ISIL, ISIS, Daesh discussion thread.

RoboCod said:
Where is this detailed?
Click to expand...

Not facebook but may credible social media account.

Which are just as valid as BBC ect. As all they do is take information from these.

And those that say no they don't. I can quote multiple times where the likes of the BBC use the syrian observatory for human rights, which just uses twitter facebook etc to collect their information. Also other social media accounts they use.
 
Last edited:
thep02 said:
A surprisingly honest piece from the Boston Globe, may be the yanks are actually stepping back with the so called ceasefire, perhaps our UK press will follow suit if not it may indicate that the mess is ours and not the yanks after all.

https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion...ory.html?p1=Article_Recommended_ReadMore_Pos1
Click to expand...

I disagree about the surprisingly honest bit :S there are some hard truths in that piece that contradict the official US story but some (inconvenient) aspects have been omitted in the narrative - Assad is no saint - many of those rebel groups didn't spring up for the sake of it though even that is a more complex story in which Syria's open immigration/refugee policy ended up biting it in the rear.

EDIT: Well I guess relatively speaking it is surprisingly honest for the US media :S
 
Last edited:
Rroff said:
I disagree about the surprisingly honest bit :S there are some hard truths in that piece that contradict the official US story but some (inconvenient) aspects have been omitted in the narrative - Assad is no saint - many of those rebel groups didn't spring up for the sake of it though even that is a more complex story in which Syria's open immigration/refugee policy ended up biting it in the rear.
Click to expand...

They do spring up for the sake of it. These rebel groups are salafists like Saudi. Now Assad did something the Saudis didn't like and now he's paying the price.
 
manoz said:
They do spring up for the sake of it. These rebel groups are salafists like Saudi. Now Assad did something the Saudis didn't like and now he's paying the price.
Click to expand...

There are certainly Islamist and Salafist entities but they don't make up the entirety of the rebel groups, though more prominent now as they've tended to be the ones that have survived better.
 
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-35685981

Police in the Russian capital Moscow have arrested a woman on suspicion of murdering a child after she was found apparently carrying a severed head.

The woman, believed to be the victim's nanny, is suspected of killing the child before setting fire to its parents' apartment.

CCTV appears to show the woman, dressed in a hijab, walking near a metro station with a head in her hands.
...
Amateur video posted online shows a woman, apparently the suspect, outside a metro station shouting the Islamic phrase "Allahu Akbar" (God is Great).
Click to expand...

:( Shocking. Maybe now Russia will stop its support of Islamic State and actually start bombing it.
 
VincentHanna said:
Sorry, how have Russia been supporting the Islamic State?

AFAIK they've been supporting Assad in Syria, which is not the same thing at all.
Click to expand...

The guy is an idiot, just ignore him. He does not have a clue what is going on in Syria.

If he had not been a member for so long I would have sworn he was a bot. He posts nothing to back any of his statements up and just posts total lies and silly statements.

And when you ask him to back up anything he just flat out ignores the request. Heck last week he did not even know where ISIS are operating in Syria. He even argued over a full page to be proven wrong, then was mysteriously quite for a week.
 
Last edited:
scorza said:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-35685981



:( Shocking. Maybe now Russia will stop its support of Islamic State and actually start bombing it.
Click to expand...

they haven't supported ISIS at all, they've supported the government armed forces.

we' have however been supporting random rebels who half the time seem to ally or merge with ISIS.

ISIS is mainly armed with American and British weapons and gear.

Russia has taken the pragmatic approached, picked the most capable united side with an existing coherent command structure and gone "right we're backing you to win the war and crush all the other groups"

where as we've picked a bunch of infighting disparate group an gone "we'll kinda help some times but not all the times and hopefully you'll all kinda work together like an after school special in-between bouts of random genocide."
 
VincentHanna said:
Sorry, how have Russia been supporting the Islamic State?

AFAIK they've been supporting Assad in Syria, which is not the same thing at all.
Click to expand...

IIRC the Russians haven't been supporting ISIS, but have mainly been bombing the other rebel groups, many of whom had been fighting ISIS as much as Assad.
So whilst they haven't been aiming to assist ISIS, their actions have basically meant that ISIS hasn't been hit anything like as hard is it could have been due to the wide variety of targets Russia has been hitting, whilst the more moderate groups have been weakened.

Effectively Russia has been (be it by intent, stupidity or simply not caring), potentially making ISIS stronger in comparison to the other groups.
 
Werewolf said:
IIRC the Russians haven't been supporting ISIS, but have mainly been bombing the other rebel groups, many of whom had been fighting ISIS as much as Assad.
So whilst they haven't been aiming to assist ISIS, their actions have basically meant that ISIS hasn't been hit anything like as hard is it could have been due to the wide variety of targets Russia has been hitting, whilst the more moderate groups have been weakened.

Effectively Russia has been (be it by intent, stupidity or simply not caring), potentially making ISIS stronger in comparison to the other groups.
Click to expand...

They have not been fighting ISIS as much as Assad at all, that's a fictitious statement.

http://isis.liveuamap.com/

Just to help you

Green are "rebels"
Red is SAA
Black is ISIS
Yellow is SDF

Should give you an idea of where each operate. The so called rebels don't have a lot of territory mixing with ISIS, so while there is fighting between them it is limited and in reality there is quite a bit of co-operation between many of the factions and ISIS.

A large part of the reason the Russians attack the moderate wahhabi beheaders, is the fact they are the closest to the base in which Russia operate and i would guess this is for security reasons.
 
Last edited:
Werewolf said:
IIRC the Russians haven't been supporting ISIS, but have mainly been bombing the other rebel groups, many of whom had been fighting ISIS as much as Assad.
So whilst they haven't been aiming to assist ISIS, their actions have basically meant that ISIS hasn't been hit anything like as hard is it could have been due to the wide variety of targets Russia has been hitting, whilst the more moderate groups have been weakened.

Effectively Russia has been (be it by intent, stupidity or simply not caring), potentially making ISIS stronger in comparison to the other groups.
Click to expand...

Not to mention sending Russian engineers to help extract oil at Islamic State controlled fields. Let's also not forget that IS are crucial to Russia and Assad's strategy for winning the civil war - hence why Assad released a load of jihadis from his prisons early on to make sure IS became a serious threat.
 
scorza said:
Not to mention sending Russian engineers to help extract oil at Islamic State controlled fields. Let's also not forget that IS are crucial to Russia and Assad's strategy for winning the civil war - hence why Assad released a load of jihadis from his prisons early on to make sure IS became a serious threat.
Click to expand...


Yawn yawn.

Did we not already go over these many pages ago? You was proven incorrect then, i can do it again if you want?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom