Tag: Militants

Closing Thought–11Dec18

Does anyone remember the name of BUNDY?

They began their rise with a stand off about some cattle in a wildlife refuge….it then escalated later onto a bird sanctuary and a confrontation with Federal agents….now the son of the elder Bundy has decided that the militia movement is bogus…..in solidarity with the so-called “caravan”…….

Ammon Bundy is best known as a leading light of the American militia movement (a motley coalition of various different flavors of firearms enthusiasts who hate the federal government). He’s famous for getting into armed standoffs with federal agents and violently occupying bird sanctuaries. His friends are the kind of folks who co-chair pro-Trump veterans groups; his father is the kind of man who says, “I want to tell you one more thing I know about the Negro” — and proceeds to explain why black people were “better off as slaves.”

So, this being 2018, Bundy naturally just disavowed the militia movement in solidarity with the migrant caravan, suggested that nationalism is actually the opposite of patriotism, and said that Trump’s America resembles nothing so much as 1930s Germany.

http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2018/12/ammon-bundy-quits-militia-movement-defends-migrant-caravan.html

Now I want to hear the retort from the alt-Right that held the Bundys up as the saviors of America…..

The Road To Al-Baghdadi

Inkwell Institute

Middle East Desk

The news now a days is Gaza and MH17…….but with all that coverage there is still problems elsewhere that we would like to ignore……but do so at our own peril.

Iraq and Syria may have slipped from the headlines but both are a smoldering pile of fecal matter……death, destruction and extreme violence are all they have to look forward to in the near future…….ISIS then ISIL then Islamic State and now the Caliphate….what do we know about the man credited with forming the caliphate…..Abu Bakr Al Baghadi who now calls himself Caliph Ibrahim…….what do we actually know about the ‘enemy’?

Let me state first and foremost, I have zero confidence in our intel agencies….they have missed too much that has come back to bite us in the ass…..al-Baghdadi seems to be one of those nibbles on our tush…….

What do we know?

To begin with if Bill O’Reilly is correct the he is a Muslim because he has a beard…….he is a terrorist because we are told he is…..he makes videos for posting on the internet……that my friends is what we know about al-Baghdadi…..all of which is hearsay and accusations….could there be more?

A reflection from a Mother Jones article……..

Baghdadi has become Iraq’s most prominent extremist leader. But for much of his adult life, Baghdadi did not have a reputations as a fiery, jihadist trailblazer. According to the Telegraph, members of his local mosque in Tobchi (a neighborhood in Baghdad) who knew him from around 1989 until 2004 (when he was between the ages of 18 and 33) considered Baghdadi a quiet, studious fellow and a talented soccer player. When the United States invaded Iraq in 2003, Baghdadi was earning a degree in Islamic studies in Baghdad.

But within a couple years of the US invasion, Baghdadi was a prisoner in Camp Bucca, the US-run detainment facility in Umm Qasr, Iraq. And a US compound commander stationed at that prison—and other military officials—have in recent weeks wondered whether Baghdadi’s stint there radicalized him and put him on the path to taking over ISIS in 2010 and guiding the movement to its recent military victories.

The details of Baghdadi’s time in Camp Bucca are murky. Some media reports note that he was held as a “civilian internee” at the prison for 10 months in 2004. Others report that he was captured by US forces in 2005 and spent four years at Camp Bucca. The reason why he was apprehended is not publicly known; he could have been arrested on a specific charge or as part of a large sweep of insurgents or insurgent supporters. (A confidential Red Cross report leaked in May 2004 suggested than around 90 percent of detainees of Iraqi origin were arrested “by mistake.”) Army Colonel Kenneth King, the commanding US officer at Camp Bucca in 2009, recently told the Daily Beast that he distinctly remembered a man resembling Baghdadi: “He was a bad dude, but he wasn’t the worst of the worst.” King noted he was “not surprised” that such a radical figure emerged from the facility.

In other words we not only originated AQ but now we help form a mass murderer, is that what they are saying?

U.S. officials now believed that two years after his release, Baghdadi was actively working with al Qaeda in the very city where he was arrested, a U.S. counter-terrorism official told McClatchy. The official cannot be identified under the conditions with which he discussed Baghdadi.

