Jihadists Seize Iraq's Nineveh Province!

  • Thread starter Thread starter Seamus_L
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Which means there will be more violence, death and mayhem, i.e., there is no way these countries will comply with a caliphate, and there will be, as such, major wars.
And overwhelming cost to human life if America intervenes again. When will this stop? Are you sure that military intervention is the best and only way to bring about peace in the area? Military force hasn’t worked for years and years, so I don’t see how military force will solve anything now. Please tell us how more American warfare, more human casualties and more displacement of thousands of people in the Mideast will result in relieving the widespread deep hatred for America in that area?
 
Being true or not has nothing to do with the dictionary definition of ad hominem. An ad hominem argument is attacking an opponent’s personality, character or reputation rather than answering his argument.
And, BTW, I believe that the argument given by Professor Dr. Noam Chomsky here is well worth reading.
But if his argument is always the same, i.e., blame the U.S., then yes, his reputation will suffer, i.e., what credibility will he have if he can’t think outside his leftist p.o.v.?

**
If the Nuremberg laws were applied, then every post-war American president would have been hanged.
— Noam Chomsky (around 1990) [12]
**

These are hardly the words of a moderate.
 
ISIS Uses Mafia Tactics To Fund Its Own Operations Without Help From Persian Gulf Donors
When fighters from the Islamic State of Syria and al-Sham stole tens of millions of dollars from a bank in Mosul earlier this year, it wasn’t simply a startling symbol of the collapse of Baghdad’s control over Iraq’s second-largest city. The brazen theft was instead a stark illustration of one of the most alarming aspects of ISIS’s rise: the group’s growing ability to fund its own operations through bank heists, extortion, kidnappings and other tactics more commonly associated with the mob than with violent Islamist extremists.

In its early years ISIS – like the Taliban and other Sunni militants – received most of its funding from wealthy donors in Kuwait, Qatar, and other Persian Gulf countries. Extremists in those U.S. ally states continue to send money to ISIS, but American counterterrorism officials believe that the group now finances the bulk of its recruitment, weapons purchases, and attacks without outside help. Even if the U.S. and its allies somehow stopped the flow of money from the Persian Gulf to the battlefields of Iraq and Syria, in other words, it would be too late to prevent ISIS from banking enough money to fight on for years.

“The overwhelming majority of their money comes from criminal activities like bank heists, extortion, robberies and smuggling,” said one U.S. counter-terrorism official.“They’re getting some money from outside donors, but that pales in comparison to their self-funding.”

The exact amount of money in ISIS’s possession is the subject of intense debate among Western intelligence officials. At the high end, some analysts estimate that the group may have access to at least $500 million in cash drawn from bank robberies, oil smuggling, and old-fashioned extortion and protection rackets. Other analysts believe the number is far lower, with one official putting it at between $100 million and $200 million. Those numbers are moving higher as the group conquers more cities on its seemingly inexorable drive toward Baghdad and is able to loot the local private and government banks. On Monday, ISIS fighters took the strategically important town of Tal Afar, adding to the territory under its direct control.

Calculating the true size of ISIS’s coffers is complicated by the lack of U.S. intelligence assets in the areas the group controls in Syria and Iraq and by the difficulty of sorting through the group’s sophisticated propaganda efforts. In closed-door briefings on Capitol Hill, senior officials from the intelligence community dismissed the initial reports that ISIS may have stolen more than $400 million from the bank in Mosul and said those figures were highly exaggerated. “We’re talking tens of millions from Mosul, not hundreds of millions,” one official said.

Read the rest
complex.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2014/06/16/isis_uses_mafia_tactics_to_fund_its_own_operations_without_help_from_persian_gulf_d?utm_content=buffer3c2e2&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer
 
ISIS Uses Mafia Tactics To Fund Its Own Operations Without Help From Persian Gulf Donors
When fighters from the Islamic State of Syria and al-Sham stole tens of millions of dollars from a bank in Mosul earlier this year, it wasn’t simply a startling symbol of the collapse of Baghdad’s control over Iraq’s second-largest city. The brazen theft was instead a stark illustration of one of the most alarming aspects of ISIS’s rise: the group’s growing ability to fund its own operations through bank heists, extortion, kidnappings and other tactics more commonly associated with the mob than with violent Islamist extremists.

In its early years ISIS – like the Taliban and other Sunni militants – received most of its funding from wealthy donors in Kuwait, Qatar, and other Persian Gulf countries. Extremists in those U.S. ally states continue to send money to ISIS, but American counterterrorism officials believe that the group now finances the bulk of its recruitment, weapons purchases, and attacks without outside help. Even if the U.S. and its allies somehow stopped the flow of money from the Persian Gulf to the battlefields of Iraq and Syria, in other words, it would be too late to prevent ISIS from banking enough money to fight on for years.

“The overwhelming majority of their money comes from criminal activities like bank heists, extortion, robberies and smuggling,” said one U.S. counter-terrorism official.“They’re getting some money from outside donors, but that pales in comparison to their self-funding.”

The exact amount of money in ISIS’s possession is the subject of intense debate among Western intelligence officials. At the high end, some analysts estimate that the group may have access to at least $500 million in cash drawn from bank robberies, oil smuggling, and old-fashioned extortion and protection rackets. Other analysts believe the number is far lower, with one official putting it at between $100 million and $200 million. Those numbers are moving higher as the group conquers more cities on its seemingly inexorable drive toward Baghdad and is able to loot the local private and government banks. On Monday, ISIS fighters took the strategically important town of Tal Afar, adding to the territory under its direct control.

