Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
June 23, 2014

Where Will ISIS Go Next?

Elijah J. Magnier has an interesting interview with an ISIS commander, Abu Baqr-al-Janabi, in Baghdad. There are plans for ISIS to take the city and there are apparently sleeper cells of fighters waiting for the big attack signal. But, says the commander, ISIS and the attached other forces, will first have to consolidate their positions and eliminate Iraqi government position in their back. The Iraqi government is already giving up some outer position and is consolidating its side by securing only Baghdad, the south and some economically important assets.

The 300 military "advisers" the U.S. had announced to send to Iraqi headquarters will likely never arrive. There is disagreement over their legal status and the Iraqi government, given the U.S. commitment to another regime change in Baghdad, may well conclude that these soldiers would likely be malign actors rather than trustworthy allies. The Maliki government, like the Iranians, probably sees the whole ISIS attack as the result of a U.S. conspiracy.

My hunch for now is that ISIS will not go for the big fight in Baghdad in the near term but will rather try to launch some substantial diversion elsewhere. In the introduction of the interview Magnier writes:

ISIS’s aim is not Iraq and Syria, it is the Levant and beyond. It includes Jordan, Lebanon, Palestine, Israel and more. “No Limits”, as I am told.

There was a pro-ISIS demonstration today in Ma'an, "Jordan's Fallujah" (video). Just like ISIS had sleeper cells within the Iraqi military it may well have some within the Jordanian forces or secret services. The road between Baghdad and Jordan is in ISIS's hand as well as the border crossing to Jordan. Involving Jordan would certainly see a military reaction from Washington. That is something which, according to the interview, ISIS would very much want. Could ISIS go, if only as diversion, for Amman before taking on Baghdad?

Posted by b on June 23, 2014 at 16:52 UTC | Permalink

next page »

This whole ISIS egregore is well beyond rational description, and of course that's because no one here has full information or even half information. At this rate, I fully expect Saddam to Come Again like the Lord Jesus Christ.

Considering what's transpired as of late, it's not too far-fetched that he'll descend longitudinally from Belarus where he's been hanging out all these years waiting for the right moment to ride in and save the day.

If Tupac Shakur Can Do It, Why Not Saddam Hussein?

Posted by: Cold N. Holefield | Jun 23 2014 17:15 utc | 1

There is no need whatsoever for US boots on the ground in Iraq given the astounding success of our ISIS proxy forces so far.

Posted by: Bill J. | Jun 23 2014 17:17 utc | 2

Why has no one even discussed the easiest way to stop IISIS -- Bombing Saudi Arabia if they continue supporting terrorists in Iraq and Syria.

Posted by: Andoheb | Jun 23 2014 17:19 utc | 3

I'm sure Obama is patting himself on the back for effectively creating a defacto partition in Iraq already. If al Maliki wants to turn things around, he's going to have to send in the military and remove these guys physically. Now that he's under fire, that might not be so easy.

Also, ISIS will expand if the model they are working with (for regime change) works out. But that is still uncertain, as of today. Obama has a lot of loose ends here, and this whole plan could go south fast if al Maliki doesn't play along...which he definitely will NOT do.

I disagree about ISIS and Baghdad, though. They don't have the power to seize the capital, but they can still do a lot of damage to infrastructure, water, pipelines etc. You just can't let guys like this run around wreaking havoc. You have to find them and kill them.

Posted by: plantman | Jun 23 2014 17:20 utc | 4

via Syrian Perspective (Comment section is also interesting)



Posted by: crone | Jun 23 2014 17:39 utc | 5

"We are where we are because we armed the Syrian rebels. We have been fighting alongside Al-Qaeda," Sen. Paul said to CNN.

United States Senator Rand Pal (R-Kentucky) says jihadist wonderlands are sprouting up abroad, and American foreign policy is to blame.

The possible 2016 presidential contender was discussing the escalating crisis in Iraq on camera with CNN host Candy Crowley over the weekend when he condemned the notion that the American military should intervene further.

According to the junior senator, other recent uprisings in the region that prompted a militarized response from the US only made matters worse and further fueled terrorist activities.

“We went into Libya and we got rid of that terrible Gadhafi. Now it is a jihadist wonderland over there,” Sen. Paul said. “There's jihadists everywhere.”

