What's new

IS Mega Discussion Thread

British militant Jihadi John 'flees Islamic State' in fear of his life
Notorious self-styled Islamic State executioner 'Jihadi John' has reportedly fled the militant group's territory and is now on the run in Syria.

The Daily Mirror says that sources told the newspaper that the London-born terrorist - real name Mohammed Emwazi - has been terrified by the publicity he recieved after being identified as the murderer of British and American hostages and fears he is being hunted by allied special forces.

The newspaper also reports that Emwazi is running because he fears he is no longer valuable to the terror group.

26-year-old Emwazi is wanted for the gruesome killings of journalists and aid workers Stephen Sotloff, James Foley, David Haines, Alan Henning and Peter Kassig last year.

According to some reports, US and UK special forces are in both Iraq and Syria and it is thought the British radical could be high on a potential 'kill or capture' list.

It is thought Emwazi may try and flee to North Africa and join up with other radical militants there.
http://www.itv.com/news/2015-07-26/...john-flees-islamic-state-in-fear-of-his-life/

Meanwhile another 3 Britons have been killed in Syria in the last 3 weeks (all of Bengali origin notably)
http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/news/local/final-portsmouth-jihadi-assad-uzzaman-dies-in-syria-1-6869922
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ime-Minister-killed-anti-ISIS-air-strike.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...lamic-State-to-skip-bail-killed-in-Syria.html
 
Muslims must focus, not on mass media or the atrocities committed by this criminal gang of bandits - as far from 'Islamic State' as one can imagine - but on reclaiming the narrative, and presenting the true one. Muslim unity would help to defeat these dividers and rulers, which means all national and sectarian differences should be set aside.

There are times when people experience utter hopelessness and helplessness, when they witness great suffering, caused by poverty or wars, often results of injustice, iniquity and oppression. Feeling guilty and powerless is inevitable, and arises out of the profound belief that change cannot, or will never, be effected.

However, history teaches us that change can and does occur: it does not always require a majority to bring about beneficial change, a small group or minority can transform communities and societies, inspire their compatriots or co-religionists to realise their potential, and create beautiful spaces wherein all peoples can thrive, prosper, attain harmony, unity and - above all else - peace. Thereby relegating those who profit from death and destruction to the pages of history.

We must not assume, conclude or think that vast numbers of people - as opposed to a few - will defeat the forces of evil, or make the changes we desire to see. All that is needed is belief in justice, righteousness and equity, along with sincerity, humility and patience.

Words of truth are the greatest weapons against false ideologies, because promoters of extremism and supremacism use violence to advance their perverted agenda, whereas believers in justice and equity only ever employ the truth to confirm their cause.

"..How often has a small host overcome a great host by God's leave! For God is with those who are patient in adversity."
Q2:249

"...if there be one hundred of you who are patient in adversity, they shall overcome two hundred; and if there be one thousand of you, they shall overcome two thousand by God's leave: for God is with those who are patient in adversity."
Q8:66


The idea stressed in the above verses is important, because it reveals that a minority can win in seemingly impossible conditions, providing their cause is righteous. The way to defeat terrorist groups is not to employ their methods - which only leads to more violence, death and destruction - but to speak the truth about their lies, manipulations and deceit. Knowing the truth would prevent vulnerable Muslims from joining these extremist groups, whose cause is rooted in the ideology promoted and propagated by the Saudi royal regime.( Because Al-Wahhab - The Bestower - is one of Allah SwT's Attributes, I try to avoid employing the term Wahhabism.)
 
^ sometime merely speaking against atrocities isn't enough. In case of ISIS, one has to take a stand and wipe them off of the face of earth.
 
^ sometime merely speaking against atrocities isn't enough. In case of ISIS, one has to take a stand and wipe them off of the face of earth.

Taking a stand is only for Israel, ISIS will just get a distant stern look.
 
^ sometime merely speaking against atrocities isn't enough. In case of ISIS, one has to take a stand and wipe them off of the face of earth.

Who is going to "wipe them off the face of the earth"? Morally bankrupt and extremely corrupt Arab/Muslim or Western governments? Those who are, in part, responsible for the rise in extremist and supremacist ideologies, especially the hypocritical royal regime in Saudi Arabia?

In order to combat a vile ideology, which is fuelled by violence, aggression and war, a counter-narrative has to be offered, one founded upon truth, righteousness, justice, equity and compassion. That is the legacy of the Prophets (pbut) - yes, there were battles and military campaigns, but not before the Message from Allah SwT had been delivered, preached and explained.

Muslims are invited to fight, and defeat, those Muslims who are perpetrating wrongs and injustices. So, which of the 'Muslim' - Arab, African or Asian - armies would you trust to fight ISIS?
 
I will definitely go, maybe my presence will double their numbers.


Al-Hamdu Li-Llah :)

Although, it is not weight of numbers that count, it is the sincerity of intention of those who do attend - please see Q2:249 and Q8:66 quoted above.

In sha'a Allah SwT, hope to go too.
 
Turkey and US preparing a ground attack on ISIS.

65vqenj.png


Al-Hamdu Li-Llah :)

Although, it is not weight of numbers that count, it is the sincerity of intention of those who do attend - please see Q2:249 and Q8:66 quoted above.

In sha'a Allah SwT, hope to go too.

It takes a drop to muddy a glass but an ocean to clear the glass.
 
[MENTION=95766]leatherface58[/MENTION] I read on PP somewhere that ISIS use chickens as suicide bombers :))) I swear you can do that in Dead Trigger 2 on android to distract the zombies
 
[MENTION=95766]leatherface58[/MENTION] I read on PP somewhere that ISIS use chickens as suicide bombers :))) I swear you can do that in Dead Trigger 2 on android to distract the zombies
Holy hell :)))

I am reminded of Charlie Sheen using the chicken as the arrow in Hot Shots: Part Deux.

Right nutters these people.
 
Turkey and US preparing a ground attack on ISIS.

65vqenj.png




It takes a drop to muddy a glass but an ocean to clear the glass.


An ocean would break the glass, not clear it.

Muslims are good at complaining, whinging and whining. They are also good at sitting back and letting other people do what they themselves should be doing - confronting the extremist ideology which groups like IS promote and propagate (and which has its roots in Saudi Arabia), by restoring the true Message of Islam, which rests upon the Grace and Mercy of Allah SwT.

Join the movement towards justice, equity, righteousness, mercy and peace. Let us defeat those who employ religion, sect or nationality to kill, injure, divide and rule - whosoever they may be - by speaking the language of humanity, so that humankind may attain unity.

http://www.detglobal.net/
 
An ocean would break the glass, not clear it.

Muslims are good at complaining, whinging and whining. They are also good at sitting back and letting other people do what they themselves should be doing - confronting the extremist ideology which groups like IS promote and propagate (and which has its roots in Saudi Arabia), by restoring the true Message of Islam, which rests upon the Grace and Mercy of Allah SwT.

Join the movement towards justice, equity, righteousness, mercy and peace. Let us defeat those who employ religion, sect or nationality to kill, injure, divide and rule - whosoever they may be - by speaking the language of humanity, so that humankind may attain unity.

http://www.detglobal.net/

It's a metaphorical glass, it can contain all the water needed for the sake of conversation :)

It seems to be a good initiative. But I like the comfort of skepticism better.
 
An ocean would break the glass, not clear it.

Muslims are good at complaining, whinging and whining. They are also good at sitting back and letting other people do what they themselves should be doing - confronting the extremist ideology which groups like IS promote and propagate (and which has its roots in Saudi Arabia), by restoring the true Message of Islam, which rests upon the Grace and Mercy of Allah SwT.

Join the movement towards justice, equity, righteousness, mercy and peace. Let us defeat those who employ religion, sect or nationality to kill, injure, divide and rule - whosoever they may be - by speaking the language of humanity, so that humankind may attain unity.

http://www.detglobal.net/

It's a metaphorical glass, it can contain all the water needed for the sake of conversation :)

It seems to be a good initiative. But I like the comfort of skepticism better.
 
Oh dear, how unfortunate....


The Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL) terrorist group plans to send 16 of its fighters on suicide missions after they were tested positive for AIDS, a Syrian source claimed.

The fighters are currently in quarantine in a hospital in the city of Mayadeen in the eastern Syrian province of Deir ez-Zor, the Kurdish Syrian ARA news reported.

“Most of those infected are foreign militants who had sexual intercourse with two Moroccan women. The women passed on the disease to the militants before their infection was revealed. We were ordered by the group’s local leadership to transfer the infected militants to a quarantine center in the city,” the agency cited a local Syrian doctor as saying.