Looks like the intel community may have missed another sign of what was to come…….they continue to show me that we should have NO confidence on these agencies to keep us safe.

I believe the biggest problem that al Baghdadi is going to have is his Muslim brethren…..

Iraqi clerics meeting in Anbar described the recent declaration by the “Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant” (ISIL) of a “caliphate” as a violation of sharia.

ISIL’s declaration of caliphate clearly shows why the group has recently spilled blood and killed people, said Anbar Scholars Council spokesman Sheikh Abdul Hamid al-Alwani.

It is like an occupation and coercion to force people to agree with them under threats, and is also a violation of sharia and the requirements of a caliphate, he said.

“A caliphate requires consent and allegiance from citizens, and this did not happen with ISIL’s declaration, therefore making it a violation of religion,” al-Alwani said.

There are some level heads within the Muslim community, regardless of what the haters would have you believe……..

Dr Habash concludes with a counsel: “What we need is a revolution within the Muslim mindset that takes it back to the true Islamic values of freedom, justice, human dignity; away from the sacredness of the caliphate … to a political system that simply governs the affairs of people.”

The Syrian Muslim Brotherhood sees it thusly………The SMB said his caliphate was illegitimate because he had never shown his face in public – one of the main conditions for a legitimate imam in Islam is that he is known. The embarrassing argument was refuted after the video of Mr Al Baghdadi’s Friday sermon in one of Mosul’s largest and oldest mosques was released.

Al-Baghdadi may not be the threat that the war hawks want him to be…….but again,  without a reliable intel community we will just have to wait and see.

PS:  After I wrote this draft new info has come to light…..from the Centre for Research on Globalization……….

The former employee at US National Security Agency (NSA), Edward Snowden, has revealed that the British and American intelligence and the Mossad worked together to create the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS).

Snowden said intelligence services of three countries created a terrorist organisation that is able to attract all extremists of the world to one place, using a strategy called “the hornet’s nest”.

NSA documents refer to recent implementation of the hornet’s nest to protect the Zionist entity by creating religious and Islamic slogans.

According to documents released by Snowden, “The only solution for the protection of the Jewish state “is to create an enemy near its borders”.

Leaks revealed that ISIS leader and cleric Abu Bakr Al Baghdadi took intensive military training for a whole year in the hands of Mossad, besides courses in theology and the art of speech.

There is nothing about that revelation that is surprising…at least to me…….waiting patiently for the MSM to act on this info……..and I wait!

Come on all you conspiracists….this is a perfect situation for you to latch onto and rant and rave…………….and I wait!

Good Money After Bad?

Think back a year or more ago…..Syria had just used CWs on its population and the Neo-cons went bat crap crazy……..they demanded that the US do something……none were really too clear on what….but something must be done!

We have sent some humanitarian aid and various amounts of small arms….but neocons demanded more that we were killing the resistance to Assad by not sending bigger and better weapons and of course….we needed to do what we do best….airstrikes.

Well the Pentagon is set to pour more money into the Syrian civil war….they are seeking something like an extra $500 million for training of the Syrian rebels…….first we should ask….which rebels?  There are moderates and there are the fringe lunatics like ISIS……and how would we guarantee that the “proper” rebels would get the training?

The next question should be…..would this money be a waste?  Why ask that?

For one, it seems that Assad could be winning this war…….

 

Territorial Control: Syrian government troops have managed to hold on to most major urban centers, but large parts of the countryside are either in rebel hands, or a heavily contested no-man zone. The pro-Assad forces have a strong grip on the capital Damascus in the south, central Syria with the Homs province, and the Mediterranean coast in the west. The government controls key strategic routes connecting the capital with the coastline and with the Jordanian border in the south, ensuring the survival of the regime.
Military Power: Syria’s regular armed forces have been stretched thin by the widespread rebellion, suffering heavy casualties from daily ambushes and bomb attacks. However, the elite units numbering about 50 000 men are well-equipped, manned by Alawite loyalists from Assad’s home region, and backed by air support and heavy artillery. Plus, the regime has organized tens of thousands of supporters into paramilitary units that could continue the fight even if Assad himself were to lose control of the capital.

Even Syria’s dire enemy Israel does not see the rebels as winning the war……..this from a piece in the Times of Israel…….

