Octopus Overlords

• Dangle a really juicy carrot to lure a Special Forces op into an ambush (some very good men die very bad deaths);
  Lure in a strike against innocent civilians (something like an orphanage, hospital, etc) to score propaganda/political points;
  Lure in a strike against indigenous anti-IS assets, attempting to drive a wedge into a shaky alliance-of-convenience while weakening the local competition.

BBC.com wrote:Exclusive footage reveals how Islamic State wields power over people's everyday lives in Iraq's second city, Mosul, a year after it was captured. Secretly filmed videos obtained by the BBC's Ghadi Sary show mosques being blown up, abandoned schools, and women being forced to cover up their bodies. Residents said they were living in fear of punishment according to the group's extreme interpretation of Islamic law. They also described IS preparations for an expected government offensive.

Max Peck wrote:Inside Mosul: What's life like under Islamic State?

BBC.com wrote:Exclusive footage reveals how Islamic State wields power over people's everyday lives in Iraq's second city, Mosul, a year after it was captured. Secretly filmed videos obtained by the BBC's Ghadi Sary show mosques being blown up, abandoned schools, and women being forced to cover up their bodies. Residents said they were living in fear of punishment according to the group's extreme interpretation of Islamic law. They also described IS preparations for an expected government offensive.

Kraken wrote:

Max Peck wrote:Inside Mosul: What's life like under Islamic State?

BBC.com wrote:Exclusive footage reveals how Islamic State wields power over people's everyday lives in Iraq's second city, Mosul, a year after it was captured. Secretly filmed videos obtained by the BBC's Ghadi Sary show mosques being blown up, abandoned schools, and women being forced to cover up their bodies. Residents said they were living in fear of punishment according to the group's extreme interpretation of Islamic law. They also described IS preparations for an expected government offensive.

That's both horrifying and about what I expected.

Drazzil wrote:

Kraken wrote:

Max Peck wrote:Inside Mosul: What's life like under Islamic State?

BBC.com wrote:Exclusive footage reveals how Islamic State wields power over people's everyday lives in Iraq's second city, Mosul, a year after it was captured. Secretly filmed videos obtained by the BBC's Ghadi Sary show mosques being blown up, abandoned schools, and women being forced to cover up their bodies. Residents said they were living in fear of punishment according to the group's extreme interpretation of Islamic law. They also described IS preparations for an expected government offensive.

That's both horrifying and about what I expected.

And yet the Iraqis as a whole don't seem to want to stand against these people.

Kraken wrote:

Drazzil wrote:

Kraken wrote:

Max Peck wrote:Inside Mosul: What's life like under Islamic State?

BBC.com wrote:Exclusive footage reveals how Islamic State wields power over people's everyday lives in Iraq's second city, Mosul, a year after it was captured. Secretly filmed videos obtained by the BBC's Ghadi Sary show mosques being blown up, abandoned schools, and women being forced to cover up their bodies. Residents said they were living in fear of punishment according to the group's extreme interpretation of Islamic law. They also described IS preparations for an expected government offensive.

That's both horrifying and about what I expected.

And yet the Iraqis as a whole don't seem to want to stand against these people.

Which Iraqis? They are not "a whole." The Shiite government in Baghdad, which comprises most of the army, has little stomach for holding or re-conquering Sunni lands...and many Sunnis prefer ISIS to their Shiite overlords.

hepcat wrote:Don't interpret that as acceptance though.

Kraken wrote:

Drazzil wrote:

Kraken wrote:

Max Peck wrote:Inside Mosul: What's life like under Islamic State?

BBC.com wrote:Exclusive footage reveals how Islamic State wields power over people's everyday lives in Iraq's second city, Mosul, a year after it was captured. Secretly filmed videos obtained by the BBC's Ghadi Sary show mosques being blown up, abandoned schools, and women being forced to cover up their bodies. Residents said they were living in fear of punishment according to the group's extreme interpretation of Islamic law. They also described IS preparations for an expected government offensive.

That's both horrifying and about what I expected.

And yet the Iraqis as a whole don't seem to want to stand against these people.