The doctor said the two women escaped to Turkey fearing they would be executed for giving the disease to IS fighters.

https://www.rt.com/news/312986-isis-aids-suicide-missions/
 
Islamic State conflict: Two Britons killed in RAF Syria strike

_85415260_jihad.jpg


Two British Islamic State jihadists who died in Syria were killed by an RAF drone strike, David Cameron has said.

Cardiff-born Reyaad Khan, 21, and Ruhul Amin, from Aberdeen, died last month in Raqqa, alongside another fighter, in the first targeted UK drone attack on a British citizen, Mr Cameron told MPs.

Khan - the target - had been plotting "barbaric" attacks on UK soil, he said.

The "act of self defence" was lawful, despite MPs previously ruling out UK military action in Syria, the PM said.

Khan was killed in a precision strike on 21 August by a remotely piloted aircraft, "after meticulous planning", while he was travelling in a vehicle.

Another British national, Junaid Hussain, 21 and from Birmingham, was killed in a separate air strike by US forces in Raqqa on 24 August

Both Khan and Hussain had been involved in actively recruiting IS "sympathisers" and plotting to attack "high-profile public commemorations" taking place in the UK this summer, the prime minister said.

The attorney general had been consulted and agreed there was a "clear legal basis" for the strike on Khan, Mr Cameron added.

Acting Labour leader Harriet Harman urged the government to publish the legal advice.

Downing Street said it was a "long-standing convention that we do not publish advice of the law officers".
'Directing murder'

Two years ago MPs rejected possible UK military action in Syria, but last September approved British participation in air strikes against IS targets in Iraq only.

However, officials said the UK would "act immediately [in Syria] and explain to Parliament afterwards" if there was "a critical British national interest at stake".

The strike on Khan was "the first time in modern times that a British asset has been used to conduct a strike in a country where we're not involved in a war", the PM confirmed.

"Of course Britain has used remotely piloted aircraft in Iraq and Afghanistan but this is a new departure and that's why I thought it important to come to the House and explain why I think it is necessary and justified."

Mr Cameron told MPs: "My first duty as prime minister is to keep the British people safe."

In reference to Khan, he added: "There was a terrorist directing murder on our streets and no other means to stop him.

"This government does not for one moment take these decisions lightly.

"But I am not prepared to stand here in the aftermath of a terrorist attack on our streets and have to explain to the House why I did not take the chance to prevent it when I could have done."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-34178998
 
I have never understood where this group has come from all of a sudden and they always seemed dodgy, found an interesting article on this

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jun/03/us-isis-syria-iraq

Now the truth emerges: how the US fuelled the rise of Isis in Syria and Iraq

The war on terror, that campaign without end launched 14 years ago by George Bush, is tying itself up in ever more grotesque contortions. On Monday the trial in London of a Swedish man, Bherlin Gildo, accused of terrorism in Syria, collapsed after it became clear British intelligence had been arming the same rebel groups the defendant was charged with supporting.

The prosecution abandoned the case, apparently to avoid embarrassing the intelligence services. The defence argued that going ahead with the trial would have been an “affront to justice” when there was plenty of evidence the British state was itself providing “extensive support” to the armed Syrian opposition.

That didn’t only include the “non-lethal assistance” boasted of by the government (including body armour and military vehicles), but training, logistical support and the secret supply of “arms on a massive scale”. Reports were cited that MI6 had cooperated with the CIA on a “rat line” of arms transfers from Libyan stockpiles to the Syrian rebels in 2012 after the fall of the Gaddafi regime.

Clearly, the absurdity of sending someone to prison for doing what ministers and their security officials were up to themselves became too much. But it’s only the latest of a string of such cases. Less fortunate was a London cab driver Anis Sardar, who was given a life sentence a fortnight earlier for taking part in 2007 in resistance to the occupation of Iraq by US and British forces. Armed opposition to illegal invasion and occupation clearly doesn’t constitute terrorism or murder on most definitions, including the Geneva convention.

But terrorism is now squarely in the eye of the beholder. And nowhere is that more so than in the Middle East, where today’s terrorists are tomorrow’s fighters against tyranny – and allies are enemies – often at the bewildering whim of a western policymaker’s conference call.

For the past year, US, British and other western forces have been back in Iraq, supposedly in the cause of destroying the hyper-sectarian terror group Islamic State (formerly known as al-Qaida in Iraq). This was after Isis overran huge chunks of Iraqi and Syrian territory and proclaimed a self-styled Islamic caliphate.
The campaign isn’t going well. Last month, Isis rolled into the Iraqi city of Ramadi, while on the other side of the now nonexistent border its forces conquered the Syrian town of Palmyra. Al-Qaida’s official franchise, the Nusra Front, has also been making gains in Syria.

Some Iraqis complain that the US sat on its hands while all this was going on. The Americans insist they are trying to avoid civilian casualties, and claim significant successes. Privately, officials say they don’t want to be seen hammering Sunni strongholds in a sectarian war and risk upsetting their Sunni allies in the Gulf.

A revealing light on how we got here has now been shone by a recently declassified secret US intelligence report, written in August 2012, which uncannily predicts – and effectively welcomes – the prospect of a “Salafist principality” in eastern Syria and an al-Qaida-controlled Islamic state in Syria and Iraq. In stark contrast to western claims at the time, the Defense Intelligence Agency document identifies al-Qaida in Iraq (which became Isis) and fellow Salafists as the “major forces driving the insurgency in Syria” – and states that “western countries, the Gulf states and Turkey” were supporting the opposition’s efforts to take control of eastern Syria.
Raising the “possibility of establishing a declared or undeclared Salafist principality”, the Pentagon report goes on, “this is exactly what the supporting powers to the opposition want, in order to isolate the Syrian regime, which is considered the strategic depth of the Shia expansion (Iraq and Iran)”.
That doesn’t mean the US created Isis, of course, though some of its Gulf allies certainly played a role in it – as the US vice-president, Joe Biden, acknowledged last year. But there was no al-Qaida in Iraq until the US and Britain invaded. And the US has certainly exploited the existence of Isis against other forces in the region as part of a wider drive to maintain western control.

The calculus changed when Isis started beheading westerners and posting atrocities online, and the Gulf states are now backing other groups in the Syrian war, such as the Nusra Front. But this US and western habit of playing with jihadi groups, which then come back to bite them, goes back at least to the 1980s war against the Soviet Union in Afghanistan, which fostered the original al-Qaida under CIA tutelage.

It was recalibrated during the occupation of Iraq, when US forces led by General Petraeus sponsored an El Salvador-style dirty war of sectarian death squads to weaken the Iraqi resistance. And it was reprised in 2011 in the Nato-orchestrated war in Libya, where Isis last week took control of Gaddafi’s home town of Sirte.

In reality, US and western policy in the conflagration that is now the Middle East is in the classic mould of imperial divide-and-rule. American forces bomb one set of rebels while backing another in Syria, and mount what are effectively joint military operations with Iran against Isis in Iraq while supporting Saudi Arabia’s military campaign against Iranian-backed Houthi forces in Yemen. However confused US policy may often be, a weak, partitioned Iraq and Syria fit such an approach perfectly.
What’s clear is that Isis and its monstrosities won’t be defeated by the same powers that brought it to Iraq and Syria in the first place, or whose open and covert war-making has fostered it in the years since. Endless western military interventions in the Middle East have brought only destruction and division. It’s the people of the region who can cure this disease – not those who incubated the virus.
 
Yesterday Russia was trying to attack Syria with a cruise missiles and they ended up hitting Iran. What a failure this Russian intervention has been. Its only matter of time before Russian jets get shot down.
 
Yesterday Russia was trying to attack Syria with a cruise missiles and they ended up hitting Iran. What a failure this Russian intervention has been. Its only matter of time before Russian jets get shot down.
Lolz @ the US trolling Russia and Iran.
 
Going by the reports, Russian aerial bombing have been really effective.

Sent from my Lenovo A6000 using Tapatalk
 
Russia just handed ISIS a 'big win' in Syria's largest city
The terror group ISIS made gains near Syria's largest city in the last 24 hours, indirectly aided by Russian airstrikes that drove other groups out.

ISIS militants seized five villages on the northern edge of Aleppo, putting them within 1 mile of territory held by the Syrian regime, Reuters reports.
http://www.businessinsider.com/russia-just-handed-isis-a-big-win-in-syrias-largest-city-2015-10

So is Russia still fighting ISIS or is it going to act as ISIS's air force?
 
