Worldwide Caliphate Rising?

[scudsucker]

Maybe start a thread of your own for Lightscribe's Obsessive Anti-Islam Posts,

I support this.

 

[OrbitalDawn]

I'm aware of their ultimate goals. But as a backward, underfunded, ill-trained and badly armed army, how far south of Iraq will they get?

Granted, Iraq and Syria are not the most difficult of armies to defeat. But Saudi Arabia is very comfortable being the major Arab power in the region and is not going to allow ISIS anything.

Turkey is well armed and will get European support, Israel is incredibly well defended and internationally supported.

Even in the best possible case for IS (or whatever their name is now) they will be limited to a very dry, desolate and severely under-populated part of a very third world area.

They're not that backward, underfunded or ill-trained actually. They've blossomed out of a melting pot of militant groups in the region, taking advantage of the weakness of the Iraqi government, but also the chaos caused by the Syrian civil war. Many other groups have join them, bringing funds, arms and a certain level of fighting experience.

Even the Peshmerga are struggling a bit against them, and they've been a very stable, disciplined fighting unit for a long time.

What their long term prospects are, I dunno. But it's a scary idea that they could actually establish a state there. The people who live in that state would be living under an intolerably cruel regime.

 

[thestaggy]

I'm aware of their ultimate goals. But as a backward, underfunded, ill-trained and badly armed army, how far south of Iraq will they get?

Granted, Iraq and Syria are not the most difficult of armies to defeat. But Saudi Arabia is very comfortable being the major Arab power in the region and is not going to allow ISIS anything.

Turkey is well armed and will get European support, Israel is incredibly well defended and internationally supported.

Even in the best possible case for IS (or whatever their name is now) they will be limited to a very dry, desolate and severely under-populated part of a very third world area.

Analysts believe they are the most organised radical movement they have ever seen. Military analysts that have combat experience in Iraq and Afghanistan conclude that they are far more organised and far more effective as a ''traditional'' army. I saw one ex-military man turned analyst say ''You don't fight for nearly a decade and not learn anything. In the past, we could lure these guys into pitched fire fights and kill them in large numbers. They were good at making bombs and blowing themselves up, but now they can actually fight.''

And aside from the military aspect, they know the value of infrastructure and resources. They do not destroy things when they move in. No burning of oil fields or blowing up power plants. They are selling electricity to the Syrian government and are even pumping oil and gas.

But the group is not only following a stone-age script. It also rapidly establishes control of local resources and uses them to extend and strengthen its grip.

It has taken over oil fields in eastern Syria, for example, and according to several rebel commanders and aid workers, has resumed pumping. It has also secured revenue by selling electricity to the government from captured power plants. In Iraq on Wednesday, the militants seized control of Baiji, the site of Iraq's largest oil refinery and power plant.

http://www.vox.com/2014/6/12/5802824/how-isis-is-exploiting-the-economics-of-syrias-civil-war

Syria Deeply: How much does ISIS make from oil?

Karasik: Officials from the Iraqi oil industry have said that ISIS reaps $1 million per day in Iraq in oil profits and that if they get the Syrian fields in [areas where they're advancing], the total would be $100 million per month for both Iraq and Syria combined. They sell it for $30 a barrel because it's a black market. It's not pegged to international standards for oil prices, which are over $100 a barrel. The oil is bought through Turkey from Syria, and it's sold to black market traders who function throughout the Levant.

Mills: The $1 million a day figure is coming out of the Iraqi fields of which they have control. Iraq and Syria together could reach up to $3 million a day, so they're still getting more oil out of Syria [than Iraq]. Production is at 10 percent of pre-war levels – they're old, mature fields that need a lot of special technological work, and they're not getting it, so production is falling very sharply. We've seen from reports that ISIS controls most of the oil fields in eastern Syria and Deir Ezzor, right up to the northeast, where some are under Kurdish control.

http://abcnews.go.com/International/isis-makes-million-day-selling-oil-analysts/story?id=24814359

 

[scudsucker]

Global. They are recorded saying they will plant the caliphate flag in the White House. Although, as the article mentions, they seem to have already...

