I can't imagine Is would find it challenging. But they stop right there at the border. Why? More astute question - what are the money links between Amman and Raqqah?

- Why do the Iraqi soldiers keep running? I think that these men received intentionally substandard training, from top to bottom. That it was an intentional act of sabotague by the US, from both relevant administrations - the US doesn't want a strong and capable iraqi military! it doesn't want any nation in the region to have that. (Well... one nation...)

 

Lurks Often

(5,455 posts)
19. Going to have to disagree with you on your last two points
Mon Sep 8, 2014, 09:51 AM
Sep 2014

Everything I have read suggests that the Jordanian military is considered to be a professional, competent military, even if the majority of their current equipment is starting to show it's age. The older equipment shouldn't be an issue facing ISIS.

I don't agree with the intentionally substandard training. It takes a lot of training and a lot of time to produce good senior NCO's and officers of the rank of major and above and the Iraqi military hasn't had the time to do that despite our help. Additionally the vast majority of senior officers (colonel and up) have little or no experience at those ranks. Under Saddam, virtually all of the senior officers would have been Sunni, Bathist and probably would have come from around Tikrit and been related to Saddam in some form.

Essentially Iraq had to start pretty much from scratch in rebuilding their military and having them break and run from ISIS wasn't a huge surprise.

Look up the battle of Kasserine Pass for an example of American troops breaking and running from a better trained and led opponent.

 

YoungDemCA

(5,714 posts)
8. A few of my thoughts
Sun Sep 7, 2014, 10:29 PM
Sep 2014

First, read this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Takfiri

Basically, they are an incredibly fanatical group of (mostly) young, often well-educated and middle-class Sunni Muslim men (and some women, surprisingly) from a wide variety of nationalities-ranging from Iraq, Syria, Saudi Arabia, and elsewhere in the Middle East to the United Kingdom and even the United States. They are united by thinking that they are the only true Muslims, and that anyone-Muslim or otherwise-who dares disagree with them, or whom is simply not like them, must be viciously and brutally killed. Furthermore, they are willing to bend and break their own religion's rules, because "the ends justify the means."

Their stated goal is to create a new Caliphate, but I honestly think that a lot of ISIS/ISIL's strength is driven by the political rivalries between different countries in the Middle East-particularly between the Saudis and the Iranians, who have both been fighting something of a protracted proxy war in Iraq and Syria (Actually, the Syrian conflict and the Assad regimes' brutality is a big catalyst for the recent resurgence of Sunni jihadists in the region...)

Also, as much as I hate to say it...the United States and its allies do bear some of the blame for destabilizing the region with the occupation of Iraq, and not replacing Saddam Hussein's government with something...well, something that could be tolerable and competent. Iraq's post-Saddam government has been dominated by the majority Shiites-a group that is more oriented toward Iran. Now, it's not surprising that the (mostly) Sunni Baathists were driven out of Iraqi politics and civil society, considering what happened under Saddam's rule. But that situation has definitely had an effect on what's happened since.

Finally, it's pretty obvious where all the gruesome and barbaric actions of ISIL came from; remember Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi? His group was the direct ancestor of ISIL, more or less. So it's not like there weren't plenty of jihadists already in the region with similar tactics (particularly since, again, the wars in Iraq and Syria). Exploiting social media for the shock value of beheading Westerners and showing how scary ISIL is=political theatre for ISIL.

Anyway...I believe they have received funding from a wide variety of sources-especially from sources within the Persian Gulf states-but since they've captured a lot of territory and resources in Iraq and Syria, they are becoming increasingly self-sufficient. Therefore, I don't know how much targeting funding sources from outside the region will have a big effect, particularly as time goes on.

That's my analysis, anyway.

BainsBane

(53,029 posts)
12. They aren't nihlists
Sun Sep 7, 2014, 11:05 PM
Sep 2014

They seek to create a larger caliphate. The reason they are called the Islamic State is that they operate as a state: provide protection, schools, collect taxes, etc... Those are not the actions of nihilists. They hate Westerners, but they seek to create something.
And no, they are not a false flag operation.
They have been in existence for three years, so the al-Malaki explanation doesn't hold either. None of your choices are good.

Additionally, the experts I've heard speak on the matter say they cannot be defeated, not with the level of commitment the US has, which is not much due to war fatigue by the public and administration alike. They can at best be contained.