An interesting insight into ISIS

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">ISIS's goal from their own publication. A black & white world. What they call "grayzone" is our coexistence zone. <a href="https://t.co/dDPqigam4t">pic.twitter.com/dDPqigam4t</a></p>— Iyad El-Baghdadi (@iyad_elbaghdadi) <a href="https://twitter.com/iyad_elbaghdadi/status/665337881351729152">November 14, 2015</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-conversation="none" lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Eliminating the grayzone - the zone of coexistence - and rendering a world as black & white as their own flag. That's what ISIS wants.</p>— Iyad El-Baghdadi (@iyad_elbaghdadi) <a href="https://twitter.com/iyad_elbaghdadi/status/665338228279394305">November 14, 2015</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-conversation="none" lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">A black & white world is ISIS's strategic objective and is the perfect kind of world for them to absolutely thrive.</p>— Iyad El-Baghdadi (@iyad_elbaghdadi) <a href="https://twitter.com/iyad_elbaghdadi/status/665338289746870273">November 14, 2015</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-conversation="none" lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Insisting to coexist isn't just "moralizing" right now. It's an absolute screaming strategic necessity. An absolute strategic necessity.</p>— Iyad El-Baghdadi (@iyad_elbaghdadi) <a href="https://twitter.com/iyad_elbaghdadi/status/665338574263357441">November 14, 2015</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-conversation="none" lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">ISIS or whoever is behind this isn't looking for body count, human life is meaningless to them. They want to eliminate the grayzone.</p>— Iyad El-Baghdadi (@iyad_elbaghdadi) <a href="https://twitter.com/iyad_elbaghdadi/status/665338920868048896">November 14, 2015</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-conversation="none" lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Anyone who attacks coexistence is an ISIS ally in their quest to eliminate the grayzone. Anyone, including right wing populists.</p>— Iyad El-Baghdadi (@iyad_elbaghdadi) <a href="https://twitter.com/iyad_elbaghdadi/status/665339162397052928">November 14, 2015</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-conversation="none" lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Example of an IS ally in their quest to end coexistence, a useful idiot willing to help IS destroy their society: <a href="https://t.co/eY3DVy0DbV">pic.twitter.com/eY3DVy0DbV</a></p>— Iyad El-Baghdadi (@iyad_elbaghdadi) <a href="https://twitter.com/iyad_elbaghdadi/status/665682819104903168">November 15, 2015</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
 
So Kurds took Sinjar and broke the highway 47 connection between Raqqa and Mosul. Mosul is still connected from the south but it will be less supplied now. You would expect for Mosul to fall in the forseeable future.

From the map, ISIS doesn't look that big in Iraq anymore.

2000px-iraq21.png
 
iraq_rel_2004.jpg


As you can see on this map of iraqi roads, Mosul is now totally cut off by the Iraqis in the south and the Kurds in the north and the west
 
No matter how much I ponder on it I can't comprehend why would someone from middle class with good job, family and education would join ISIS?!? It's just so illogical and yet people do?! ISIS kills Muslims non-Muslims both and yet people from Europe leave everything and join ISIS?
 
France and USA started air attack today on ISIS. But I suspect it will not be much. Someone needs to get the military on the ground.

Hope in the G20 summit there are some breakthrough.
 
How well did ground invasion work in previous instances?

Well it dismantaled Al Qaeda and Taliban to a very large extent isn't it? Al Qaeda is almost non exsistent now. Moment the USA army left Iraq ISIS formed. So someone needs to go back there and wipe them out. It will be a much tougher challenge though due to much larger number of ISIS soldiers. A multinational ground operation required.
 
Well it dismantaled Al Qaeda and Taliban to a very large extent isn't it? Al Qaeda is almost non exsistent now. Moment the USA army left Iraq ISIS formed. So someone needs to go back there and wipe them out. It will be a much tougher challenge though due to much larger number of ISIS soldiers. A multinational ground operation required.

I really think you need to educate yourself on the Middle East.

There was never any Al Qaeda in Iraq before the 2003 invasion. Saddam though a nutcase was a secular nationalistic leader that didn't let any religious group flourish in Iraq.
Only after the invasion did these radical groups started to pop up in Iraq, that too when more than 100,000 American troops were there. The Iraq war became very unpopular in America once thousands of American troops started coming in bodybags so the retreat started, not because they wiped out the fanatics.

And also to let you know ISIS formed from "Al qaeda in Iraq" group.

Lastly this is a war about ideas and you can't win a war against an enemy that you can't see. You are always following shadows.

So please educate yourself a better on the subject or keep it zipped if you are not well informed on the matter.
 
Who created ISIS? and if any what are the factors which ensure their success?

This thread is inspired by a post I read from [MENTION=138254]Syed1[/MENTION] in one of the threads where he was arguing with [MENTION=139315]Indian_Supporter[/MENTION]

Many people are not informed when it comes to the origins of terrorist organizations so the purpose of this thread is to give people a better perspective.

Sectarian Violence and Islamist expansionism are certainly factors which have proved to be pivotal but is foreign policy a greater grievance?
[MENTION=7774]Robert[/MENTION] [MENTION=53290]Markhor[/MENTION] [MENTION=136193]Adil_94[/MENTION] [MENTION=43583]KingKhanWC[/MENTION]
 
SHORT ANSWER

It began with the Russia and Ukraine relations deteriorating, and with Europe supporting Ukraine, Putin blocks gas and oil supplies to Russia, especially in the winter months that hit Europe HARD.

Therefore a new pipeline was needed which would take oil and gas from from Qatar to Saudi and delivered to Europe, however Syria gets in the way and being a Russian ally, the pipeline could never be made and therefore the Russian supporting regime had to be removed.

Who wanted them removed?

The Sunni Wahabi states.

Who got support from USA and Israel, who wanted to take out a Russia ally and hence USA began selling huge amounts of military equipment to Saudi, Qatar and UAE . Where do you think all this equipment was going?

However this turned into a Sunni and Shia war, where Syria, Iran and Iraq have proposed there own pipline going to Europe, a Shia pipeline instead of a Sunni pipeline. Therefore the Saudis where able to get support from Israel to wipe out regimes that threaten them like the Iranian one and bring Arab Spring style revolutions.

This is a Sunni Shia war, why do you think Saudi was attacked from Yeman.

However i believe the US has now backed out after seeing how messy things got and they though it would be a walk in the park to remove Asad after what happened in Egypt, Libya, Tunisa etc.

HOWEVER THIS IS A WAR ABOUT OIL AND GAS PIPELINES TO CAPTURE THE EUROPEAN MARKET.
 
SHORT ANSWER

It began with the Russia and Ukraine relations deteriorating, and with Europe supporting Ukraine, Putin blocks gas and oil supplies to Russia, especially in the winter months that hit Europe HARD.

Therefore a new pipeline was needed which would take oil and gas from from Qatar to Saudi and delivered to Europe, however Syria gets in the way and being a Russian ally, the pipeline could never be made and therefore the Russian supporting regime had to be removed.

Who wanted them removed?

The Sunni Wahabi states.

Who got support from USA and Israel, who wanted to take out a Russia ally and hence USA began selling huge amounts of military equipment to Saudi, Qatar and UAE . Where do you think all this equipment was going?

However this turned into a Sunni and Shia war, where Syria, Iran and Iraq have proposed there own pipline going to Europe, a Shia pipeline instead of a Sunni pipeline. Therefore the Saudis where able to get support from Israel to wipe out regimes that threaten them like the Iranian one and bring Arab Spring style revolutions.

This is a Sunni Shia war, why do you think Saudi was attacked from Yeman.

However i believe the US has now backed out after seeing how messy things got and they though it would be a walk in the park to remove Asad after what happened in Egypt, Libya, Tunisa etc.

HOWEVER THIS IS A WAR ABOUT OIL AND GAS PIPELINES TO CAPTURE THE EUROPEAN MARKET.

Summed up nicely.
 
ISIS was formed due to the mistake of US forces. But we cannot obviously blame west for the killings and attrocities ISIS is doing now in civilized world.

To answer your question, here is the brief how ISIS was formed.

So when US invaded Iraq it basically blew up the entire country. Destroyed the Government, toppled Saddam Hussain, destroyed the infrastructure, destroyed Iraqi society etc. With Saddam gone, it created a power vaccum. So basically US created a condition in Iraq where a group like ISIS could form. ISIS started as a small group in Iraq in 2006 with no money, no ability to recruit etc. Then in 2009 ISIS moved the focus to the civil war in Syria. Even there ISIS struggled to find any foothole because the 2 groups that were fighting then against president Basshar Al Assad were al-Qaeda affiliate Al-Nusra Front and Free Syrian Army.

The came a pivotal point. In june 2013 a Northern General of Free Syrian Army spoke to Al Jazira cutter saying that if International forces does not send them the weapon then they will lose the battle to topple president Assad. President Obama then said they will provide non lethal support to Syrian opposition to topple the government and create a more stable Syria. So within few weeks US, Saudi, Jordan, Israel and Turkey began providing weapons, money and military training to the so called Free Syrian Army.