Mugabe also blusters. Do we believe his lies?

"They seem to have already" - this is patently false; your fifth post in this thread is inaccurate, paranoid - and quite delusional - in claiming so.

t's news and current affairs. Not simply anti-Islam posting. Take the time to read it.

It is not "news" nor "current affairs" - the whole screed is a rant with little factual backup and a tremendous amount of imagination. This "news" you post should be in Off Topic - where sensible people can laugh at it, in the way it deserves.

 

[ToxicBunny]

Mugabe also blusters. Do we believe his lies?

"They seem to have already" - this is patently false; your fifth post in this thread is inaccurate, paranoid - and quite delusional - in claiming so.



It is not "news" nor "current affairs" - the whole screed is a rant with little factual backup and a tremendous amount of imagination. This "news" you post should be in Off Topic - where sensible people can laugh at it, in the way it deserves.

Mugabe does not have a fighting force that is being funded to the tune of at least $3m per DAY, plus the $2bn dollar stolen from Iraqi banks.

You would do well NOT to underestimate what IS are capable of.

 

[scudsucker]

Analysts believe they are the most organised radical movement they have ever seen. Military analysts that have combat experience in Iraq and Afghanistan conclude that they are far more organised and far more effective as a ''traditional'' army.

I'm not denying that they are combat experienced, and a real threat to the area.

However - they are just that - a real threat to that area. Without heavy machinery and air support, what are they? A bunch of tribesmen on horses with AK-47s and an ideal to follow. Occasionally they capture a piece of heavy Iraqi ordnance - and the US have now started destroying that.

I am not happy they exist but they are by no means a major global destabilisation factor.

 

[scudsucker]

You would do well NOT to underestimate what IS are capable of.

Yes, great. They have lots of cash to pay for lots more horses and AK-47s.

I'll start worrying when they start buying helicopters and attack aircraft.

 

[Lightscribe]

TBH your posts seem obsessed, and obsessively anti-Islam at that. Your looooong and frequent posts just clutter up the place. Maybe start a thread of your own for Lightscribe's Obsessive Anti-Islam Posts, then it will be simple to ignore.

TBH I don't care what you think. Like I said, ignore my posts or threads and cry elsewhere or add something informative to the discussion.

 

[ToxicBunny]

So the fact that they have a few UH-60 Blackhawks should be enough for you to start worrying then?

 

[Lightscribe]

I support this.

Hold on, let me fake surprise...What I said to it, same goes for you.

 

[thestaggy]

I'm not denying that they are combat experienced, and a real threat to the area.

However - they are just that - a real threat to that area. Without heavy machinery and air support, what are they? A bunch of tribesmen on horses with AK-47s and an ideal to follow. Occasionally they capture a piece of heavy Iraqi ordnance - and the US have now started destroying that.

I am not happy they exist but they are by no means a major global destabilisation factor.

Fair enough. They may not be a global threat yet, but they are growing and could supplant Al-Qaeda as the top-dog in the world of terrorism. And if Al-Qaeda is a barometer then the Caliphate could easily expand into North Africa. Egypt - which has a massive weapon's arsenal - and Libya are hardly stable and we saw how quickly Syria fell apart so there is no guarantee they could resist. And imagine the IS seizing the Suez Canal?

There are 1,000 Chechens fighting for the Islamic State and in fact their northern commander is Chechen, which means they could end up influencing the Caucasus or at the least forging ties with them, where the unrecognised Jihadist Caucasus Emirate has established itself.

 

[OrbitalDawn]

The amount of foreigners that are flocking to IS is disturbing.

 

[Looney]

There are people of every race and creed who want to conquer the globe - we call them the insane. I do not think that a "Worldwide Caliphate" is likely, or even possible. Granted - they may conquer a portion of the middle east. This is not a "Worldwide Caliphate" by any stretch.