Calculating the true size of ISIS’s coffers is complicated by the lack of U.S. intelligence assets in the areas the group controls in Syria and Iraq and by the difficulty of sorting through the group’s sophisticated propaganda efforts. In closed-door briefings on Capitol Hill, senior officials from the intelligence community dismissed the initial reports that ISIS may have stolen more than $400 million from the bank in Mosul and said those figures were highly exaggerated. “We’re talking tens of millions from Mosul, not hundreds of millions,” one official said.

Read the rest
complex.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2014/06/16/isis_uses_mafia_tactics_to_fund_its_own_operations_without_help_from_persian_gulf_d?utm_content=buffer3c2e2&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer
I could pick out $ signs from the article, replace it with WMDs and feel like I’m right back in 2003. Is this what a trip in a time machine feels like?
 
If they settle in with their gains in Iraq, expect to see Jordan attacked in the near future. There are a lot of Sunnis there who would side with them.
Yes, but there will be many others who won’t, i.e., it can only result in horrendous atrocities, attacks and aggression.

p.s. I do not see how we can simply stand by if this is their aim, and you can be assured that Israel will use it WMDs if it must.
 
But if his argument is always the same, i.e., blame the U.S., then yes, his reputation will suffer, i.e., what credibility will he have if he can’t think outside his leftist p.o.v.?

These are hardly the words of a moderate.
I hope that everyone will read the argument of Mr. Chomsky in post #323 or
democracynow.org/blog/2013/9/11/noam_chomsky_us_has_been_torturing_iran_for_60_years_since_1953_coup
and decide for themselves.
When you criticize an argument, the standard procedure is to go over the points of disagreement and this has not been done. The only thing that has been done here Is to attack the character or reputation of Mr. Chomsky and not address his well reasoned arguments. When you attack the person, rather than address the arguments raised, that qualifies as an ad hominem argument. This is the standard and well known definition of the term ad hominem.
 
Yes, but there will be many others who won’t, i.e., it can only result in horrendous atrocities, attacks and aggression.

p.s. I do not see how we can simply stand by if this is their aim, and you can be assured that Israel will use it WMDs if it must.
Militants ‘may have committed war crimes’, says UN

bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-27875053

I don’t think ISIS cares what the UN says
 
I could pick out $ signs from the article, replace it with WMDs and feel like I’m right back in 2003. Is this what a trip in a time machine feels like?
I don’t know what you know about Islamic history, but ISIS is doing almost exactly what the original Islamic warlords did. My guess is they are using them as their role models in all this.
 
I hope that everyone will read the argument of Mr. Chomsky in post #323 or
democracynow.org/blog/2013/9/11/noam_chomsky_us_has_been_torturing_iran_for_60_years_since_1953_coup
and decide for themselves.
When you criticize an argument, the standard procedure is to go over the points of disagreement and this has not been done. The only thing that has been done here Is to attack the character or reputation of Mr. Chomsky and not address his well reasoned arguments. When you attack the person, rather than address the arguments raised, that qualifies as an ad hominem argument. This is the standard and well known definition of the term ad hominem.
Fine, I will read his argument, but be assured that I have already read several of his books, so I know more or less what he’s going to say.
 
I don’t know what you know about Islamic history, but ISIS is doing almost exactly what the original Islamic warlords did. My guess is they are using them as their role models in all this.
Why go that far back? How about the ‘warlords’ of Cold War era Afghanistan? Why we ever dreamed that anything more than short, swift, targeted airstrikes would ever succeed in Afghanistan is beyond me. Same goes for most of the ME, but Iraq in particular has had more than its share of American blood and weaponry.*** No more*** for them.
 
Why go that far back? How about the ‘warlords’ of Cold War era Afghanistan? Why we ever dreamed that anything more than short, swift, targeted airstrikes would ever succeed in Afghanistan is beyond me. Same goes for most of the ME, but Iraq in particular has had more than its share of American blood and weaponry.*** No more*** for them.
I don’t think airstrikes will do much against ISIS now that they are in cities. Can’t bomb civilians and expect to gain anything out of it unless you carpet bomb, and that isn’t the way the West conducts war anymore. ISIS would of course do it if they had the air power, and Maliki might but he doesn’t have the air power or the artillery to do it.
 
Some headline. I could close my eyes, spin around inside a circle of Syrian medics and find witnesses to the all the worst modern warfare has to offer - and then some. It’s news because it happens in Iraq?
I think for over 100 years now, rounding up in excess of 1,000 prisoners of war; having them dig their own graves and then executing them, can be considered a war crime no matter who did it. But ISIS is living in the 7th century and doesn’t follow the rules of modern civilization.
 
I don’t think the daily mail is fooling anyone with that headline.
 
I think for over 100 years now, rounding up in excess of 1,000 prisoners of war; having them dig their own graves and then executing them, can be considered a war crime no matter who did it. But ISIS is living in the 7th century and doesn’t follow the rules of modern civilization.
They have to be killed. It’s as simple as that.
 
I think for over 100 years now, rounding up in excess of 1,000 prisoners of war; having them dig their own graves and then executing them, can be considered a war crime no matter who did it. But ISIS is living in the 7th century and doesn’t follow the rules of modern civilization.
According to an article in today’s NY Times, p. 6: “An official statement posted on the Ministry of Defense’s website denied the executions had taken place at all.”
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top