But where it fall apart or rather backfired to US is that within 1 year those weapons which US inisted will be used by the freedom fighters falls into the hand of opportunist ISIS fighters. Also large number of the Free Syrian Army joined the ISIS group. So basically this freedom fighters were selling weapons and sending fighters to the new group called Islamic state. Then in June 2014 a fully trained ISIS group emerged heavily armed and enterd dramatically into Iraq capturing Mosul.

Also, when the USA military left Iraq they left all the military weapons there unattainded and did not destroyed them. ISIS captured all those weapons, military tanks etc. and became more powerful. Now the ISIS is easily the most richest terrorist group in the world due to selling oils to Turkey. Because of immense wealth and money ISIS have they are able to hire more and more people.
 
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/9Ns_MMPoTEM" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

This dude summed it up perfectly.

ISIS is a rogue nation.
 
It's all confusing, first I thought ISIS were created by the west to cause continuing instability in the middle east, hence their worried reaction when Russia got involved in the fight against ISIS but now it looks like Russia is on the same side as USA/UK/France and they are all attacking ISIS.

Anyway it's impossible to know the answers, there are some very dodgy people at the top of society who can orchestrate things, people with no morals and value of human lives, who just want power and resources.

Yet most people are too busy watching pointless reality TV, movies, sports to investigate who really runs things.

Look up families like Rothschild and Rockefeller, they are more powerful than any USA president or UK Prime Minister, the Queen of England is also extremely powerful despite what we are told.

It's not contradictory : ISIS still can help by fighting the West. In fact, ISIS helps the West more by fighting it, as not only the weapons keep being sold (indirectly to ISIS, directly to Saudi, etc and France got some juicy contracts), but also they redefine the geopolitical strategies of the West by de-legitimising the local states. In the modern definition of "state" it's the territorial sovereignty which counts the most, and if Bashar al Assad can't "control" his territories in Syria, France and all will say "then, it doesn't belong to you. We can bomb it."

You're right about the Rothschilds. They made money thanks to the Napoleonic wars : Jews being a diasporic people, they had relatives everywhere, and one cousin in France supported one side while the other in another country supported the other side, but the money ultimately going to the same banking family. That's what the Anglo American élite has done during the two World Wars (read "Conjuring Hitler") and what, more recently, the West has done in the Iraq-Iran war.
 
I will tell you where it started.

When the US invaded Iraq in 2003 there were many Sunni and ex Baath party groups who started an insurgency against the US forces for a number of years.

One of these Sunni groups formed in 2004 was called Al Qaeda in Iraq headed Abu_Musab_Al Zarqawai. I am sure some of the more knowledgable and older posters have heard of this name. His group was extremely violent as they not only targeted American soldiers but also any foreigner or Iraqi that was associated with the government as they viewed them as apostates.

It was this group that started the beheading culture as this was almost non-existent before. Even Bin Ladin wanted to distance himself from Zarqawi because they saw him focusing too much on his anti-Shia hatred rather than targeting specifically the coalition forces especially the Americans.

Anyway sometime in 2006 this lunatic Zarqawi was killed in an air strike but it was too late as the damage was already done. After that the different extremist insurgent groups got together and formed another group called Islamic state of Iraq or ISI. They then kept up the insurgency targeting anyone that saw as Infidels not just coalition troops and they were continuing to use barbaric methods and means to achieve their goals.

Once the Syrian civil war started in 2011 they slowly expanded their tentacles from Iraq to Syria as the funding for rebel groups from gulf states stated to pour in. They then changed the name to ISIL while also gaining not just some key cities like Mosul and Raqqa but also the oil refineries to keep them well funded.

They wanted to establish a caliphate as their main goal a few years ago but since they have been softened up by American air strikes they now are targeting people outside of Syria and Iraq like the Kurds in Turkey, Shias in Lebanon and Saudi Arabia, the Russian airliner recently and of course the Paris attacks.

I think eventhough these attacks are horrendous they are happening because this group is now losing territory and is in serious decline. We will see more horrific attacks as their demise gets closer unfortunately.
 
This is why I have said in previous posts that although this is supposed to be the civilized age of humanity

Agree with the rest of your post, but here, a precision : not only we don't live in the most "civilized" age of humanity, but the very opposite. All ancient traditions talk of the inevitable cyclical decay and the last age of humanity, Hindus call it Kali-Yuga, because that's where we are : you can see media talk of "Islamism" as "world's problem" just to hide the economic disparities. Tens of millions of peoples in the so called Third World who love in inhumane conditions don't care about "Islamism", but about economic exploitation by the West, whereas Westerners themselves, despite the "latest technology", have never been so depressed. You can see the statistics on France, or, for a more extreme case, Japan (rapid industrialization).

Even if you only talk of warfare, when have civilian lives been so statistically irrelevant ? I mean literally thousands of Arabs die on a daily basis, in an extremely brutal way.

Never has a "civilization" created so much misery as the "modern civilization", it's just that outwardly it looks beautiful ("oh look, we live longer and have iPhones !").

Only solution is the Mahdi/Kalki Avatar.
 
I will tell you where it started.

When the US invaded Iraq in 2003 there were many Sunni and ex Baath party groups who started an insurgency against the US forces for a number of years.

One of these Sunni groups formed in 2004 was called Al Qaeda in Iraq headed Abu_Musab_Al Zarqawai. I am sure some of the more knowledgable and older posters have heard of this name. His group was extremely violent as they not only targeted American soldiers but also any foreigner or Iraqi that was associated with the government as they viewed them as apostates.

It was this group that started the beheading culture as this was almost non-existent before. Even Bin Ladin wanted to distance himself from Zarqawi because they saw him focusing too much on his anti-Shia hatred rather than targeting specifically the coalition forces especially the Americans.

Anyway sometime in 2006 this lunatic Zarqawi was killed in an air strike but it was too late as the damage was already done. After that the different extremist insurgent groups got together and formed another group called Islamic state of Iraq or ISI. They then kept up the insurgency targeting anyone that saw as Infidels not just coalition troops and they were continuing to use barbaric methods and means to achieve their goals.

Once the Syrian civil war started in 2011 they slowly expanded their tentacles from Iraq to Syria as the funding for rebel groups from gulf states stated to pour in. They then changed the name to ISIL while also gaining not just some key cities like Mosul and Raqqa but also the oil refineries to keep them well funded.

They wanted to establish a caliphate as their main goal a few years ago but since they have been softened up by American air strikes they now are targeting people outside of Syria and Iraq like the Kurds in Turkey, Shias in Lebanon and Saudi Arabia, the Russian airliner recently and of course the Paris attacks.

I think eventhough these attacks are horrendous they are happening because this group is now losing territory and is in serious decline. We will see more horrific attacks as their demise gets closer unfortunately.

This post makes the most sense. Its sad that some people are resorting to conspiracy theories.
 
Isis are opportunists, they seized weapons dropped by us and their allies and tried fueling the civil war against a dictator into some sectarian war. They also used sex slaves as a way of recruiting many ppl
 
I will tell you where it started.

When the US invaded Iraq in 2003 there were many Sunni and ex Baath party groups who started an insurgency against the US forces for a number of years.

One of these Sunni groups formed in 2004 was called Al Qaeda in Iraq headed Abu_Musab_Al Zarqawai. I am sure some of the more knowledgable and older posters have heard of this name. His group was extremely violent as they not only targeted American soldiers but also any foreigner or Iraqi that was associated with the government as they viewed them as apostates.

It was this group that started the beheading culture as this was almost non-existent before. Even Bin Ladin wanted to distance himself from Zarqawi because they saw him focusing too much on his anti-Shia hatred rather than targeting specifically the coalition forces especially the Americans.

Anyway sometime in 2006 this lunatic Zarqawi was killed in an air strike but it was too late as the damage was already done. After that the different extremist insurgent groups got together and formed another group called Islamic state of Iraq or ISI. They then kept up the insurgency targeting anyone that saw as Infidels not just coalition troops and they were continuing to use barbaric methods and means to achieve their goals.

Once the Syrian civil war started in 2011 they slowly expanded their tentacles from Iraq to Syria as the funding for rebel groups from gulf states stated to pour in. They then changed the name to ISIL while also gaining not just some key cities like Mosul and Raqqa but also the oil refineries to keep them well funded.

They wanted to establish a caliphate as their main goal a few years ago but since they have been softened up by American air strikes they now are targeting people outside of Syria and Iraq like the Kurds in Turkey, Shias in Lebanon and Saudi Arabia, the Russian airliner recently and of course the Paris attacks.

I think eventhough these attacks are horrendous they are happening because this group is now losing territory and is in serious decline. We will see more horrific attacks as their demise gets closer unfortunately.