This is fear-mongering, and not even sophisticated fear-mongering.

I'm more interested in why Lightscribe has this overwhelming hatred and fear of Islam - he claims to be an atheist, but I do not see him railing against Christianity or any other religion.

Maybe because other religions are not beheading journalists live on camera?

Just a thought.

 

[Lightscribe]

Mugabe also blusters. Do we believe his lies?

"They seem to have already" - this is patently false; your fifth post in this thread is inaccurate, paranoid - and quite delusional - in claiming so.

It is not "news" nor "current affairs" - the whole screed is a rant with little factual backup and a tremendous amount of imagination. This "news" you post should be in Off Topic - where sensible people can laugh at it, in the way it deserves.

Shame, you seem inaccurate, paranoid - and quite delusional.

Actually read it and then tell us what you don't agree with.

 

[Lightscribe]

Yes, great. They have lots of cash to pay for lots more horses and AK-47s.

I'll start worrying when they start buying helicopters and attack aircraft.

...inaccurate, paranoid - and quite delusional...

 

[rwenzori]

TBH I don't care what you think. Like I said, ignore my posts or threads and cry elsewhere or add something informative to the discussion.

My suggestion was based on the fact that many of us do not care for your screeds of offensive prejudice either, so be a good chappie and contain it to a single thread, else the RBPing will have to start. As for crying - is that not what your posts are? The end of the world is nigh!

 

[Lightscribe]

I'm not denying that they are combat experienced, and a real threat to the area.

However - they are just that - a real threat to that area. Without heavy machinery and air support, what are they? A bunch of tribesmen on horses with AK-47s and an ideal to follow. Occasionally they capture a piece of heavy Iraqi ordnance - and the US have now started destroying that.

I am not happy they exist but they are by no means a major global destabilisation factor.

Yep, inaccurate, paranoid - and quite delusional...

 

[scudsucker]

And if Al-Qaeda is a barometer

Al Qaeda is not a single organisation, it is a very loosely associated group of different factions. The "Al Qaeda" name is relatively new, having been used by the US to describe the bin Laden faction - and subsequently numerous other radical Islamist organisations have either been described as such, or claimed it as a status symbol. While Boko Haram, for example, claim to be affiliated, they share little. So that argument falls a little flat - al Qaeda is only a "top-dog" in Western minds, mostly because of propaganda that has taught us to view all militant Islamic movements as one.

In order for ISIS to sieze the Suez, they'd have to topple Egypt - which, while unstable, does have significant numbers of fighter planes and tanks, alongside a battle-experienced army. But to get there, they'd need to either try to take Egypt internally (meaning essentially a coup) or to fight through the Sinai Peninsular - which would be a rather large own-goal.

In that extreme case I can see both Saudi Arabia and Israel fighting back - probably not as "allies" but against a common enemy.

In order to gain control of Egypt - and let us not forget that the Egyptian populace have recently successfully deposed an unpopular leader, and could easily do so again - IS would have to have massive support in a country that is currently cracking down on the Muslim Brotherhood, IS's 'brother' in the country.

 

[scudsucker]

Shame, you seem inaccurate, paranoid - and quite delusional.

Actually read it and then tell us what you don't agree with.

I did. And that is why I described you as such.

If you can grasp the slightly higher level of discussion elsewhere in the thread - ie, not your posts - you'll see actual debate. Not just "post-a-diatribe-and-a-" as you so often do.

 

[ToxicBunny]

You really have some rose-tinted glasses ideas about what IS will do and what they won't do.

They're a brutal organisation, that is incredibly well funded, who currently probably have the most battle hardened fighting force in the region... they are a force to be reckoned with, and if they gain larger equipment could become massively more dangerous. They feel feathers for fighting through Muslim areas to gain control of them, so your "own-goal" statement is a bit meaningless. They would happily go through the Sinai Peninsula and into Egypt when they're ready for it.