“If we were to get rid of Assad, it would be a jihadist wonderland in Syria. It's now a jihadist wonderland in Iraq, precisely because we got over-involved, not because we had too little involvement, but too much involvement,” Paul added.

Posted by: Virgile | Jun 23 2014 17:40 utc | 6

3rd teen from Aberdeen in ISIS recruitment video

Posted by: somebody | Jun 23 2014 17:44 utc | 7

The mehdi Army will NOT allow some shitty ISIS to take over Baghdad. And I pray for these Animals to fly over to Jordan and take over the kingdom of the Dwarf king so that he can move to his mother country in the UK for Good.

Posted by: nini | Jun 23 2014 17:46 utc | 8

"You have to find them and kill them."

Give it a month or two and Al Maliki will come out victorious. He has very strong military allies; Iran, Syria, Hezbollah and a huge reserve of Iraqi Shia fighters. Even Saudi Arabia and Jordan will join in when they will be threatened on their border. The more ISIS stretches geographically, the more it weakens.

Al Maliki and his allies just need some time to get organized then get ready for a blitz over ISIS.

Posted by: Virgile | Jun 23 2014 17:48 utc | 9

ISIL terrorists sponsored by Saudis, US, Israel

Posted by: crone | Jun 23 2014 17:48 utc | 10

Can the report from Syrian perspective be trusted?

It looks like ISIS is already taking some major hits.

Posted by: plantman | Jun 23 2014 17:54 utc | 11

Good news from Iraq. "Troops recaptured the Trebil border crossing with Jordan and al-Waleed crossing on the border with Syria on Monday." Should it be sustainable, those two Al Anbar crossings are deep critical for ISIS weapons and fighter rats from KSA.

Posted by: crone | Jun 23 2014 17:58 utc | 12

b - interesting speculation on isis to jordan before baghdad... anything is possible.

i agree with @2, except the way i see it 'the hollywood approach' is all about the show, especially when it's in direct opposition to what the usa gov't says..

as for bombing saudi arabia - that would be like bombing 'gospel' center where a good chunk of the fanaticism generates from. may as well bomb texas too while you are at it.

Posted by: james | Jun 23 2014 18:02 utc | 13

Ah desperation - Leslie H. Gelb of the Iraq division fame!

A Winning Strategy for Iraq and Syria
It’s time for the U.S. to form an alliance between Baghdad, Damascus, Tehran, and Moscow — and divide Iraq and Syria
into semi-autonomous ethnic

Posted by: somebody | Jun 23 2014 18:04 utc | 14

@13, i meant to say 'what the usa gov't


Posted by: james | Jun 23 2014 18:21 utc | 15

I think it is unlikely, if not impossible, for ISIS to march on Jordan. It would upend the underlying logic that ISIS is a Saudi-Qatari proxy in their war on Iran.

Blowback will come to the House of Saud, but it is going to take several more turns of the wheel for that to happen. The salafis can stay busy fighting the ex-Baathist sufis for a while.

Posted by: Mike Maloney | Jun 23 2014 18:27 utc | 16

Posted by: Mike Maloney | Jun 23, 2014 2:27:13 PM | 16

I don't think they are marching. They are activating networks.

Posted by: somebody | Jun 23 2014 18:51 utc | 17

next stop Europe?
German Emir Alexander from Munich in ISIS

German tv. Pay reportedly is good and you can have a media career growing into a recruitment leadership role.

Posted by: somebody | Jun 23 2014 19:26 utc | 18

That Magnier interview is very interesting. I think the commander was trying to spread fear and uncertainty with some of his claims. An army of 10,000 could not begin to invade Jordan. Also all of his talk about sleeper cells in Baghdad were probably designed to provoke Malaki into oppressing the Sunnis. However, it did make sense that ISIS

Posted by: ToivoS | Jun 23 2014 19:45 utc | 19

The war-cry of ISIS last week was: "Baghdad and Jerusalem!"

According to a tweet printed in the Guardian, the Jordanians have heavily beefed up the frontier with tanks and missiles. That must be round Ruweishid. But of course most of the border is open flat desert.

It's not really a question of taking Amman, but feeding in to the highly pro-Jihadi towns east and south of Amman - Zarqa, Ma'an, Tafileh. Amman itself would probably be difficult to take. The Jordanian army, the Americans and the Israelis would defend it to the end.