“Assad has secured 70-80 percent of essential Syria,” the official said, sketching a line from Aleppo in the north down through Hama, Homs, Damascus and the southern areas near Jordan and the city of Dara’a – a Syrian city where the war began and, currently, a channel through which Sunni extremists enter Syria from Jordan.

The official’s depiction of the situation in Syria contradicts an assessment given by a top defense official, who in May told several journalists that Assad’s forces have lost the entire Golan Heights, aside from Quneitra and one enclave, and that, “In Aleppo, in Damascus, in the north near the Turkish border, in the Golan Heights – in all of these places he is losing.”

If Assad is truly winning the civil war….what will extra training for the rebels actually accomplish?

And we can ask…..If we had listened to John McCain would the outcome be different?  Would airstrikes in the early part of the war have made a difference?

I am sure that the GOP will make hay out of any defeat of the rebels as ….”Obama’s fault”……..The argument could be made that we could have made a difference……it could be made….but not be me.

 

 

 

What The Hell Is A “Caliphate”?

Inkwell Institute

Middle East Desk

for the last couple of weeks there has been the thought of ISIS may establish a caliphate…..and of course everyone has an opinion….ut not one of them has any idea what is meant by the ‘caliphate’……and now there has been an announcement and I am sure it will be the talk of the day…….

First, just hat is the ‘caliphate’?

Caliphate, the political-religious state comprising the Muslim community and the lands and peoples under its dominion in the centuries following the death (632 ce) of the Prophet Muhammad. Ruled by a caliph, who held temporal and sometimes a degree of spiritual authority, the empire of the Caliphate grew rapidly through conquest during its first two centuries to include most of Southwest Asia, North Africa, and Spain. Dynastic struggles later brought about the Caliphate’s decline, and it ceased to exist with the Mongol destruction of Baghdad in 1258.

Now that you have a rudimentary grasp on the concept…….

Reflecting its virtually uncontested control over a broad swath of land in Iraq and Syria, the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) has announced the formation of a new nation, dubbed simply The Islamic State (TIS).

According to the announcement, TIS has been determined by Shura councils to be the “restoration of the Caliphate,” and ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi has been declared the Caliph.

While TIS has been a de facto state for quite some time, albeit one with ill-defined borders engaged in multiple wars, the declaration of themselves as the new Caliphate is likely to fuel controversy around the world, and a direct challenge to Islamist factions.

That’s because a Caliphate claims to be the direct successor of the Prophet Muhammad, and its Caliph would at least claim to be the consensus final religious authority for all of Sunni Islam.

Caliphates have a long history across the Middle East, with dominant Caliphates ruling significant territory and wielding broad influence through much of history. For centuries, Ottoman sultans also held the position of Caliph. In 1924, Turkey dissolved the institution of Caliphate, and there has been no consensus Caliph since. In recent decades several Islamist factions have called for the restoration of the Caliphate, though naturally each has envisioned itself at the head, and none has gained anywhere near this much traction.

With the declaration, ISIS is making an enormous power play, aiming to put itself formally in command of all “faithful” Sunnis on a religious level. While that’s unlikely to matter across the broader Sunni world, except as a slap in the face, among Salafist factions like al-Qaeda this is a direct challenge, and a call for al-Qaeda and other such factions to submit to a position under Baghdadi’s rule.

Now that the ‘worst’ fears have been realized…..what will it mean to the rest of the world?  Well, not much I gonna change in the world…for now…I am sure that the doomsayers will be all over this as a harbinger of doom….the first thing to remember is that AQ is NOT a friend of ISIS……….that should lead to a bunch of in-fighting.  Next, see just which country or group gives their support to this Baghdadi dude……he got the big head and claimed he was the leader of ALL Muslims……..not gonna sit well in most cirlces….

For now all it will be is a pundit talking point……I would not go out and buy a slightly used bomb shelter…….

 

Does Anyone Really Know?

Iraq is bursting at the seams…..violence is taking over….and everyone and i mean everyone has an opinion on what to do….but the question should be asked….is anyone thinking of what cold happen to the country of Iraq?

US does not not have a plan………Iran has a plan but will it fly in the West?  The Arab world is quaking in their shoes…..whatever they do could be wrong……….the rest of the world would rather go back to Ukraine…….