Which Iraqis? They are not "a whole." The Shiite government in Baghdad, which comprises most of the army, has little stomach for holding or re-conquering Sunni lands...and many Sunnis prefer ISIS to their Shiite overlords.

Drazzil wrote:

hepcat wrote:Don't interpret that as acceptance though.

Sounds like acceptance to me.

BBC.com wrote:A fake battle, invented in a hail of tweets by a London man, has tricked both so-called Islamic State's supporters, and their opponents, supporters of Shia militia fighters in Iraq. It was supposedly an intense battle involving Islamic State and Shia and Iraqi government fighters. Soon after the news broke, Twitter users that back anti-IS forces claimed a famous victory. "Big celebrations in Karbala after the freedom of Shichwa," said one. Another claimed "10,000 refugees flee Shichwa to Karbala" and rumours spread that neighbouring countries were being dragged into the fighting: "Disaster: the Saudi Army must quickly mobilize to the Iraqi border." But the battle of Shichwa never actually happened - in fact, Shichwa isn't even a real place.

BBC.com wrote:Kurdish fighters are reported to be moving in on the north-east Syrian town of Tal Abyad, which is held by Islamic State (IS) militants. Thousands of civilians have fled to a nearby border crossing with Turkey, and some have managed to cross to safety. The advance by the Kurdish Popular Protection Units (YPG) has been supported by Syrian rebel groups and US-led coalition air strikes. Tal Abyad is strategically important for both sides. For the IS militants, it controls a major supply route to their headquarters at Raqqa, 80km (50 miles) to the south, reports the BBC's Jim Muir in Beirut. For the Kurds, capturing Tal Abyad would help them link up the other pockets they control along the Turkish border, from Iraq in the east to Kobane in the west, which has long been their dream, our correspondent adds.

hepcat wrote:

Drazzil wrote:

hepcat wrote:Don't interpret that as acceptance though.

Sounds like acceptance to me.

Then you're not listening.

hepcat wrote:Resignation is not acceptance. When a group of armed folks show up and start shooting people who don't do what they tell them, most folks who haven't known anything much better just keep their mouths shut.

Drazzil wrote: Here's a novel idea: Lets take all the money we are throwing away on the middle east and funnel it into alternative energy research, or hell, just buy every US citizen a Ford Fusion, flip the finger to the whole goddamned fractious, petty, tribalistic, idiotic region and let them fight their own battles. We continue to allow our government to justify widening a conflict in Iraq that cannot be won.

LawBeefaroni wrote:

Drazzil wrote: Here's a novel idea: Lets take all the money we are throwing away on the middle east and funnel it into alternative energy research, or hell, just buy every US citizen a Ford Fusion, flip the finger to the whole goddamned fractious, petty, tribalistic, idiotic region and let them fight their own battles. We continue to allow our government to justify widening a conflict in Iraq that cannot be won.

Think about that for a minute. I'm pretty sure about greater than half of the potential outcomes of that strategy involve nuclear conflagration in the region. That's not good for anyone on the planet, no matter how isolationist they may want to be. Sure, oil started our troubles in the region but it's the NBC specter that now keeps us interested.

Drazzil wrote:Our media is drumming for war once again as Obama uses the continued threat of ISIS to halt and reverse the draw down and exit of US troops.

The military industrial complex wants our armed forces to fight and die in a fruitless pointless war so that the 1% can collect dividends. Do you really think we will ever be free of Iraq, Afghanistan or the latest Islamic boogeyman? The only way we win this conflict is not to play. We the citizenry will not do that until there is a major movement in this country, just like the Vietnam protests.

hepcat wrote:It's called the Central Intelligence Agency, not Ra's al Ghul's League of Assassins.

Drazzil wrote:

LawBeefaroni wrote:

Drazzil wrote: Here's a novel idea: Lets take all the money we are throwing away on the middle east and funnel it into alternative energy research, or hell, just buy every US citizen a Ford Fusion, flip the finger to the whole goddamned fractious, petty, tribalistic, idiotic region and let them fight their own battles. We continue to allow our government to justify widening a conflict in Iraq that cannot be won.