Posted by: Alexno | Jun 23 2014 19:45 utc | 20

damn, thing just posted spontaneously. However it did make sense that ISIS and its sunni allies must have penetrated Mosul before that city fell and perhaps even had agents inside the Iraqi army. True or not, nothing like a big purge of the army right now to improve morale.

Posted by: ToivoS | Jun 23 2014 19:48 utc | 21

Where are the supply lines for ISIS?

Posted by: JaimeInTexas | Jun 23 2014 19:51 utc | 22

@16 It doesn't undermine the logic. These guys are irregulars not soldiers, so they don't have the direct line from ISIS commanders, who I imagine have a more democratic council structure, to Saudi benefactors, who are split between oil barons and religious nuts.

There is no reason ISIS inspired by their success might decide they should be in charge especially if the Shiites don't want them. Are the Saudi princes going to arrest them if ISIS doesn't follow orders?

With cash, weapons, an aura of invincibility, and status as successful fighting jihadists against western trained and equipped soldiers, it's not a far stretch for ISIS to question why they need to worry about the feelings of hard partying princes. Maybe they will bring back the old time religion. ISIS has been and may still be Saudi proxy troops, but it would be naive to think ISIS commanders haven't perceived a change of conditions with their rapid success. If the go to Baghdad for more than terror, they will be stomped, so why not continue to liberate Sunni regions and humiliate the west? My guess is the rank and file would love it over trying to take a city of five million people.

Posted by: NotTimothyGeithner | Jun 23 2014 19:58 utc | 23

slightly off-topic, but much more advisable to talk about then wasting time with religious and political idiots on all sides of the barricades in ME:

Amcu's leader has used the congratulatory speech of the historic strike to take swipes at the union's defectors and the new mines minister.

“The world called you uneducated,” he said, addressing the workers. “But you taught the entire world a lesson.”

Posted by: thomas | Jun 23 2014 20:27 utc | 24

then = than

Posted by: thomas | Jun 23 2014 20:29 utc | 25

b-"Involving Jordan would certainly see a military reaction from Washington"

Nope! Jordan is ripe for the partitioning. And the US is okeydokey with it.

Posted by: Penny | Jun 23 2014 20:39 utc | 26

ISIS is just rolling off every tongue, isn't it? i mean, what a handy little acronym. ISIS's like an almost palindrome or something. and just two syllables, too. it's like just 2 or 3 days ago or so that ISIS 'conquered' a city of almost 2 million called mossul, and now ISIS is at the gates of baghdad after neutralizing much of the greater levant. holy shiite! ya think news corp is having a field day? ya think ISIS'll go all the way? for the u s a?

Posted by: john | Jun 23 2014 20:51 utc | 28

More proof, if any more were needed about US/UK intentions in Iraq..Kurdistan’s security agency says it tipped off the CIA and MI6 five months ago outlining the planned seizure of northern Iraq by the so-called Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL).

However, the Kurdish officials say, the American and British governments failed to take action and ignored the repeated warnings.

Posted by: harry law | Jun 23 2014 20:53 utc | 29

Yup, just more incompetence all the way around!!!

So now the CIA not only was training ISIS but it also knew about the Iraq attack at least 5 months prior.

Yeah, that "incompetence" seems totally fucking believable. Just like the "incompetence" and "ignored warnings" on display during 9/11.

Move along!! Nothing to see here!!!

Posted by: JSorrentine | Jun 23 2014 21:11 utc | 30


Sounds much like "who would have thought they would fly planes into buildings?"

Posted by: crone | Jun 23 2014 21:13 utc | 31

Posted by: harry law | Jun 23, 2014 4:53:22 PM | 29

They also say they tipped off Maliki who did not do anything ... so it was a plot all around ...

Posted by: somebody | Jun 23 2014 21:29 utc | 32

ISIS infiltration of the Iraqi state

There was no hiding, the captain said: ISIS knew who all the police and soldiers were and where their families lived. He was posted elsewhere at the time, but he quickly moved his family to Baghdad. As soon as they left, ISIS fighters moved into his home. “It is difficult to hide yourself,” the captain said. “They have agents and spies everywhere.”