I know most Americans could care less….that is unless they can get something that they can insult the prez over…….but what could happen?

In a piece written by Kaiwon Bahroz, a political analyst for Middle East News sees several scenarios for the country….these are……

1. Baghdad is conquered by ISIL
This is the worst of all possible outcomes. It will result in protracted and bloody street fighting between various militias including ISIL. Such an outcome would also be a political nightmare for Barack Obama, making it even harder to convince Americans that their engagement in Iraq is over. The U.S. may be forced to consider whether they will have to intervene directly. In that case we face an Iraq War phase two.

The probability of a conquest of Baghdad is not great. ISIL is admittedly strong and probably has 10,000 prospective soldiers and jihadists they can draw on. Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki in turn has limited control and loyalty in the new Iraqi army, and the army is poorly trained, as we have seen in Mosul. But in and around Baghdad, Maliki is still strong. He has control over his own forceful sjiamilitser, and the armies have a lot of weapons.

2. Attacks against Kurdish areas
Another scenario is that ISIL might try to attack the autonomous Kurdistan (KRG) in the north. But the question is whether ISIL will waste its power on this.

Kurds lack the kind of weapons that allows them to be sure to keep ISIL away. Kurds fear this, and on Thursday they even went into the big oil hub of Kirkuk to prevent ISIL from attacking the city.

One possible outcome is that the Kurds will declare their own state, with Kirkuk as its capital, as a counterbalance to the chaos in the south. If the situation continues on the current track, the Kurds could seek international support for this venture, which still wouldn’t solve the problem in Iraq.

3. Baghdad strikes back militarily
That is what we are now experiencing. Baghdad has carried out air strikes, and the U.S. might use drones and/or aircraft. Air strikes will not be able to force ISIL away. Maliki therefore hopes to use the fear of ISIL to build a common front where the Iraqi Army, Kurdish Peshmerga and Shiite militias together try to drive ISIL back. Would such an alliance defeat ISIL?

Assad in Syria is unable to remove the jihadists although he is militarily superior. Maliki is therefore totally dependent on the former Sunni insurgent groups that have so far withstood him. A win against ISIL therefore requires a political reconciliation process in Iraq that no one other than the U.S. can guarantee. But Obama has so far been passive and focused on negotiations with Iran. Iran has no desire for increased U.S. involvement or to get the Sunnis back into a more powerful role in Iraqi politics.

4. Designated caliphate in parts of Iraq and Syria
This is ISIL’s real main goal. They want to establish a caliphate crisscrossing the border between Syria and Iraq. ISIL is a dogmatic opponent of state boundaries in the Middle East as they were drawn up after the First World War. ISIS has previously declared minor areas of Iraq as a caliphate and can do this again. Yet, their ability to maintain control over large areas over a long time is still limited.

The group lacks local support in almost every location. The solution lies in a genuine peace process between the Shia government in Baghdad and Iraq’s Sunni outcasts. Here the U.S. has a key role because they can put pressure on the regime in Baghdad. The alternative is prolonged chaos and an enduring focal point for a new generation of regional and international terrorism – something that will give the debate in the U.S. about intervention new life.

5. Chaos and prolonged civil war
This is the most probable outcome. Iraq is currently, in practice, no longer a state. As of the war in 2003, Iraq has gone from being an authoritarian dictatorship under Saddam’s total control, to something that strongly resembles the fragmented and stateless Afghanistan.

Neither Maliki nor the Americans were joined by the great part of Iraq that was pushed out when Saddam fell. Instead, the Sunnis have been suppressed. This has allowed for a strong ISIL and made much of Iraq an unclaimed and chaotic place. Unlike in Afghanistan, the troubled areas extend all the way up to the shores of the Mediterranean and the edge of Europe, absorbing angry and radicalized youth from across the Middle East and the West.

There you have 5 scenarios that could change the face of the Middle East and it could all begin to happen in Iraq.

Personally, Iraqis need to sort their problems out for themselves……they wanted us gone in 2012 and now Maliki wants our help……he needs to get a grip……the Sunnis are Iraqis too…..to treat them otherwise is not something we should support……..