Good explanation, Bolded area is where I personally would basically insert petroDollars explanation (post 2) in to complete the narrative. To me, your post and his related.

IS are lunatics indeed and in the spectrum of groups that sprung up post Iraq war, they had the recipe to be the perfect tools/horses for courses for the people higher up due to their extremely barbaric characteristics, anti shia leanings, and access to American weapons left behind. Thus they got funding and better weapons compared to other Syrian factions that couldn't topple assad as of yet.

In the end everyone that is on the ground there is serving for higher up people without knowing it. Those people higher up are looking to make some $$ and hold europe's energy requirements by the neck. (power)
 
Last edited:
There is a lot of background context as mentioned but how did they come into existence as the group we know now.

In short by Nato, led by the CIA and inspired by Zionism.

Al-Baghdadi and all other founders of ISIL (which it was first called) were held at Camp Bucca in Iraq for many years before their release. It was their university for creating an group which would be stronger and more wiser than any other created group before it's time. You don't get to teach bomb making skills in a classroom in any maximum security prison for terrorists. They were given the time, the knowledge and plan of what was to come.

Once they got out, they evolved the Al-Qaeda in Iraq which was already being supported by the US against Syria and Iran. In the long run also against Russia.

The main reasons for the creation of IS was to attack its enemies in the region, to be used as an excuse to justify bombings and invasions and to use as an excuse to bring western nations into a more stronger police state, giving it powers to control the lives of their own people.
 
Good explanation, Bolded area is where I personally would basically insert petroDollars explanation (post 2) in to complete the narrative. To me, your post and his related.

IS are lunatics indeed and in the spectrum of groups that sprung up post Iraq war, they had the recipe to be the perfect tools/horses for courses for the people higher up due to their extremely barbaric characteristics, anti shia leanings, and access to American weapons left behind. Thus they got funding and better weapons compared to other Syrian factions that couldn't topple assad as of yet.

In the end everyone that is on the ground there is serving for higher up people without knowing it. Those people higher up are looking to make some $$ and hold europe's energy requirements by the neck. (power)

Agree although they are obviously extremely misguided and twisted in the ideology they believe in, one aspect about ISIs is that no one can disoute is how well organised they are. There seems to be a proper structure on how they operate and function and probably one of the main reasons why they have become hard to destroy their capabilities.

The other Sunni groups in Syria just do not match upto them in any way, hence the reason they have suffered so many setbacks.
 
Last edited:
I will tell you where it started.

When the US invaded Iraq in 2003 there were many Sunni and ex Baath party groups who started an insurgency against the US forces for a number of years.

One of these Sunni groups formed in 2004 was called Al Qaeda in Iraq headed Abu_Musab_Al Zarqawai. I am sure some of the more knowledgable and older posters have heard of this name. His group was extremely violent as they not only targeted American soldiers but also any foreigner or Iraqi that was associated with the government as they viewed them as apostates.

It was this group that started the beheading culture as this was almost non-existent before. Even Bin Ladin wanted to distance himself from Zarqawi because they saw him focusing too much on his anti-Shia hatred rather than targeting specifically the coalition forces especially the Americans.

Anyway sometime in 2006 this lunatic Zarqawi was killed in an air strike but it was too late as the damage was already done. After that the different extremist insurgent groups got together and formed another group called Islamic state of Iraq or ISI. They then kept up the insurgency targeting anyone that saw as Infidels not just coalition troops and they were continuing to use barbaric methods and means to achieve their goals.

Once the Syrian civil war started in 2011 they slowly expanded their tentacles from Iraq to Syria as the funding for rebel groups from gulf states stated to pour in. They then changed the name to ISIL while also gaining not just some key cities like Mosul and Raqqa but also the oil refineries to keep them well funded.

They wanted to establish a caliphate as their main goal a few years ago but since they have been softened up by American air strikes they now are targeting people outside of Syria and Iraq like the Kurds in Turkey, Shias in Lebanon and Saudi Arabia, the Russian airliner recently and of course the Paris attacks.

I think eventhough these attacks are horrendous they are happening because this group is now losing territory and is in serious decline. We will see more horrific attacks as their demise gets closer unfortunately.

This is probably most accurate account.

West does not look serious or bothered by this terror business. After First World War British gave the oil to Saudis aka Wahabis (who are mother of all Islamic terror). Those Wahabis were pretty limited to small portion in Arab during Othmans in 1800, although they were as radical and ill tolerant.

You also have to keep in mind they are other forms of conservative Islam who were not rigid or ill tolerant like Sufis, sufis were artist, scholars and not too much in to literalism.

Wahabis use oil to fund there agenda lot more rigorously than any other entity in Islamic world. They have much hijack the social conversation within conservative Islamic world. Shia extremism has also reborn thanks to these cultural conversation become long main stream. They also exploited the tension between Muslims and Hindus, which was not as big as it becomes after 1930s. This whole notion of Muslim Uma and not able to live with others... Forcing societies to follow rigid and literal Islam is all Magnification of their culture.

They also indoctrinated kids with this rigidity with there madrasas. Amount of madrasas Wahabis fund is insane.

I don't think west has really understood what their partners have done to 1.5B Muslim world or they don't care or maybe that is ok.... As long as Muslims are busy these issues they will not bother them and it will be easy to milk them. Because they will always come to them for buying tech and what not. This is form of modern imperialism.

Muslims culture is really in a mess, guys like us who are liberal/atheist cannot even stay in those countries. Without an ounce of liberal culture, how this non sense is ever going to change??? - Everybody else is protecting their interest first. West have even less epithet for national building, since it's very expensive and time consuming. They are fixing one bug, creating another, never going to go after the big fish like Saudis, atleast till they are the big fish... Once oil is gone that's a different story.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
SHORT ANSWER

It began with the Russia and Ukraine relations deteriorating, and with Europe supporting Ukraine, Putin blocks gas and oil supplies to Russia, especially in the winter months that hit Europe HARD.

Therefore a new pipeline was needed which would take oil and gas from from Qatar to Saudi and delivered to Europe, however Syria gets in the way and being a Russian ally, the pipeline could never be made and therefore the Russian supporting regime had to be removed.

Who wanted them removed?

The Sunni Wahabi states.

Who got support from USA and Israel, who wanted to take out a Russia ally and hence USA began selling huge amounts of military equipment to Saudi, Qatar and UAE . Where do you think all this equipment was going?

However this turned into a Sunni and Shia war, where Syria, Iran and Iraq have proposed there own pipline going to Europe, a Shia pipeline instead of a Sunni pipeline. Therefore the Saudis where able to get support from Israel to wipe out regimes that threaten them like the Iranian one and bring Arab Spring style revolutions.

This is a Sunni Shia war, why do you think Saudi was attacked from Yeman.

However i believe the US has now backed out after seeing how messy things got and they though it would be a walk in the park to remove Asad after what happened in Egypt, Libya, Tunisa etc.

HOWEVER THIS IS A WAR ABOUT OIL AND GAS PIPELINES TO CAPTURE THE EUROPEAN MARKET.

this +1
 
Origins can be attributed to Western forces, but religion has helped it survive and flourish.
 
Do people here believe ISIS is getting weak due to airstrikes? Will it be enough to contain them?

What happens in the case where Gulf/West are able to somehow oust Assad while keeping ISIS contained?
 
Do people here believe ISIS is getting weak due to airstrikes? Will it be enough to contain them?

What happens in the case where Gulf/West are able to somehow oust Assad while keeping ISIS contained?

Firstly, i don't believe ISIS is as strong as the media makes them out to be otherwise Russia would have entered the game much earlier.

Secondly, Russian airstrikes are not really targeting ISIS. If you read media reports they are only protecting Al-Asad. I believe the Russians are not only there to strengthen him BUT to use airstrikes to move and relocate ISIS out of Syria possibly sending them down south into Saudi Arabia while wiping out the rebels that threaten Al-Asad.

So right now it doesn't seem anyone will oust Al-Assad, his position is strengthening by the day. Plus the whole ISIS drama has made the world realise he is better than ISIS, so we should just stick with him for now.

The pressure has shifted on to Saudi now, especially after they tried to crash the oil market by increasing supplies and bringing prices down to bankrupt all other oil nations as they could produce it cheaply, but Obama responded by lifting sanctions off Iran, meaning if Saudi breaks even on oil at $40/barrel, Iran can break even at $20/barrel. Now they will be making losses on oil when the new collapse comes in the oil market which is a few months away, then they will have to deal with the monster they created.
 
I recommend everyone to read the following, an old article from 2012

Qatar - Rich and Dangerous

The first concern of the Emir of Qatar is the prosperity and security of the tiny kingdom. To achieve that, he knows no limits.