The captain, who was on leave in Baghdad, spoke at an upscale hotel in the city center — and he said it was one of the rare times he ventured outside his home. When a car had arrived earlier to pick him up for the meeting, his family had peered worriedly from the windows. The captain believed that the deadly reach of the ISIS militants extended to Baghdad — that they tracked his movements and knew where he lived. He said that ISIS had access to databases and intelligence that let them know the name, rank, home address and even salary of everyone who served.

Posted by: somebody | Jun 23 2014 21:44 utc | 33

"Ignored warnings." Sounds familiar.

Posted by: lysias | Jun 23 2014 21:44 utc | 34

Where next? Maybe India. Let's hope not. If India is next, it will use nukes, and when it does, bye bye everyone. Can the genie be put back in the bottle? Why would the U.S. back a group that has its sights on India that could stoke a regional nuclear war between Pakistan and India that will destroy the planet? Think people, think.

After Iraq, will ISIS target India? New map shows group's chilling plan

Even as Iraq reels from the onslaught of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) militants who have seized multiple cities and towns and taken 39 Indian construction workers hostage, a new map released by the group shows parts of western India as part of a bigger 'caliphate' that the group calls the "Islamic state of Khorasan." The Times of India reported that ISIS that has taken over a number of cities in Iraq in a lightning advance is aiming "to create an Islamic World Dominion of which even India would be a part." According to the TOI report, the militant group recently released a map, which shows parts of North-west India, including Gujarat, part of a bigger caliphate called the "Islamic state of Khorasan." The report claims that the outfit is likely to get help from Indian jihadists allegedly fighting in Iraq and Syria. The jihadists, the report says, are likely to return to India and aid the ISIS from within.

The ISIS' brisk onslaught in Iraq comes two years after the United States withdrew troops from Iraq and left the war-torn nation in the hands of a Shi'ite government led by Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki. The Iraq government has failed to prevent the attacks in which scores have been killed and close to a million have fled.
In a piece on Firstpost titled 'Iraq unrest: Why India needs to worry about the ISIS', Seema Sirohi wrote: "India, which has the second largest Shia population, is affected in three critical ways by what’s unfolding: it has 10,000 workers in Iraq alone and hundreds of thousands more in other Arab countries, it imports 25 million tonnes of oil from Iraq every year and finally the presence of Pakistani jihadists in the ranks of Syrian and Iraqi militants brings the conflict and Wahabi Islamist ideology closer to India."

More at link

Posted by: Cold N. Holefield | Jun 23 2014 21:53 utc | 35

Supply-lines for ISIL: one country which named itself after its king, one country
acting on behalf of Rasmussen and one country has an association-agreement with
BrEUxelles a peace-treaty with zion, albeit more than half of its population are
arab refugees from palestine - hail to the kings! oh, sorry - to hell with the kings!

Posted by: slirs | Jun 23 2014 21:56 utc | 36

Foxnews finds out that there are Baathists involved.

Much has been written about ISIS's blitzkrieg across northern Iraq, but it is unlikely the fighters would have been as successful without the Baathists. Three of Saddam's former generals led the takeover of Mosul, and eight of the top 10 generals in the ISIS army are believed to be Baathists. Izzat Douri, a former military commander who Saddam considered to be like a brother, is widely rumored to be in Mosul, overseeing the conflict after hiding out in Qatar and Syria for a decade.

In addition to their military training, the Baathists have been able to tap strong tribal ties in the region to command countless followers. That's helped to keep the conquered territory in ISIS hands while the army of terrorists and freed soldiers moves forward toward the prize: Baghdad and the holy Shia cities of Karbala and Najaf.

“As an effective fighting force alone, ISIS would never have been able to hold such large territories, a Kurdish intelligence officer told but with the help of Baathists [united under the banner of the Naqshbandi army], they have been able to keep the momentum going.”

Posted by: somebody | Jun 23 2014 21:57 utc | 37

Israel and the US have a 'peace plan' all cooked up for Jordan
If ISIS moves into Jordan it's all just part of the makeover for Jordan
You know? New hair Nice lipstick and a bunch of new clothes
Israel will drop millions of Palestinians and Jordan will gain them all
It will take time, but, the plan has been in the works for a while now

I put up a whole bunch of stuff at my place
In summary; Jordan will be the new Palestine
One way. Or another

Posted by: Penny | Jun 23 2014 21:57 utc | 38

Yup, we're supposed to believe for example on the one hand that even though US intelligence agencies supposedly have the power/ability to monitor/track every sort of electronic signal imaginable world-wide that they still are SOOOOO FUCKING incompetent that even when someone DIRECTLY TELLS them that some shit is going down they STILL don't know what to do, right?