 

There is a “tribal revolution” in Iraq: Anbar tribal chief « ASHARQ AL-AWSAT

Three days ago I finally got through to a friend in Baghdad, Prof. Azmi and he question the accuracy of the west’s reporting on the militants in Northern Iraq…..I found a editorial written by a leader of the Sunnis in al Anbar which basically confirms what the professor had told me……

read it for yourself……..

 

There is a “tribal revolution” in Iraq: Anbar tribal chief « ASHARQ AL-AWSAT.

Militants Advance Towards Baghdad

The US had better decide what to do about Iraq……I have gotten info that the militants are on route to the capital……..

Iraqi tribal forces and Islamist militants have begun their push for the capital Baghdad, a tribal rebel spokesman told Al Arabiya News on Monday, amid reports of clashes near Baghdad’s international airport.

Abu Abd al-Nuaimi said the decision to launch assault on Baghdad was taken during a meeting by tribal rebel military commanders. He said the meeting was held on the outskirts of Baghdad, without indicating exactly where.

The situation in Iraq is a memory of Blitzkrieg warfare…..move fast and strike hard….

(Design by Farwa Rizwan/ Al Arabiya News)

On the home front…….one of the mouth-keteers, Lindsey Graham said on “Face the Nation” that it may be prudent to ask and side with Iran in this matter………that oughta make John McCain’s head explode.

This blog was born out of the necessity for the West readers to get all the information in 2006 when Lebanon and Israel were pissing at each other….it has now come full circle with the situation in Iraq….i have always been fascinated by war….especially why we must have them….once again my blog is a voice that cannot be heard here in the United States. ….there is always more to the ct of war than we are told by the media……i will try to sort as much of it as i can and give to my readers.

Taliban Negotiations Begin

A major push to open negotiations with the Taliban on both sides of the Pakistan-Afghanistan border will begin Monday at a summit of leading political figures from the two countries, as the U.S.-backed governments in Kabul and Islamabad face a mounting threat from Islamic extremists.

Pakistani Taliban, based in the country’s tribal border area with Afghanistan, have joined the battle in Afghanistan and also taken on Islamabad. Nevertheless, the assembly of 50 people, called a jirga, which will meet for two days in Islamabad with the backing of both governments, is likely to question the continued presence of American and NATO forces in Afghanistan.

Rustam Shah Mohmand, a participant and a former Pakistani ambassador to Afghanistan, said it’s impossible to deal with the Taliban while Western forces remain in Afghanistan. He also said that the Kabul and Islamabad governments must drop their insistence that they’ll negotiate only with Taliban who’ve disarmed.

This year has been the most violent in Afghanistan since the 2001 U.S. invasion toppled the Taliban regime. Signs that Western will may be collapsing have panicked many Afghans, who fear that the international community is about to abandon them once again, as it did after the Soviets withdrew from the country in 1989.

Could This Be The Beginning Of Something Ugly?

The Pakistani military on Friday warned that it could strike back at U.S. soldiers if they conducted cross-border raids from Afghanistan, escalating the tension between the allies as U.S. missiles again pounded suspected militant hideouts.

A statement issued Friday by the Pakistani military at the end of a two-day meeting said the government and military agreed on the need to defend the nation. “Pakistani troops on the spot will retaliate for any actions across the border,” Maj. Gen. Athar Abbas, chief military spokesman, said. He didn’t provide details of possible actions, but the orders raised the prospect of the two allies shooting at each other even as they both increase the targeting of militants.

The Pakistani stance comes after it was revealed earlier this week that U.S. President George W. Bush approved secret orders in July clearing the way for Special Operations forces to conduct ground assaults in Pakistan without that government’s permission. U.S. commandos backed by a helicopter gunship recently raided a village in Pakistan’s border region, prompting a furious reaction in Pakistan.

But the substance of Pakistan’s threat will be fully known only if U.S. and Pakistani troops encounter each other on a combat mission. And Pakistan’s repeated, escalating rhetoric underscores how seriously it takes the issue. Earlier this week, Pakistan’s army chief, Gen. Ashfaq Kayani, warned that U.S. incursions into Pakistan wouldn’t be tolerated and that Pakistani forces would defend national sovereignty at all costs. “There is no question of any agreement or understanding with the coalition forces allowing them to strike inside Pakistan,” he said.