War Against ISIL

socialist · November 3, 2015

Yep....by any measure. Funny how that fact escapes the end of time gloom and doomers.

The idea of a borderless Europe (and USA too) is one of those utopianisms characteristic of the post-Cold War epoch, and is being demolished by reality like all the other utopianisms that have deluded the West since the beginning of the modern world.

Moonlight Graham · November 4, 2015

So, until Trudeau is able to get our aircraft out of the Middle East we are still at war with ISIL. That means that we are on the same side and supporting and defending the anti-Assad rebels. These are the good guys - I think.

There is a group of fighters in that region who are putting their enemies into cages and bringing them to the front lines. Instead of burning them or drowning them in those cages they are using them as shields against their enemies.

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2015/11/syrian-rebels-caged-captives-human-shields-151102203114417.html

Oh, did you think this was ISIS, sorry - these are the anti-Assad rebels. The good guys who we are defending.

Maybe it is time we reviewed who are the good guys and the bad guys.

We are being played like a fine, fine fiddle!

There's no "good guys" in Syria. There's no "freedom fighters". The FSA, who don't even exist anymore in any meaningful way, were led by Sunni defectors within the Syrian military. It's a Sunni vs Shia civil war, just like the last 12 years (and counting) in Iraq.

And you were right before, ground troops by the US is mainly to show force against the Russians, who have ground troops in Syria too (yes the US has had ground troops in Syria for a while, as have Canada). It's one giant shit-show that Canada needs to stay very far away from. Harper getting Canada involved in the Iraq War and the Syrian Civil War last year was a huge, embarrassing blunder. Canada shouldn't be trying to fix America's stupid messes. Harper's foreign policy is easily one of the worst in Canadian history, if not the worst.

Edited November 4, 2015 by Moonlight Graham

bush_cheney2004 · November 4, 2015

.....Canada shouldn't be trying to fix America's stupid messes. Harper's foreign policy is easily one of the worst in Canadian history, if not the worst.

Canada's foreign policy against ISIL is very very Canadian, replicating military actions in the past by Liberal governments. Canada is not trying to "fix America's stupid messes", as it is incapable of doing so.

Rue · November 4, 2015

Harper hated and had great disdain for Obama. As Bush stated he did not go in to support the US but to place Canada as having a role in the world in regards to terrorism prevention overseas. Bush is 100% correct. In fact Obama's fued with Harper started over Libya. Canada backed the French, Italians and then Britain over Libya not the US. Canada's foreign policy in regards to terrorism supports the French and British not the US. Obama alienated all his Nato allies. In fact the US at this point has one ally Turkey. well two if you count Iran hah.

eyeball · November 4, 2015

There is a group of fighters in that region who are putting their enemies into cages and bringing them to the front lines. Instead of burning them or drowning them in those cages they are using them as shields against their enemies.

That's actually a pretty clever tactic, despicable and probably contrary to the "best-practice" principles of civilized warfare, but clever nonetheless.

Big Guy · November 5, 2015

That's actually a pretty clever tactic, despicable and probably contrary to the "best-practice" principles of civilized warfare, but clever nonetheless.

I remember the reports coming from the periodic and expected wars between Iraq and Iran before the USA changed the balance of power. Every few years, Iran and Iraq would declare war and decrease each population by hundreds of thousands. I recall the "Iranian land mines disposal squad".

The Iraqi prisoners were led to a field that was suspected to have been land mined by the Iraqi army. The Iraqi prisoners were formed into a long line, ordered to hold hands and told to walk forward. When a section of this line was blown up, the hole was filled by more Iraqi prisoners. Eventually the field was cleaned of land mines. The process was employed by both sides and led to both sides greatly reducing the number of land mines that they placed under the sand.

Perhaps the prelude to the MAD theory?

Moonlight Graham · November 5, 2015

I'm wondering what the heck Obama's realistic desired outcome in Syria is? Clearly he supports regime change because, like Saddam and Gaddafi, Assad doesn't play by the US's rules. He also wants to destroy ISIS. But what is the realistic goal here? I see no major "moderate" groups fighting with any chance to win, and many of them that have been trained/armed by the US have been surrendering or defecting to terrorist groups like al-Qaeda. I see mostly sunni Islamist groups fighting the Assad regime, including the al-Nusra Front (al-Qaeda's arm in Syria) and ISIS.