Why then the fucking rush/worry to encrypt our data then? I mean, why don't the "terrorists" just email their fucking plots directly to Langley? What fucking difference does it make as they're so fucking stoopid?

Yet NO ONE is supposed to say: hey, that shit just doesn't make ANY FUCKING SENSE whatsoever. We're all just supposed to sit here in face of this retarded nonsense and "re-evaluate" OUR understanding of how things work, right? Yup, "complex" situations just happen to spiral out of control again and again and again and NO ONE in any intelligence capacity or position of power has learned a fucking thing from ANY of their past "incompetent" mistakes, a record spanning years and decades? Y'know, the very same "mistakes" that they've made BILLIONS if not TRILLIONS of dollars from and which has followed the Zionist Yinon Plan etc like a how-to manual?

Just to recap:

The conscious and premeditated furtherance of US war criminal plots and designs e.g. the Yinon Plan etc?

Unadulterated conspiratorial balderdash.

A near "perfect" track record of US intelligence "incompetence" going back AT LEAST ten years and continuing right up to the present?

The Establishment promulgated conventional wisdom.

Posted by: JSorrentine | Jun 23 2014 21:58 utc | 39

The Alliance between ISIS and Old Baʿthists under the Leadership of ʿIzzat Ibrāhīm al-Dūrī? – Some Reflections on the Propaganda during the current Iraqi Crisis

To sum up: Given the last reports and statements with respect to the ideological and religious differences between JRTN and ISIS, it seems unlikely that both groups are united in an alliance, at least not for long. The current announcements of the Maliki government of such an alliance might be seen as a means to convince the Iraqi and international public of the necessity of foreign intervention in order to prevent a merging of radical Islamists and former Baʿth members.

There it is. ISIS/L cannot fight with Baathist generals and be genuinely Wahhabi Islamist.

Posted by: somebody | Jun 23 2014 22:18 utc | 40

Listen to the conspiracy cranks like sorrentine or listen to the Iranian government itself talk blowback.

"I advise Muslim countries that support the terrorists with their petrodollars to stop," Rouhani said in remarks reported by the website of Iran's state broadcaster, AFP reports.

"Tomorrow you will be targeted... by these savage terrorists. Wash your hands of killing and the killing of Muslims," he added.
Read more:

Posted by: truthbetold | Jun 23 2014 22:36 utc | 41

@5, "comments interesting," very, seems Madame O is a Mister

Posted by: ruralito | Jun 23 2014 22:39 utc | 42

if this has previously been posted, sorry re the redundancy.

Posted by: truthbetold | Jun 23 2014 23:05 utc | 43

oh well, confession

Qatar’s military and economic largesse has made its way to Jabhat al-Nusra, to the point that a senior Qatari official told me he can identify al-Nusra commanders by the blocks they control in various Syrian cities. But ISIS is another matter. As one senior Qatari official stated, “ISIS has been a Saudi project.”

Posted by: somebody | Jun 23 2014 23:40 utc | 44

@40 Why does it matter whether theyre 'legitimately islamist' or not?

@41 Truthbetold, Did you not read Bs post? Iran thinks that this is a US conspiracy just like Sorrentine does.

Posted by: Massinissa | Jun 23 2014 23:44 utc | 45

Listen to the conspiracy cranks like sorrentine or listen to the Iranian government itself talk blowback.

Blowback is part and parcel of the Conspiracy Cranks Hypothesis. You got nothin'.

Blowback and Conspiracy Cranks Hypothesis are not mutually exclusive concepts. The more chaos - the merrier.

Posted by: Fast Freddy | Jun 23 2014 23:45 utc | 46

Posted by: Massinissa | Jun 23, 2014 7:44:10 PM | 45

No. Iran thinks it is "Petrodollars"

Tehran: Iran's President Hassan Rouhani warned on Sunday that Muslim states which funnel petrodollars to jihadist Sunni fighters wreaking havoc in Iraq will become their next target.

