Jump to content

Theme© by Fisana
 

Fool Moon
Photo
* * * * * 2 votes

Bush43 Gave Iraq to Iran and General Suleimani now holds the keys

qassim suleimani iraq iran qods force

284 replies to this topic

#31 mmoghand

mmoghand

    member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 706 posts

Posted 30 July 2014 - 09:47 AM

We are getting more in the way of disinformation. Events from June are depicted as current events. Material from the Human Rights Watch site is being recycled.

 

This morning’s news includes release of a video from ISIS depicting mass executions. The story lines are tagged as "breaking news" and "1700 slaughtered at Tikrit." Since ISIS rolled into Tikrit back on June 11th, there has been one mass slaughter. Tikrit has gone quite differently from Mosul as the locals did not turn out to support ISIS takeover.

 

This is being spread out by BNO News and other unidentified blogs.

 

 

http://wireupdate.co...tegory/bno-news

 

In fact the most of these executions occurred more than a month ago when ISIS took Mosul on June 11th and then the Tikrit executions (not in the main photos and videos) happened when ISIS captured a class of Iraqi Air Force cadets. There are various rumors floating around as to how many of the cadets were murdered.

 

The main executions were documented by Human Rights Watch on June 26th and 27th. Local verification of the cadet killings goes to recovery of several of the cadets’ bodies from the Tigris river downstream from Tikrit. The images in the video out of Baghdad are the same images exactly as HRW had from Mosul back with their June 26/27 stories.

 

A majority of the ISIS raiders who drove into Tikrit unopposed on June 11th are now dead. They did control about a third of the city through the first week of July. That was their high water mark for Caliphate Conquest.

 

From here on these raiders are up against professional soldiers, plus the usual local volunteer militiamen in support roles. One interesting part of these events at Tikrit is that two of the Sunni tribes from Tikrit came over to help rout these ISIS raiders -- news from Mosul has been that bad. Even if Iraq was absorbed by Shi'ia Iran, which is not going to happen, that would be preferable to being ruled by crazy people. Meeting the Qods Force soldiers and speaking with them in Arabic was an entirely different experience from what they experienced from the Americans.



#32 minesadorada

minesadorada

    enthusiastic member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,550 posts

Posted 30 July 2014 - 11:49 AM

 

 

The whole Sunni--Shia conflict seems idiotic to me, they've been at it since the death of the prophet. Shias consider Imams almost holy, sinless, like saints. They think the prophet's family should have continued his rule, rather than having a new leader selected from the most qualified people. Sunnis believe the opposite, and certainly do not believe in sinless Imams and saints. So that's basically the conflict, and it seems to me a live and let live approach would work far better for the region than tribal hatred, but honestly, these middle easterners are stupid enough to continue the hatred forever.

When questioned, the Imams and 'community leaders' say "Islam is a religion of peace"

 

It depends which bit of the Q'uaran you follow.  Muhammed's time in Mecca was as a proselyting peaceable prophet trying to jump-start a new religion that accepted the value of existing religions (like Yahweh) but then he moved to Medina and became its governor  - and his writings became political, intolerant and somewhat belligerent, as his power grew.  The hadiths (sayings of the prophet) were written long after his death, and are some of the most belligerent - yet most were made up of whole cloth by priests who never knew or met Mohammed.

 

In Christianity, the Old and New Testament also reflect the different political climates and progress of the religion of the time.  It's like the Qu'ran 'back to front'

 

Major wars have changed from political intolerance (capitalism vs. communism) back to religious intolerance within my lifetime.

 

It wasn't always like that.  There was a time when all religions lived in relative peace with one another.



#33 aus

aus

    loyal member

  • longstanding member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,280 posts

Posted 30 July 2014 - 10:14 PM

mmoghand, it is true that ISIS. have conducted war crimes. those Australian involve will be prosecuted if and when they return to Australia. However Shí';te have also committed war crimes as well.

As you said the majority of ISIS who drove to Tiki unopposed are now dead.