Does the West have a good outcome prospects in this war? It's very likely either Assad or Islamist militants who will prevail. Obama is totally screwed in Syria, and now Russia's involved. US-led/supported regime change in the M.E. has been an epic failure in virtually every circumstance I can think of. Best outcome is probably Assad regaining power.

Big Guy · November 17, 2015

With all the rhetoric about this conflict I have yet to hear what is the end game for the American coaltion and how it is to be evaluated. Will it be like Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan where the USA will declare victory and go home?

How many times can you cover failure and defeat with BS?

bush_cheney2004 · November 17, 2015

...How many times can you cover failure and defeat with BS?

Canada's new prime minister has the answer.....cut and run...take more selfies.

ReeferMadness · November 18, 2015

With all the rhetoric about this conflict I have yet to hear what is the end game for the American coaltion and how it is to be evaluated. Will it be like Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan where the USA will declare victory and go home?

How many times can you cover failure and defeat with BS?

ISIS isn't Vietnam or Iraq. It's an army of 30,000 occupying a poor area, mostly desert. Turkey, which borders ISIS controlled territory, has an army a million strong (including reservists) with thousands of tanks and a modern air force. So, I'm forced to conclude that Turkey alone could easily roll over ISIS if it chose to do so. And, since Turkey is a country populated predominantly by Sunni Muslims, that wouldn't present the same problem as white Christian westerners occupying Iraq. However, Turkey won't fight ISIS because ISIS is fighting Turkey's enemies, Assad and the Kurds. (the enemy of my enemy...). In fact, Turkey has, officially or otherwise, been supporting ISIS by allowing it to cross its border and buying some of its black market oil.

Therein lies the problem. ISIS isn't some random malignancy of Islam or just a bunch of madmen in the desert. It's a manifestation of deep ethnic and political issues whose roots include the following:

Ethnic/tribal strife and tensions in the region
Countries consisting of multiple ethnic groups arbitrarily created by European colonial powers
Deep anti-western sentiment resulting from centuries of invasions, intervention, colonialism and neocolonialism
Regional economic malaise resulting in the unemployment or underemployment of large percentages of people, particularly the young

The governments of Turkey and Saudi Arabia won't confront ISIS on the battlefield, not because they're afraid of the 30,000 fighters, but because they're afraid of their own people who might sympathize with them.

To make things even worse, I saw a story today (I lost the link) that spoke of Israeli and Russian sources discussing using the type of tactics that Russia used in Chechnya and Israel uses against Palestinians. Collective punishment and more indiscriminate attacks. Both of which may temporarily put a lid on things but are guaranteed to fuel the underlying problems.

Until and unless the major players in the region (Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Iran) are prepared to get serious about trying to fix the underlying issues, the west and Russia should pack up and leave.

Edited November 18, 2015 by ReeferMadness

Big Guy · November 19, 2015

ISIS isn't Vietnam or Iraq. It's an army of 30,000 occupying a poor area, mostly desert. ...

I disagree with your premise. The 30,000 number may be correct but they are not "occupiers". Their military base is the Saddam Republican Guard which "disappeared" when the USA invaded. They are Sunni and are now occupying Sunni territory from which they came originally. The locals are also Sunni and the fighters can easily "dissolve" back into the populace.

That is not an "occupation" in my mind.

I still ask:

What is ISIS?

Who is the leader of ISIS?

How can we tell the difference between a local Sunni and an ISIS sympathiser or fighter?

Edited November 19, 2015 by Big Guy

ReeferMadness · November 19, 2015

I disagree with your premise. The 30,000 number may be correct but they are not "occupiers". Their military base is the Saddam Republican Guard which "disappeared" when the USA invaded. They are Sunni and are now occupying Sunni territory from which they came originally. The locals are also Sunni and the fighters can easily "dissolve" back into the populace.

That is not an "occupation" in my mind.

So, first of all, nobody voted for ISIS and it's unclear how much support they have. Which makes them occupiers.