 

AverageJoe90

(10,745 posts)
14. It's very much a nasty jihadist movement with horrific aims.
Mon Sep 8, 2014, 01:49 AM
Sep 2014

Not so sure it's spontaneous, though. Or genuine.

 

AnalystInParadise

(1,832 posts)
15. Jihadists
Mon Sep 8, 2014, 02:06 AM
Sep 2014

pure and simple. We (USD-C) in Baghdad were tracking elements of these guys in 2010-2011, my last tour in Iraq. But no one on either side of the political aisle wanted to hear there was a new threat brewing. Our side and the pukes only wanted to end the war and didn't want to hear bad news. Frankly, I blame the entire Federal govt. for ISIS, there were soldiers and contractors in the IC warning about these guys and we were told to go sit in the corner and finger paint because "nobody had time for ISIS".....

Blue_In_AK

(46,436 posts)
16. I don't know.
Mon Sep 8, 2014, 03:39 AM
Sep 2014

It's hard to trust the media portrayal. They could be as awful as they're being depicted, or there could be a lot of exaggeration. Like they say, one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. But if what we're being told is true, these guys are particularly pissed.

What I don't understand, though, is why Saudi Arabia gets to behead people all the time and yet they're our allies.

QC

(26,371 posts)
20. The inevitable result of Junior's Big Adventure in Iraq,
Mon Sep 8, 2014, 10:08 AM
Sep 2014

one predicted by his own father, who said that he left Saddam in place because otherwise Iraq would collapse into sectarian warfare.

gratuitous

(82,849 posts)
22. Winner, winner, chicken dinner
Mon Sep 8, 2014, 11:22 AM
Sep 2014

The normal and natural result of a disastrous foreign policy going back 30 years. It would be startling if something like IS didn't coalesce.

 

hifiguy

(33,688 posts)
23. My guess, and that's what it is,
Mon Sep 8, 2014, 11:27 AM
Sep 2014

is that ISIL is a group of fanatics that generated spontaneously ab initio. That is the kind of thing that happens in the ME with Islamic fanatics, and it happens on a regular basis. BUT why they are NOW is the Saudis' latest proxy army for stirring shit and battling the Shi'a powers. I would bet something substantial indeed that the Saudis are pulling the strings and writing the checks. It is what the Saudis do.

Xithras

(16,191 posts)
24. It is nature abhoring a vacuum.
Mon Sep 8, 2014, 11:28 AM
Sep 2014

Whenever there is a power vacuum, there is someone willing to step up and fill it. Typically, it's filled by the guy with the most guns and the willingness to use them.

We destroyed Iraq and created a power vacuum in the Iraqi north. Then we stoked the war in Syria, and created a power vacuum in eastern Syria while simultaneously encouraging a flood of arms and money into the region. ISIS was the inevitable result.

Only fools support war, because war never goes according to plan. The pro-war left had the crutch of Bush to fall back on, blaming him for the failures during those campaigns. In a sane world, Libya and Syria would have demonstrated the pointlessness of stoking conflict in other countries (even for the "right" reasons), but we don't live in a sane world. Hawks will be hawks, and we'll have a new "good war" on Wednesday.

 

grahamhgreen

(15,741 posts)
27. +1. One thing is they likely have the names of many of the jihadi's since they gave em guns in
Mon Sep 8, 2014, 01:22 PM
Sep 2014

the first place.

 

grahamhgreen

(15,741 posts)
26. It's a cross between false flag and genuine jihadi's. Fairly common op, arm some whakos to do
Mon Sep 8, 2014, 01:21 PM
Sep 2014

your dirty work (Mujahadeen/bin laden), then get more cash when the blowback starts.

 

Marr

(20,317 posts)
30. If I had to guess, I'd say an assortment of thugs and political and/or religious zealots that
Mon Sep 8, 2014, 01:28 PM
Sep 2014

our war marketeers have packaged into a nice, comic book style villain.

I mean really-- "ISIS" would be at home in a Bond movie.

ZombieHorde

(29,047 posts)
31. A social construct.
Mon Sep 8, 2014, 01:34 PM
Sep 2014

People use faction-based social constructs in order to justify/excuse all sorts of violence. For example, the US used factions based on skin color in order to justify slavery, interment camps, small pox blankets, etc.

It's just people killing people.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»What do YOU think "I...