Minesadorda,  It is easy to use a text of a holy book to justify your actions. I suspect these were used during the cold war between Communists and capitalists.

The war of our time are the same. they are political wars but we sometimes use holy books to justify them.



#34 mmoghand

mmoghand

    member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 706 posts

Posted 31 July 2014 - 03:19 PM

Contrasting ISIS with Qods Force gives us several surprising differences. One might expect to find ISIS supporting Hamas, for example. Both organizations have no problem spilling blood. They use the Arabic justifications for jihad at every convenience. And they are both Sunni of the Salafi subsect.

 

Yet ISIS is indifferent to Hamas claims and damns Hamas as an apostate for accepting help from Shia. With QF and General Suleimani, a disciplined army, what you get is an emotional support for Hamas. No religious quibbling. No complaints. From al-Monitor:


 


 

Islamic State (IS) is following in al-Qaeda's footsteps, fighting a brutal war across swathes of Iraq and Syria and in an effort to “purify” these areas through killings and population displacement. Once taking territory, it is not mobilizing the populations under its control in opposition to the Israeli military operations in Gaza. Why is this?

 

Some jihadists or pro-jihadist Salafists have issued video clips and tweets explaining their lack of assistance to the Palestinians. One tweet stated, “The Hamas government is apostate, and what it is doing does not constitute jihad, but rather a defense of democracy [which Salafists oppose].” Another tweet said, “Khaled Meshaal: Hamas fights for the sake of freedom and independence. The Islamic State: it fights so that all religion can be for God.” Meshaal is head of Hamas' political bureau.

 

On July 22, the Egyptian Salafist sheikh Talaat Zahran declared that it is inappropriate to aid the people of Gaza because they do not follow a legitimate leadership, and because they are equivalent to Shiites since they follow them, referring to Hezbollah and Iran, with which the Sunni Hamas movement has been allied. Thus the jihadists' position is not simply a political stance, but stems from Salafist theological principles.

 

Salafists believe that jihad must be performed under legitimate leadership. This argument is advanced through the “banner and commander” concept, which holds that whoever undertakes jihad must follow a commander who fulfills the criteria of religious and political leadership and has raised the banner of jihad. Given that there is neither a legitimate leader nor a Salafist-approved declaration of jihad in Palestine, fighting there is forbidden.

 

In addition, for Salafists, if non-Muslims control Islamic countries and apostates exist in the Islamic world, the Islamic world must be cleansed of them before all else. In short, the purification of Islamic society takes priority over combat against non-Islamic societies. On this basis, Salafists see conflict with an allegedly illegitimate Hamas government as a first step toward confrontation with Israel. Should the opportunity for military action present itself in the Palestinian territories, Salafists would fight Hamas and other factions deemed in need of “cleansing” from the land and engage Israel afterward.

 

This approach has its roots in Islamic history, which Salafists believe confirms the validity of their position. Relevant points of historical reference include the first caliphate of Abu Bakr, which gave priority to fighting apostates over expanding Islamic conquests, which occurred later, during the second caliphate, under Umar bin al-Khattab. Likewise, Saladin fought the Shiites and suppressed them before he engaged the crusaders in the Holy Land.

 

 

For ISIS, what they call religion is the driver for everything. To me this looks, walks, quacks like a duck known as megalomania.

 

General Suleimani has issued a personal letter supporting Hamas. It is a piece of poetry as well as opposing Israel more or less completely. You'll have to read it to believe it. (The letter is written in modern Persian. I'll look around for a translator.)



#35 aus

aus

    loyal member

  • longstanding member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,280 posts

Posted 31 July 2014 - 07:42 PM

mmoghend, I will leave it to you to give details of the various Islamic factions. It is true the ISIS is opposed to any compromise with Shíte . However other Sunnies do compromise. The Iman of our mosque in Doncaster here in Australia allows shí'te  to pray in the sunni mosque.