Stuck between Iran and Saudi Arabia is Qatar with the third largest natural gas deposit in the world. The gas gives the nearly quarter of a million Qatari citizens the highest per capita income on the planet and provides 70 percent of government revenue.

How does an extremely wealthy midget with two potentially dangerous neighbors keep them from making an unwelcomed visit? Naturally, you have someone bigger and tougher to protect you.

Of course, nothing is free. The price has been to allow the United States to have two military bases in a strategic location. According to Wikileak diplomatic cables, the Qataris are even paying sixty percent of the costs.

Having tanks and bunker busting bombs nearby will discourage military aggression, but it does nothing to curb the social tumult that has been bubbling for decades in the Middle Eastern societies. Eighty-four years ago, the Moslem Brotherhood arose in Egypt because of the presence of foreign domination by Great Britain and the discontent of millions of the teaming masses yearning to be free. Eighty-four years later, the teaming masses are still yearning.

Sixty-five percent of the people in the Middle East are under twenty-nine years of age. It is this desperate angry group that presents a danger that armies cannot stop. The cry for their dignity, “I am a man,” is the sound that sends terror through governments. It is this overwhelming force that the Emir of Qatar has been able to deflect.

A year after he deposed his father in 1995, Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa Al-Thani established the Al-Jazeera television satellite news network. He invited some of the radical Salafi preachers that had been given sanctuary in Qatar to address the one and a half billion Moslems around the world. They had their electronic soapbox and the card to an ATM, but there was a price.

The price was silence. They could speak to the world and arouse the fury in Egypt or Libya, but they would have to leave their revolution outside of Qatar or the microphone would be switched off and the ATM would stop dispensing the good life.


The Moslem Brotherhood, that is a major force across the region, dissolved itself in Qatar in 1999. Jasim Sultan, a member of the former organization, explained that the kingdom was in compliance with Islamic law. He heads the state funded Awaken Project that publishes moderate political and philosophical literature.

How Qatar has benefited from networking with the Salafis is illustrated by the connections with Tunisia where Qatar is making a large investment in telecommunications. Tunisian Foreign Minister Rafiq Abdulsalaam was head of the Research and Studies Division in the Al Jazeera Centre in Doha. His father-in-law Al Ghanouchi is the head of the Tunisian Muslim Brotherhood party.

Over much of the time since he seized power, Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa Al-Thani has followed the policy of personal networking, being proactive in business and neutral on the international stage. The Emir is generous with the grateful, the Qatar Sovereign Wealth Fund bargains hard in the board room and the kingdom makes available Qatar’s Good Offices to resolve disputes.

Qatar’s foreign policy made an abrupt shift when the kingdom entered the war against Qaddafi. The kingdom sent aircraft to join NATO forces. On the ground, Qatari special forces armed, trained, and led Libyans against Qaddafi’s troops.

The head of the National Transition Council Mustafa Abdul Jalil attributed much of the success of the revolution to the efforts of Qatar that he said had spent two billion dollars. He commented, “Nobody traveled to Qatar without being given a sum of money by the government.”

Qatar had ten billion dollars in investments in Libya to protect. The Barwa Real Estate Company alone had two billion committed to the construction of a beach resort near Tripoli.


While the bullets were still flying, Qatar signed eight billion dollars in agreements with the NTC. Just in case things with the NTC didn’t work out, they financed rivals Abdel Hakim Belhaj, leader of the February 17 Martyr’s Brigade, and Sheik Ali Salabi, a radical cleric who had been exiled in Doha.

If Qatar’s investments of ten billion dollars seem substantial, the future has far more to offer. Reconstruction costs are estimated at seven hundred billion dollars. The Chinese and Russians had left behind between them thirty billion in incomplete contracts and investments and all of it is there for the taking for those who aided the revolution.

No sooner had Qaddafi been caught and shot, Qatar approached Bashar Al-Assad to establish a transitional government with the Moslem Brotherhood. As you would expect, relinquishing power to the Brotherhood was an offer that he could refuse. It didn’t take long before he heard his sentence pronounced in January 2012 on the CBS television program, 60 Minutes by Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa Al-Thani.

The Emir declared that foreign troops should be sent into Syria. At the Friends of Syria conference in February, Prime Minister Hamad bin Jassim al-Thani said, "We should do whatever necessary to help [the Syrian opposition], including giving them weapons to defend themselves."


Why would Qatar want to become involved in Syria where they have little invested? A map reveals that the kingdom is a geographic prisoner in a small enclave on the Persian Gulf coast.

It relies upon the export of LNG, because it is restricted by Saudi Arabia from building pipelines to distant markets. In 2009, the proposal of a pipeline to Europe through Saudi Arabia and Turkey to the Nabucco pipeline was considered, but Saudi Arabia that is angered by its smaller and much louder brother has blocked any overland expansion.

Already the largest LNG producer, Qatar will not increase the production of LNG. The market is becoming glutted with eight new facilities in Australia coming online between 2014 and 2020.

A saturated North American gas market and a far more competitive Asian market leaves only Europe. The discovery in 2009 of a new gas field near Israel, Lebanon, Cyprus, and Syria opened new possibilities to bypass the Saudi Barrier and to secure a new source of income. Pipelines are in place already in Turkey to receive the gas. Only Al-Assad is in the way.

Qatar along with the Turks would like to remove Al-Assad and install the Syrian chapter of the Moslem Brotherhood. It is the best organized political movement in the chaotic society and can block Saudi Arabia’s efforts to install a more fanatical Wahhabi based regime. Once the Brotherhood is in power, the Emir’s broad connections with Brotherhood groups throughout the region should make it easy for him to find a friendly ear and an open hand in Damascus.

A control centre has been established in the Turkish city of Adana near the Syrian border to direct the rebels against Al-Assad. Saudi Deputy Foreign Minister Prince Abdulaziz bin Abdullah al-Saud asked to have the Turks establish a joint Turkish, Saudi, Qatari operations center. “The Turks liked the idea of having the base in Adana so that they could supervise its operations” a source in the Gulf told Reuters.

The fighting is likely to continue for many more months, but Qatar is in for the long term. At the end, there will be contracts for the massive reconstruction and there will be the development of the gas fields. In any case, Al-Assad must go. There is nothing personal; it is strictly business to preserve the future tranquility and well-being of Qatar.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2012-09-25/guest-post-qatar-rich-and-dangerous
 
THE SECT OF THE AZĀRIQAH: FORERUNNERS OF ISIS
Many early Islāmic scholars from the 3rd, 4th and 5th centuries of Islām who specialized in the study of deviant sects (heresiography) documented the beliefs and actions of one of the most extreme sects of the Khārijite terrorists known as the Azāriqah. ISIS are reminiscent of this group.129 Their founder was Abū Rāshid Nāfiʿ bin Azraq (d. 65H around 685CE). The Azāriqah split off from the Khārijites and made their way to Baṣrah, taking control over it and other areas in Persia. Their evil doctrines included the belief that the excommunication of ʿAlī () was valid and correct and that ʿAlī’s assassin, Ibn Muljam, was correct and praiseworthy in his action. In their view, all sinful Muslims are apostates who will reside in Hellfire for eternity should they die without having repented from their sins.130 Whoever opposed their opinion was considered a polytheist and they threw the children of such people alongside them - all of them were considered disbelievers whom it was permissible to fight and kill. The land inhabited by those outside their group was considered to be land of war (dār al-ḥarb) and whatever was permitted with respect to a land of war was permitted to them against the Muslims inhabiting such a land. Anyone who did not join them by emigrating to them even if he held their view was considered a polytheist. They also held the necessity of eliminating every “disbeliever” from the Earth, and by “disbeliever” they mean every Muslim who does not agree with them. They would interrogate Muslims on their views towards the rulers and whoever did not agree with their excommunication of the Muslim rulers of the time would be killed. They would lie in wait for Muslims, slaughter them and also slaughter their children mercilessly, on the flimsiest of grounds until they instilled terror in the hearts of civilians who would be scared to leave their homes or embark on
journeys.
129 Refer to al-Milal wal-Niḥal of al-Shahrastānī (1/112).
130 This clashes with the belief of orthodox Muslims who hold that the sinful amongst the Muslims who die without repentance will be eventually delivered due to their pure monotheism.
 
It was even confirmed bt the FT in 2013,

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/86e3f28e-be3a-11e2-bb35-00144feab7de.html#axzz3s0CuMufO

The tiny gas-rich state of Qatar has spent as much as $3bn over the past two years supporting the rebellion in Syria, far exceeding any other government, but is now being nudged aside by Saudi Arabia as the prime source of arms to rebels.

The cost of Qatar’s intervention, its latest push to back an Arab revolt, amounts to a fraction of its international investment portfolio. But its financial support for the revolution that has turned into a vicious civil war dramatically overshadows western backing for the opposition.