But that's not the point I was trying to make. Defeating the 30,000 fighters isn't necessarily defeating ISIS and even if you defeat ISIS, you haven't fixed the problem. The problem is that for every one ISIS fighter there are probably 100 or 1,000 or maybe more aggrieved, young people who might be in a position to see ISIS as "standing up to the system" the way that young baby boomers did back in the 60's and 70's. That's partly why Saudi Arabia and Turkey aren't fighting ISIS - they're afraid of their own people.

Bonam · November 19, 2015

How can we tell the difference between a local Sunni and an ISIS sympathiser or fighter?

So, first of all, nobody voted for ISIS and it's unclear how much support they have. Which makes them occupiers.

But that's not the point I was trying to make. Defeating the 30,000 fighters isn't necessarily defeating ISIS and even if you defeat ISIS, you haven't fixed the problem. The problem is that for every one ISIS fighter there are probably 100 or 1,000 or maybe more aggrieved, young people who might be in a position to see ISIS as "standing up to the system" the way that young baby boomers did back in the 60's and 70's. That's partly why Saudi Arabia and Turkey aren't fighting ISIS - they're afraid of their own people.

Both of these statements seem to be in stark contradiction to both of your opinions that the majority of Muslims are moderates, that ISIS and those like them are just a handful of extremists, etc. If you can't tell between an ISIS fighter and any other Sunni in Syria, if for every one of the 30,000 Sunni fighters there are 1,000 others who are sympathetic, then the whole population is basically ISIS. And if that is your position, then it seems not self-consistent not to treat all the rest of the population the way we would treat ISIS, either.

Big Guy · November 19, 2015

Both of these statements seem to be in stark contradiction to both of your opinions that the majority of Muslims are moderates, that ISIS and those like them are just a handful of extremists, etc. If you can't tell between an ISIS fighter and any other Sunni in Syria, if for every one of the 30,000 Sunni fighters there are 1,000 others who are sympathetic, then the whole population is basically ISIS. And if that is your position, then it seems not self-consistent not to treat all the rest of the population the way we would treat ISIS, either.

I will try to clarify my view. These fighters are Sunni Muslims coming from the Sunni areas of mostly Iraq and Syria. They are radicalized locals and are trained fighters - trained by the Saddam regime. Those locals who are moderate Sunnis have one of three choices - go along with ISIS and survive, go along with the Shia governments of Iraq and Syria and be targeted or leave and try to find a better life.

I do not expect Sunni locals to give up their ISIS relatives and family to Shia forces.

And as far as what these ISIS guys want, it depends who you ask.

BTW - Who speaks for ISIS? Who is their leader? How will we know when he gives up or is killed?

Topaz · November 22, 2015

The differences between some countries and Russia may have to be put on the back burner if ISIS is to be taken down. Will the US and other countries work with Russia, who seem to have killed more ISIS members with their bombing than other countries, like it or not, the world needs Russia to help get rid of ISIS once and for all.

http://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/world/will-isis-force-russia-and-the-west-together/ar-BBniGcO?ocid=spartandhp

Big Guy · November 22, 2015

The differences between some countries and Russia may have to be put on the back burner if ISIS is to be taken down. Will the US and other countries work with Russia, who seem to have killed more ISIS members with their bombing than other countries, like it or not, the world needs Russia to help get rid of ISIS once and for all.

http://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/world/will-isis-force-russia-and-the-west-together/ar-BBniGcO?ocid=spartandhp

Russia and France have very different "targeting priorities" from the USA and especially Canada. Many American and Canadian sorties return without dropping any bombs because of the danger to civilians. Russian planes do not come back full. After Paris, the French have declared that they have increased the number of bombing runs and have adjusted their "targeting priorities".

Hook, line and sinker!

Rue · November 22, 2015

Say now, why don't those of you outraged over the IDF have anything to say about Russia or France? Oh come on now. Tell me how they are killing innocent civilians and they are barbaric. Please, line up. Oh no wait, we only do that with the IDF. Sorry I forgot.

GostHacked · November 22, 2015

Say now, why don't those of you outraged over the IDF have anything to say about Russia or France? Oh come on now. Tell me how they are killing innocent civilians and they are barbaric. Please, line up. Oh no wait, we only do that with the IDF. Sorry I forgot.