Rouhani did not name any country, but officials and media in mainly Shiite Iran have hinted that insurgents from the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) are being financially and militarily supported by Saudi Arabia and Qatar.

"I advise Muslim countries that support the terrorists with their petrodollars to stop," Rouhani said in remarks reported by the website of Iran's state broadcaster.

"Tomorrow you will be targeted... by these savage terrorists. Wash your hands of killing and the killing of Muslims," he added.

40 Why does it matter whether theyre 'legitimately islamist' or not?

It matters if the organization believes their stuff or if they are a completely artificial secret service creation. If the latter, they are capable of anything. If the former, they are limited by their ideology.

This here is an interesting Kurdish take

Murad said that ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi and former Ba’ath party vice president Izzat Ibrahim al-Douri planed recent ISIS attacks in Jordan. Regarding Iraq’s future the PUK official explained that ISIS will not stay in the region for long, but will give control of the areas they have taken over to Iraq’s Ba’athists.

So where will ISIS/L's foreigners go?

Posted by: somebody | Jun 24 2014 0:03 utc | 47

The Iranian government understands regieme change is the goal of Amer-Israel but it doesn't utilize cohesively directed formidable conspiracy defeatist propaganda to fight it.

Posted by: truthbetold | Jun 24 2014 0:34 utc | 48


5. ALANsaid:

Israe, just as KSA, wants a rabid extremist group to establish an Islamic caliphate on their border.
Israel’s continued attacks on the Syrian government are particularly bizarre considering the current context. With ISIS rapidly gaining influence in both Iraq and Syria (they just took 4 new towns in Iraq over the weekend), it would behoove Israel to consider what would actually happen if Assad fell.

The irony, is that by launching airstrikes against the Syrian government in response to an attack that was most likely carried out by the Syrian rebels, Israel is actually encouraging future attacks like this. It’s easy for the rebels to launch missiles across into Israel, and Israel’s response is essentially free air support. So clearly it is in the rebel’s interest to shoot over into the Israeli side as often as possible.

It is not too smart.

The only reason to dissolve Iraq, is Israel. Israel does not want a unified Iraq. Israel does not want an Iraq that can stand on its own two feet. Israel wants to make sure that Iraq never remerges as a regional power. And there’s only one way to achieve that goal, that is, to follow Yinon’s prescription of “breaking up Iraq …along ethnic/religious lines …so, three (or more) states will exist around the three major cities: Basra, Baghdad and Mosul.”

1 2

June 23rd, 2014, 7:05 pm

As commentor Alan notes, the Israeli Elite isn't formidably talented either.

Posted by: truthbetold | Jun 24 2014 0:43 utc | 49

According a usually reliable Lebanese journalist Scarlett Haddad:

- The US will probably not send the 300 US advisors. They's rather see Al Malaki fall and replaced by a Shia close to the USA and the Saudis (Probably Iyad Alawi who lost in the last election)
- ISIS will not attack Shia religious cities soon. They rather invade Sunni areas where they can find a complacent population and consolidate their gains in oil fields until the next wave.
- The Saudi are 100% behind ISIS. It is their angry response to the USA who is dumping them in favor of Iran, to Bashar Al Assad successful re-election in Syria and to Al Maliki's election in Iraq, a series of humiliating defeats the Kingdom couldn't bear anymore.

The unknown are ISIS's intention toward Jordan and Iran's reaction should the Shia power be threatened in Iraq.

Posted by: Virgile | Jun 24 2014 0:48 utc | 50

Where Will ISIS Go Next?

Yer mom!

Thats where they'll f' n go next

Imagine sitting in Mosul and reading some stupid cunt on the internet with half an education, which is at least half more than that dumb pompous fuck from canadia, via the Bundes Whermacht and thinking "what the fuck is this stupid german fuck talking about?"

Imagine that Bernard ye clueless fuck

Posted by: OMFG2 | Jun 24 2014 2:00 utc | 51

ISIS -according to the "I want to be accepted into the mainstream just like Pat Lang" Bernard = NOt at all an Empire distraction

Bernard, ya dumb fuck, you're never gonna be accepted into the mainstream cos yer german! And germans are a defeated people, and therfore never can be "pundits" so get with the program

Posted by: OMFG2 | Jun 24 2014 2:06 utc | 52

ISIS is like those companies that breed lady-bird beetles for orchardists. If you've got a problem with aphids(hit and miss terrorists), you sic the ladybugs on them. They gobble up the aphids and conveniently die off(are murdered by their handlers) when they're done.