Think about that for a minute. I'm pretty sure about greater than half of the potential outcomes of that strategy involve nuclear conflagration in the region. That's not good for anyone on the planet, no matter how isolationist they may want to be. Sure, oil started our troubles in the region but it's the NBC specter that now keeps us interested.

So we send in the CIA to go get em, has to be cheaper then an endless war.

LawBeefaroni wrote:

Drazzil wrote:Our media is drumming for war once again as Obama uses the continued threat of ISIS to halt and reverse the draw down and exit of US troops.

The military industrial complex wants our armed forces to fight and die in a fruitless pointless war so that the 1% can collect dividends. Do you really think we will ever be free of Iraq, Afghanistan or the latest Islamic boogeyman? The only way we win this conflict is not to play. We the citizenry will not do that until there is a major movement in this country, just like the Vietnam protests.

Vietnam was a 2-party proxy war. Us against he Soviets, using Vietnam as our playground. The exit of either side would mean the end of the war.

Today's Middle East is different. If we take our ball and go home, they will keep playing. And there are several sovereign nations involved. Keep in mind, we're not just there for the "Islamic boogeyman." We're there for Israel and Africa and Europe and Asia. It may not be our backyard but it is theirs.

The military industrial complex prints money no matter what. They're not the key driver in this.

LawBeefaroni wrote:

Drazzil wrote:

LawBeefaroni wrote:

Drazzil wrote: Here's a novel idea: Lets take all the money we are throwing away on the middle east and funnel it into alternative energy research, or hell, just buy every US citizen a Ford Fusion, flip the finger to the whole goddamned fractious, petty, tribalistic, idiotic region and let them fight their own battles. We continue to allow our government to justify widening a conflict in Iraq that cannot be won.

Think about that for a minute. I'm pretty sure about greater than half of the potential outcomes of that strategy involve nuclear conflagration in the region. That's not good for anyone on the planet, no matter how isolationist they may want to be. Sure, oil started our troubles in the region but it's the NBC specter that now keeps us interested.

So we send in the CIA to go get em, has to be cheaper then an endless war.

The CIA is already there. But who should they go after, exactly, to end this thing?

hepcat wrote:If the Middle East was as easy to deal with as you seem to think, it wouldn't have been a major issue for the last few decades.

Drazzil wrote:Sorry if I'm being dogmatic here folks. I just think that there *has* to be a better way of dealing with ISIS other then throwing time, lives and money down this endless quagmire that we still call a country.

LawBeefaroni wrote:

Drazzil wrote:Sorry if I'm being dogmatic here folks. I just think that there *has* to be a better way of dealing with ISIS other then throwing time, lives and money down this endless quagmire that we still call a country.

ISIS isn't limited to one country. That's part of the problem.

Drazzil wrote:

LawBeefaroni wrote:

Drazzil wrote:Sorry if I'm being dogmatic here folks. I just think that there *has* to be a better way of dealing with ISIS other then throwing time, lives and money down this endless quagmire that we still call a country.

ISIS isn't limited to one country. That's part of the problem.

Lawbeef. How do we handle ISIS then? Commit to an endless war with nebulous goals? When do we leave?

LawBeefaroni wrote:I would have the US maintain air control and superiority and only commit ground troops where they are required to maintain that air superiority. Let allies in the region and various rebel groups do the dirty work but when they ask for air support, we give it to them unreservedly.

theohall wrote:

LawBeefaroni wrote:I would have the US maintain air control and superiority and only commit ground troops where they are required to maintain that air superiority. Let allies in the region and various rebel groups do the dirty work but when they ask for air support, we give it to them unreservedly.

This is the crux of the problem. Many of the people living in those countries won't even fight for themselves. The Iraqi army is a disaster. There are too few who will fight and the allies in the region won't commit. If they won't commit and the army we helped build and arm won't fight, what are we supposed to do?

No. I'm not isolationist on this, I just don't see us taking the necessary steps under this administration, because this administration allowed this to happen in the first place by withdrawing too quickly, not ensuring a Status of Forces agreement was in place to withdraw slowly and not let a power vacuum happen, and setting free the current leaders of ISIS who were in Iraqi jails in Feb 2009. The current US political leaders repeatedly dismissed what the military leaders recommended to prevent this from happening and have continued to dismiss them on the best ways to prevent ISIS from expanding. "JV" is a popular quote which didn't come from the Joint Chiefs.