France is a western nation, of course they don't do anything wrong. /sarcasm.

Big Guy · November 23, 2015

Case in point about Russian "targeting priorities":

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2015/11/syria-monitoring-groups-russian-air-strikes-kill-400-civilians-151122063024984.html

Last raid left 400 civilians dead, about 100 of them children.

These Russians are on our side?

Get our Canadian planes the hell out of that fiasco!!!!

eyeball · November 23, 2015

The differences between some countries and Russia may have to be put on the back burner if ISIS is to be taken down. Will the US and other countries work with Russia, who seem to have killed more ISIS members with their bombing than other countries, like it or not, the world needs Russia to help get rid of ISIS once and for all.

http://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/world/will-isis-force-russia-and-the-west-together/ar-BBniGcO?ocid=spartandhp

It'll be good to see the Muslim world's reaction to the old war enemies who once used their region as a proxy battlefield now working together against Muslims.

This development I think will prove to be a major turning point in the clash of un-civilizations.

bush_cheney2004 · November 23, 2015

In such matters, Canada now brings more lawyers to the battle than strike fighters.

bush_cheney2004 · November 24, 2015

Turkey shot down a Russian Su-24 today after repeated warnings of airspace violation. This could get interesting...Go NATO !

http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/turkey-military-plane-1.3332171

Michael Hardner · November 24, 2015

Turkey shot down a Russian Su-24 today after repeated warnings of airspace violation. This could get interesting...Go NATO !

http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/turkey-military-plane-1.3332171

I'll be interested in your perspective on this, on a new thread:

http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums/topic/25310-russian-jet-downed-by-turkish-planes/

Army Guy · November 24, 2015

I disagree with your premise. The 30,000 number may be correct but they are not "occupiers". Their military base is the Saddam Republican Guard which "disappeared" when the USA invaded. They are Sunni and are now occupying Sunni territory from which they came originally. The locals are also Sunni and the fighters can easily "dissolve" back into the populace.

That is not an "occupation" in my mind.

I still ask:

What is ISIS?

Who is the leader of ISIS?

How can we tell the difference between a local Sunni and an ISIS sympathiser or fighter?

You forgot to mention that , the very same Military base that once was a Republican Guard base now belongs to the government of IRAQ, that was created under inter national law, who has the rights to create their own laws and up hold them.....Last time i checked the Sunni's did not own any territory within IRAQ, nor do they own they're own country, but rather they are citizens of IRAQ, who come under control of the Iraqi government....

How can this not be an occupation ? Has Iraq created a Sunni state,have they redefined their borders in any way?

Originally they are Iraqi's citizens, who happen to practice the Sunni faith...there is no such thing as Sunni Territory that is recognised by inter national law...

If we were to follow your premise, you could declare your home and land the new country of "BIG GUYS", refusing to follow any Canadian law, pay taxes, and kill who ever you disliked because that was you wish, and it would according to you not be considered an Occupation, because you fit in with the local populace.....I'm not an expert on law, but i am 100 % positive that the Canadian government and all her depts, would not be long in acting , to reclaim your new country, and restore Canadian law and order....

You may of even given credence to Israelis land claims.....and yet the rest of the world still calls it an occupation.....

What is ISIL, a bunch of pissed off Iraqis, who are tired of living under the new Iraqi government,because their class use to run the country.....so they have taken up arms, it is a group that uses terror to achieve its aims...it is a group that is ethically cleansing everything in its path to create their own twisted version of paradise.

How can you tell them apart, very carefully....which is why this type of warfare is so difficult....

Big Guy · November 24, 2015

So the coalition continues to drop "smart" bombs that continue to kill innocent civilians:

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2015/11/coalition-strikes-syria-killed-250-civilians-151124075241069.html

US coalition strikes in Syria have killed 250 civilians. Among those killed were 66 children below the age of eight, and 44 children above the age of 18.

The attack in Paris killed 8 suicide bombers. How soon do you think it will take ISIS to replenish those 8 from the many family members of the 250 civilians? Revenge is family honor in that region.