 

It is true Iran and shí'tes support Hamas. But it also gets support from sunnies. Trying to make a pure religion as a driver for you actions always fails. Look at the fall off of Christianity after the reformation when the various sects attacked one another instead of the main enemy.



#36 mmoghand

mmoghand

    member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 706 posts

Posted 02 August 2014 - 11:35 AM

Ah, yes. The details. The lovely details. Sometimes tied to rural, No Kinsey, fantasy-life sex. Allah, not so much.

 

Lock up your dogs.

 

With the extremists in the Muslim countries what you get is a projection of their darkest fantasies as lookalikes to Drudge Report lie-lines -- where The West is accused of doing what they indulge for fantasies.

 

  • “Did you know that [Michael Jackson] has relations with animals?”
  • Mehdi Bayati, the cleric who directs Iran’s Strategic Center for Chastity and Modesty: “The growth of feminism in the West and the fact the 60 percent of Western women prefer to sleep with dogs rather than men is the result of the absence of hejab and the diminished threshold of women’s sexual arousal.”
  • Mohammad-Mehdi Mandegary, of Endurance Front and head of Foundation for Promoting the Way of the Martyrs: “In the West when one woman has relations with several men, they take pride in it. But animals are different and a female of the species does not have relations with several males at the same time.”
  • “Unfortunately some people are not careful about the moment of conception. They do it after watching satellite TV and listening to inappropriate music. But all this affects the embryo.”
  • They have to have hejab because "women’s hair radiates a spark that arouses men.’
  • Hassan Rahimpour Azghadi of Iran's Supreme Council of the Cultural Revolution: “In Western societies 75 percent of children do not know their fathers and are raised by their mothers."
  • And death by stoning is quite lovely: “Why do Western countries consider this punishment [for adultery] against human rights? There are no sexual complexes in Islam because in Islam marriage makes faith complete whereas in Christianity marriage is not a godly affair.”

 

In Persia, today, the extremists run the morality sections of the government. Saudi Arabia is running a step back in second.

 

So, indeed, lock up your dogs. And be comforted that if one of the wild western women gets at them, the WWW gals, she'll only defile them one at a time.

 

(Broader coverage: the wonderful Shima Shahrabi. Her classic piece about a fatal Kiss.)



#37 mmoghand

mmoghand

    member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 706 posts

Posted 08 August 2014 - 08:42 AM

Where are the drones ?????

 

Thousands of hits in Pakistan, Yemen, Sudan, Afghanistan. Not a word about Iraq.

 

Oh, snap....



#38 aus

aus

    loyal member

  • longstanding member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,280 posts

Posted 08 August 2014 - 07:57 PM

I think we Might now see drones in Iraq now that Obama has allowed bombing. This is one way to deny responsibility pilot less aircraft. But in the end someone presses the button. We are all responsible.



#39 mmoghand

mmoghand

    member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 706 posts

Posted 10 August 2014 - 06:21 PM

President Obama announced limited drone use and aerial bombing, then expanded his estimate to months for this attack on ISIS.

 

Equally critical, ISIS tried to enter Samarra last week and got stopped, the first group killed, then a large invasion force caught out in the open and annihilated. Essentially these ISIS forces present soft targets for artillery and the cannons on APCs.

 

The defenders at Samarra ??? That's the force led by General Suleimani. The subject of this article. One interesting report has the trained militiamen of Asa'ib Ahl al-Haq doing duty for the initial holds at the city gate checkpoints.

 

ISIS had done well with suicide bombers and 20mm/23mm anti-aircraft cannons to support irregular infantry. But when they get hit with competent defensive fire, they fold.

 

Well, they rush into martyrdom with a will.



#40 aus

aus

    loyal member

  • longstanding member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,280 posts

Posted 10 August 2014 - 07:39 PM

mmoghand. I hope you are right. That there are people in Iraq who can stop the ISIS. They can not rely on outside support for long.