In dozens of interviews with the FT conducted in recent weeks, rebel leaders both abroad and within Syria as well as regional and western officials detailed Qatar’s role in the Syrian conflict, a source of mounting controversy.

The small state with a gargantuan appetite is the biggest donor to the political opposition, providing generous refugee packages to defectors (one estimate puts it at $50,000 a year for a defector and his family) and has provided vast amounts of humanitarian support.

In September, many rebels in Syria’s Aleppo province received a one off monthly salary of $150 courtesy of Qatar. Sources close to the Qatari government say total spending has reached as much as $3bn, while rebel and diplomatic sources put the figure at $1bn at most.

For Qatar, owner of the world’s third-largest gas reserves, its intervention in Syria is part of an aggressive quest for global recognition and is merely the latest chapter in its attempt to establish itself as a major player in the region, following its backing of Libya’s rebels who overthrew Muammer Gaddafi in 2011.


It should also come as no surprise to many Pakistanis here that these Wahabis are engaging the same tactics in Pakistan, funding Tableegi Jamaat and Deobandis to further promote there twisted version of Islam and there biggest donor in the whole country is Nawaz Shariff.
 
Destroy stable govts who you had no qualms with before,displace people, then sit back and cry about ISIS...and yes ensure a steady supply of arms to the region so that you can get those votes back home...
 
The Historical Roots and Stages in the Development of ISIS
Historical background
ISIS took root in the new era created in Iraq after the Americans took control of the country in 2003. The Second Gulf War led to the overthrow of Saddam Hussein’s regime, the dismantling of the Iraqi army and the destruction of the existing governmental structure. As a result, a security and governmental vacuum was created and the country’s fragile social fabric (in the middle of which was the volatile Sunni-Shi’ite schism) was severely damaged.
During the almost nine years (2003 — 2011) the United States army was stationed in Iraq the Americans failed to establish effective Iraqi army and security forces to fill the newly-created security vacuum. While in Iraq, the Americans encouraged the establishment of what was supposed to be a democratic national Shi’ite regime headed by Nouri al-Maliki. However, the regime alienated the Sunni population, which had traditionally controlled the country, even though they were a minority (about 22% of the Iraqi population is Sunni Arabs — alongside the Kurds, who are also Sunnis — while about 60% of Iraqis are Shi’ites).
The branch of Al-Qaeda in Iraq, established in 2004, entered the security vacuum and took advantage of the increasing political-societal Sunni alienation: It became an important actor in the insurgent organizations fighting the American army, became stronger after the withdrawal of the American troops at the end of 2001, and spread to Syria after the civil war began in March 2011. The establishment of Al-Qaeda and ISIS in Iraq and Syria occurred in four stages:
1. Stage One (2004-2006) — The establishment of the branch of Al-Qaeda in Iraq led by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and called “Al-Qaeda in Mesopotamia:” It waged a terrorist-guerilla war against the American and coalition forces and against the Shi’ite population. The first stage ended when Abu Musab al-Zarqawi was killed in an American targeted attack in June 2006.
2. Stage Two (2006-2011) — Establishment of the Islamic State in Iraq (ISI): ISI served as an umbrella network for several jihadi organizations that continued waging a terrorist-guerilla campaign against the United States, its coalition allies and the Shi’ite population. ISI was weakened towards the end of the American presence in Iraq following successful American military moves and a wise foreign policy that supported the Sunni population and knew how to win their hearts and minds.
3. Stage Three (2012-June 2014) — The strengthening of ISI and the founding of ISIS: After the American army withdrew from Iraq ISI became stronger. Following the outbreak of the Syrian civil war ISI established a branch in Syria called the Al-Nusra Front (“support front”). Dissension broke out between ISI and its Syrian branch, leading to a rift between ISI and Al-Qaeda and the establishment of the Islamic State in Iraq and Greater Syria (ISIS).
4. Stage Four (as of June 2014) — Dramatic ISIS military achievements: The most prominent was the takeover of Mosul, the second largest city in Iraq. At the same time ISIS established its control in eastern Syria where it set up a governmental center (its “capital city”) in Al-Raqqah. In the wake of its success, ISIS declared the establishment of an “Islamic State” (IS) (or “Islamic Caliphate”) headed by an ISIS leader named Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi. In September 2014 the United States declared a comprehensive campaign against ISIS, which is currently waging a fierce struggle against its many enemies both at home and abroad.

Further reading here www.crethiplethi.com/the-historical...lamic-countries/syria-islamic-countries/2015/
 
[MENTION=130076]PetroDollars[/MENTION]
Tableeghi Jamaat and Deoband are NOT wahhabis. This is myth created by Barelvis.

Muslims Brotherhood (Ikwaanul Muslimeen) are not wahhabis either.
 
Deobandi at least their elders like haji Imdadullah muhajir makki was a chisti Sufi.
 
Destroy stable govts who you had no qualms with before,displace people, then sit back and cry about ISIS...and yes ensure a steady supply of arms to the region so that you can get those votes back home...

I wouldn't call them stable governments but yeah when you invade a country like Iraq under false pretensions and crush their military, its a fertile ground for Islamist groups like ISIS.
 
Deobandi at least their elders like haji Imdadullah muhajir makki was a chisti Sufi.

EVERY scholar was affiliated with tassawuf back in the days. Even in Najd the first to criticize Wahabbis were the local Hanbali Sufis. Ibn Taymiyyah, as per some researchers, wasn't too alien to the nascent Qadiri tariqa, and in his Aqeeda Wassitiya talks of the miracles (karamat) of the awliya.

Colonial and their post colonial secular/so called islamist clowns have destroyed traditional Islam to the extent that you have uneducated young men nowadays who think that Sufism is about break-dancing and they laugh about the hadra while they themselves don't mind jumping like monkeys in front of a football match.

Also ISIS are not Kharijites, not only because of theological differences, but Kharijites were known (and are still known, see Ibadites in Algeria) for their moral rigorism and their piety. You just have to look at the profiles of the Paris jihadis to see how far they were from that profile, or ISIS "spokesman" al Adnani who really speaks like some gangsta rapper.
 
Last edited:
[MENTION=130076]PetroDollars[/MENTION]
Tableeghi Jamaat and Deoband are NOT wahhabis. This is myth created by Barelvis.

Muslims Brotherhood (Ikwaanul Muslimeen) are not wahhabis either.

I never said that, i said they created them and fund them. Of course i know they are not wahabis BUT the ULTIMATE GOAL is the THE DESTRUCTION OF ISLAM BY DIVIDING THE PEOPLE.
 
I never said that, i said they created them and fund them. Of course i know they are not wahabis BUT the ULTIMATE GOAL is the THE DESTRUCTION OF ISLAM BY DIVIDING THE PEOPLE.

How did wahhabis create deoband or IM?
 
EVERY scholar was affiliated with tassawuf back in the days. Even in Najd the first to criticize Wahabbis were the local Hanbali Sufis. Ibn Taymiyyah, as per some researchers, wasn't too alien to the nascent Qadiri tariqa, and in his Aqeeda Wassitiya talks of the miracles (karamat) of the awliya.

Colonial and their post colonial secular/so called islamist clowns have destroyed traditional Islam to the extent that you have uneducated young men nowadays who think that Sufism is about break-dancing and they laugh about the hadra while they themselves don't mind jumping like monkeys in front of a football match.

Also ISIS are not Kharijites, not only because of theological differences, but Kharijites were known (and are still known, see Ibadites in Algeria) for their moral rigorism and their piety. You just have to look at the profiles of the Paris jihadis to see how far they were from that profile, or ISIS "spokesman" al Adnani who really speaks like some gangsta rapper.

You should read this

The Fatwa Regarding The Gawth, Qutb, Abdal And Awtad
By Shaykh ul Islam Ibn Taymiyah
Edited By Shaykh Uzayr Shams
Translated by Ali Hassan Khan
Paperback 208 Pages
Gujranwala Umm-ul-Qura PublicationsPublications

Then you will understand the position of Shaykh Ul Islam
 
Any call for Western boots on the ground is insane, the last thing we need is another ground invasion and occupation of a Middle Eastern country as it'd attract jihadist recruits to Daesh like bees to a honeypot. That's exactly what they want as they can paint a crusader-type narrative.

Special forces for targeted operation is fine but we should support our current allies on the ground - the Kurds, the Iraqi govt forces and look to do a temporary deal with Assad as whether we like it or not, as General Richards said, the Syrian army is the only organised fighting force in Syria.
 
Isis, Syria, The West, Russians, Saudi's, Iranians - a concise summary of the conflict thus far.

Apocalypse Ora
President Assad (who is bad) is a nasty guy who got so nasty his people rebelled and the Rebels (who are good) started winning.