This doesn't even go into the massive draw down in the military over the past 7 years which severely limits options for deployments until troop levels are restored, or risk reducing security in other areas around the world.

2008 U.S.–Iraq Status of Forces Agreement

In 2008 the American and Iraqi governments signed the U.S.–Iraq Status of Forces Agreement, after being sought by the Bush Administrationand the Iraqi government. It included a specific date, 30 June 2009, by which American forces should withdraw from Iraqi cities, and a complete withdrawal date from Iraqi territory by 31 December 2011. On 14 December 2008 then-President George W. Bush signed the security agreement with Iraq. In his fourth and final trip to Iraq, President Bush appeared in a televised news conference with Iraq's prime minister Nouri al-Maliki to celebrate the agreement and applauded security gains in Iraq saying that just two years ago "such an agreement seemed impossible".

President Obama's speech on 27 February 2009

On 27 February 2009, at Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune in North Carolina, President Barack Obama announced his revision to the original date of withdrawal of combat troops from Iraq. The revision was to extend the original date of 30 June 2009 for an additional 10 months, to 31 August 2010. After which all but a "transitional force" of 35,000 to 50,000 troops would be withdrawn from the Middle Eastern nation. President Obama reaffirmed commitment to the original complete withdraw date of 31 December 2011, set by the agreement between the Bush Administration and the Iraqi government. President Obama defined the task of the transitional force as "training, equipping, and advising Iraqi Security Forces as long as they remain non-sectarian; conducting targeted counter-terrorism missions; and protecting our ongoing civilian and military efforts within Iraq".

theohall wrote:

LawBeefaroni wrote:I would have the US maintain air control and superiority and only commit ground troops where they are required to maintain that air superiority. Let allies in the region and various rebel groups do the dirty work but when they ask for air support, we give it to them unreservedly.

This is the crux of the problem. Many of the people living in those countries won't even fight for themselves. The Iraqi army is a disaster. There are too few who will fight and the allies in the region won't commit. If they won't commit and the army we helped build and arm won't fight, what are we supposed to do?

No. I'm not isolationist on this, I just don't see us taking the necessary steps under this administration, because this administration allowed this to happen in the first place by withdrawing too quickly, not ensuring a Status of Forces agreement was in place to withdraw slowly and not let a power vacuum happen, and setting free the current leaders of ISIS who were in Iraqi jails in Feb 2009. The current US political leaders repeatedly dismissed what the military leaders recommended to prevent this from happening and have continued to dismiss them on the best ways to prevent ISIS from expanding. "JV" is a popular quote which didn't come from the Joint Chiefs.

This doesn't even go into the massive draw down in the military over the past 7 years which severely limits options for deployments until troop levels are restored, or risk reducing security in other areas around the world.

Drazzil wrote:When do we leave?

Kraken wrote:

Drazzil wrote:When do we leave?

When there's no more oil, or we don't need it.

Whether you're an average Joe, someone's mom, or a member of an extremist military group, bitcoin can be confusing. What is it exactly? How does it work? To help ISIS learn the answers to these questions, one Virginia teen used social media and blogging to explain the cryptocurrency's potential value as an anonymous payment option. Now he's pleading guilty to charges of conspiring to provide material support and resources to a designated terrorist group. Whoops.

Pyperkub wrote:the Shaw

Moliere wrote:Teen Pleads Guilty to Teaching ISIS How to Use Bitcoin

Whether you're an average Joe, someone's mom, or a member of an extremist military group, bitcoin can be confusing. What is it exactly? How does it work? To help ISIS learn the answers to these questions, one Virginia teen used social media and blogging to explain the cryptocurrency's potential value as an anonymous payment option. Now he's pleading guilty to charges of conspiring to provide material support and resources to a designated terrorist group. Whoops.

Interesting to be guilty of a crime that essentially involves giving people information they could have found themselves via Google.