#41 mmoghand

mmoghand

    member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 706 posts

Posted 16 August 2014 - 08:05 AM

ISIS has now lost four big battles in a row, plus pulling out of the assault on the oil refinery down from Mosul.

 

In the first weeks of June, ISIS drove through token opposition at Mosul and went on to capture dozens of towns that lacked perimeter defense systems. The Iraqi Army in Nineveh Province had been ordered to disperse rather than confront thousands of local Sunnis.

 

Then since the middle of July, ISIS has lost four major battles in Iraq:

 

-- At Tikrit to a 3,000 man counterattack with losses at 300 - 500;

 

-- the Al-Sahra Air Base to first-rate use of small arms and artillery with losses around 100;

 

-- at Samarra to a very strong defense with losses of 80 at the city and another 250 away; and

 

-- to another 2,000 man counterattack by local Kurdish forces near Rabia and Sinjar with loss of 170 in a half-dozen skirmishes.

 

The Jihadis have lost raiders by the hundreds in these actions, roughly a thousand killed in these battles with loss of their equipment and supplies. Anti-ISIS forces have lost fewer than 50 killed, including two dozen lost to suicide-bombers at Tikrit.

 

So what is happening here ??? And why are these actions reported in the Middle East and Asia but not by corporate MSM in the United States? What do we know in particulars about the ISIS raiders?

 

To begin with ISIS fighters are motivated by Jihadi denunciations of rival sects of Muslims and by calls to wipe out "Devil worshipers" who practice other religions. Mass murder with high enthusiasm is their signature tool. The big ideas are promises of Martyrdom, eternal life in Paradise, and annual returns to Mecca in Spirit form to participate in the Hadj.

 

Hashish is also in play. And pills. Saudi Arabia has a major problem with amphetamines, also the designer-drug group which includes experimental drugs. Based on life-threatening drug seizure cases appearing at their hospitals, pills have replaced alcohol.

 

Use hash to take the edge off pre-battle nerves, then hop the attackers up on drugged tea -- that's a recipe. Invading hordes have done it for centuries.

 

Also not a great tool for running a cohesive defense. That showed with the Kurds rescuing the Yazidids. 170 ISIS killed to 9 Kurds. And the Kurds were local militiamen with rifles.

 

The forces with General Suleimani have killed over 1,000 ISIS raiders while taking 40 deaths themselves. Artillery vs. pickup trucks is what gives the General such results.Two dozen of that total came tfrom suicide bombers at Tikrit when the militia support group presented a compact target. As a bet that won't happen again.

 

Professional leadership. Good tactical design. And ISIS is a pack of amateurs. One can only imagine what happens come September/October when temperature fall sufficiently to enable the big counterattack.



#42 Helice

Helice

    Administrator

  • Administrators
  • 11,437 posts

Posted 16 August 2014 - 12:27 PM

If things go on this way perhaps the US can actually manage to stay out of this conflict.  It's nice to see people handling their  own affairs.



#43 aus

aus

    loyal member

  • longstanding member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,280 posts

Posted 16 August 2014 - 10:05 PM

I think mmoghand and Helice are right, The ICC are amateurs. The Usa and Western powers should keep out After we had our sectarian war during he Reformation



#44 Dax

Dax

    Administrator

  • Administrators
  • 21,388 posts

Posted 17 August 2014 - 10:20 AM

US is battling ISIS, drones have struck their convoys and destroyed buildings, etc. and of course I believe there is US involvement we are not being told about. As always.



#45 mmoghand

mmoghand

    member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 706 posts

Posted 19 August 2014 - 06:59 PM

Now make it five in a row with a 700-man ISIS force losing the Mosul Dam.

 

One odd item appeared claiming that the Iraqi Army is going to try to retake Tikrit. That's been in coalition hands for most of a month. Iraqi Army-AAH-Qods Force.

 

The Kurds failed to cut off the ISIS force. Bad tactics.





Reply to this topic



  



Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: qassim suleimani, iraq, iran, qods force

Copyright © 2017 Fool Moon LLC