But then some of the rebels turned a bit nasty and are now called Islamic State (who are definitely bad) and some continued to support democracy (who are still good).

So the Americans (who are good) started bombing Islamic State (who are bad) and giving arms to the Syrian Rebels (who are good) so they could fight Assad (who is still bad) which was good.

By the way, there is a breakaway state in the north run by the Kurds who want to fight IS (which is a good thing) but the Turkish authorities think they are bad, so we have to say they are bad whilst secretly thinking they're good and giving them guns to fight IS (which is good) but that is another matter.

Getting back to Syria. President Putin (bad, as he invaded Crimea and the Ukraine and killed lots of folks including that nice Russian man in London with polonium) has decided to back Assad (who is still bad) by attacking IS (who are also bad) which is sort of a good thing?

But Putin (still bad) thinks the Syrian Rebels (who are good) are also bad, and so he bombs them too, much to the annoyance of the Americans (who are good) who are busy backing and arming the rebels (who are also good).

Now Iran (who used to be bad, but now they have agreed not to build any nuclear weapons and bomb Israel are now good) are going to provide ground troops to support Assad (still bad) as are the Russians (bad) who now have ground troops and aircraft in Syria.

So, a Coalition of Assad (still bad) Putin (extra bad) and the Iranians (good, but in a bad sort of way) are going to attack IS (who are bad) which is a good thing, but also the Syrian Rebels (who are good) which is (bad).

Now the British (obviously good, except Corbyn who is probably bad) and the Americans (also good) cannot attack Assad (still bad) for fear of upsetting Putin (bad) and Iran (good / bad) and now they have to accept that Assad might not be that bad after all compared to IS (who are super bad).

So Assad (bad) is now probably good, being better than IS (no real choice there) and since Putin and Iran are also fighting IS that may now make them good. America (still good) will find it hard to arm a group of rebels being attacked by the Russians for fear of upsetting Mr Putin (now good) and that mad ayatollah in Iran (also good) and so they may be forced to say that the Rebels are now bad, or at the very least abandon them to their fate. This will lead most of them to flee to Turkey and on to Europe or join IS (still the only constantly bad group).

To Sunni Muslims, an attack by Shia Muslims (Assad and Iran) backed by Russians will be seen as something of a Holy War, and the ranks of IS will now be seen by the Sunnis as the only Jihadis fighting in the Holy War and hence many Muslims will now see IS as (good)(duh!).

Sunni Muslims will also see the lack of action by Britain and America in support of their Sunni rebel brothers as something of a betrayal (might have a point) and hence we will be seen as (bad).

So now we have America (now bad) and Britain (also bad) providing limited support to Sunni Rebels (bad) many of whom are looking to IS (good / bad) for support against Assad(now good) who, along with Iran (also good) and Putin (also now, unbelievably, good) are attempting to retake the country Assad used to run before all this started?

This should clear it all up for you. Just so you know - I am not taking any questions on this subject!

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-to-paris-attacks-and-would-hit-a6750246.html
.
 
That certainly cleared it up for me :danish
A variation on Bush's "you're with us or against us". According to the politicians and the media, everyone's a "good guy" or a "bad guy" - except that things keep changing on a daily basis, with some "good guys" becoming "bad guys" overnight - and vice-versa. And the politicians/media can't keep with all these changes and fall back on the age old position in such circumstances, "bomb 'em all !"
 
A variation on Bush's "you're with us or against us". According to the politicians and the media, everyone's a "good guy" or a "bad guy" - except that things keep changing on a daily basis, with some "good guys" becoming "bad guys" overnight - and vice-versa. And the politicians/media can't keep with all these changes and fall back on the age old position in such circumstances, "bomb 'em all !"
We're the good guys who need to swoop in and save the day to defeat the bad guys. Yet only in 2013 these same journalists (David Aaronovitch/John Rentoul) suggested we need to be bombing Assad...who's now fighting the bad guys we're fighting against now ! This "good guys vs bad guys" narrative is always used by the West to justify whatever foreign policy objective we're pursuing. The biggest example would be the now infamous 1993 UK Independent frontpage hailing none other than Osama Bin Laden as "an anti-Soviet war hero" ! Yes Osama Bin Laden was feted as a freedom fighter by a British newspaper. He was "our boy" once upon a time like Saddam was our boy.

Post-Paris, anyone trying to point out the lunacy of our Middle East policy which created the conditions for Daesh is denounced as an apologist. Objective, nuanced analysis has given way to emotional outbursts of vengeance. Andrew Neil threw a hissy fit on Twitter because some had the gall to suggest this current Syria/Daesh nightmare just might be a result of our disasterous 2003 invasion of Iraq and western foreign policy ! Its the same argument trotted out by Maher, Harris, Christopher Hitchens when he was alive and Dawkins - "they hate us because they hate us" - these are bad guys and we're good guys and that's it. Mehdi Hasan said it best - to explain is NOT to justify. Of course we all want Daesh obliterated but to ignore why Daesh came about, as a direct result of our invasion of Iraq and the backing of a government who launched sectarian policies that drove many Sunnis into the arms of extremists, to ignore the fact OUR detention and torture of Iraqi Sunni detainees sparked the first few flames of Sunni militancy in Iraq which has spread to Syria (and encouraged by our Gulf allies) is wilful blindness.

It appears people have already forgotten about Libya let alone Iraq and Afghanistan. We're now about to embark upon another quagmire in the Middle East and Cameron looks like with enough Labour rebels he's gonna get it. Who honestly thinks chucking a few British bombs on top of American, Russian and French bombs is gonna cause a military breakthrough ? If the combined might of the Pentagon and the Kremlin hasn't defeated Daesh then what chance do the RAF have ?! Even the Generals admit bombing alone won't resolve this mess !

Speaking of Bush let me add another quote - "I don't do nuance" - thanks Bush that's worked out great for the Middle East.
 
ISIS claims attack on Shia mosque in Bangladesh

DHAKA: The militant Islamic State (IS) group has claimed responsibility for a deadly attack on worshippers at a Shia mosque in northern Bangladesh, the United States (US)-based monitoring organisation SITE said Friday.

The attackers entered the mosque in Shibganj, some 125 kilometres north of Dhaka, during evening prayers on Thursday and opened fire on the gathered worshippers before fleeing.

Television footage showed the heavily guarded Shia mosque with broken windows and blood stains on the floor.

Police said the prayer caller had been killed and three worshippers wounded in the shooting, a rare attack on minority Shia Muslims in the mainly Sunni nation.

Detectives say they are questioning two people over the shooting although they had not been formally arrested.

"We have picked up two Sunni locals for interrogation in connection to the shootout," Shibganj police chief Ahsan Habib told AFP.

The SITE Intelligence Group, which monitors militant activity, said on its website that the IS group had claimed responsibility in a message posted on Twitter.

Bangladeshi authorities have previously said there is no evidence that IS extremists are active in the country.

The group, however, has claimed a series of attacks in Bangladesh, including the shooting and wounding of an Italian priest and the killing of a Sufi Muslim shrine chief, both this month.


Security had been stepped up across the country after two top opposition leaders were hanged on Sunday following their conviction for war crimes committed during the 1971 independence conflict against Pakistan.

One of the men executed was Ali Ahsan Mohammad Mujahid, who was the official number two in the Jamaat-e-Islami party.

Salahuddin Quader Chowdhury, a senior figure in the main opposition Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP), was hanged at the same time at Dhaka's Central Prison in the capital's old quarter.

The attackers in Shibganj struck a day after police shot dead a top militant accused of hurling grenades at the country's main imambargah in Dhaka last month, killing two people.

The bombing was believed to be the first attack on Shias in Bangladesh, though banned militant groups have killed more than a dozen Sufi Muslims and attacked Hindus and Christians in the last two years.

Speaking after the latest attack, local Shia leader Mir Zulfiqar Ali said that there was growing sense of fear among the community.

"We are now concerned as it was the second time an attack came on us. All we can do is to condemn such attacks and ask for extra security from the government at our mosques and shrines," he told AFP.

Police have pledged to step up security in the wake of the attack.

"Security has been beefed up at all important Shia installations including their mosques in Dhaka ahead of the Muslim's Friday prayer," Dhaka police spokesman Muntashirul Islam told AFP.

Bangladesh has been roiled by violence for much of the last three years since a domestic tribunal began delivering its verdicts on opposition figures accused of orchestrating massacres during the 1971 war.



http://www.dawn.com/news/1222660/is-claims-attack-on-shia-mosque-in-bangladesh-site
 
Things are not looking good this is 3rd or 4th time ISIS claimed responsibility of an attack in Bangla (in last few months)
 
Back
Top