Posted by: ruralito | Jun 24 2014 2:15 utc | 53

1 nil to ruralito!

Posted by: ya . . . but | Jun 24 2014 2:44 utc | 54

There it is. ISIS/L cannot fight with Baathist generalsand be genuinely Wahhabi Islamist.

I guess the cia had to settle for just regular thugs instead of Wahhabi thugs. Maybe since so many were killed in Syria they have to scrape the bottom of the barrel.

Or....maybe a lot ofr those former Baathists have been hiding in Turkey and have been turned by MIT who handle the light work on behalf of the CIA. Just throwing it out there.

Posted by: Lysander | Jun 24 2014 3:36 utc | 55

The legal issues have been resolved and the first two teams of advisors are on the ground as we speak. They will, among other things, report back as to how many more should be sent, up to a maximum of 300.

Maliki has said he will form a new "inclusive government" by next week, and if he does then we will provide air strikes. Talk about international silly babbling. First, air strikes will not solve the problem. Second, Maliki will only pretend to form the "inclusive government." Thirs, as soon as we finish providing air strikes Maliki will drop his pretense of the "inclusive government," and we are complete idiots if we think his promises mean anything.

Posted by: Bill H | Jun 24 2014 5:48 utc | 56

Mike Maloney, please stop misusing terms you're not familiar with.

Noone is fighting any "sufis" anywhere. Sufis are mystics and they do not fight, pretty much like buddhists in that regard. Also there are maybe a few thousands of real sufis left nowadays and that's an optimistic estimate.

Posted by: T2015 | Jun 24 2014 6:12 utc | 57

It seems to me that the collapse of the US trained and equipped Iraqi army matches the US trained and equipped Afgan army. Kids needing paid jobs, but not in the least bit interested in fighting. The taking of all those Iraqi towns and border posts in every case was easy because Iraqi "security" forces quit before the fighting even began.

Posted by: okie farmer | Jun 24 2014 6:27 utc | 58

Posted by: OMFG2 | Jun 23, 2014 10:06:42 PM | 52

LOL. You've obviously never read Germany, the Re-engineered Ally by Axel Brot.
Read that and then come back and tell us how your lazy little quips and insults reflect disciplined analysis and not self-obsessed dumbfuckery.

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Jun 24 2014 6:48 utc | 59

Posted by: T2015 | Jun 24, 2014 2:12:51 AM | 57

Sufis are mystics and they do not fight

Wow, just wow. Tell that to Izzat Ibrahim al-Douri to name just one.

Historically some of the most militarily effective Muslim leaders were Sufi without even pausing to think here's a few:

Omar Mukhtar: Mukhtar led the jihad against the Italian military occupation of Libya for over twenty years beginning in 1912.

Abdul-Qadir al-Jazairi: Abdul-Qadir was an Islamic scholar and a political and military leader in Algeria who led the struggle against the French invasion in the mid-nineteenth centur

Imam Shamyl: Imam Shamyl, was a Chechen Sufi member of the Naqshbandi tariqah who led the fight against the Tsarist attempts to subdue the Chechens.

In Afghanistan Sufi tariqas played a pivotal role in evicting the Communists. Men such such as Sayyid Ahmad Gailani, the head of the Qadiri order and Sebghatullah Mojaddedi and Burhanuddin Rabbani, both of whom are Naqshbandi.

Then there's the founder and the leader of the Taliban, Mullah Mohammad Omar who is Naqshbandi as well.

It is a lie - a western lie whored out by western liars to say that Sufis are passive apolitical mystics in reality Sufis have long formed one of the core intellectual and military elites in propagating Islamic revivals all across the Ummah and defending the Ummah from agressive Western expansionism.

Posted by: stop telling lies | Jun 24 2014 7:15 utc | 60


Sorry for my confusion. It's the Saudi king who paid a visit to Sisi to congratulate him the day befor Kerry's arrival...

About Kerry being told to f... off, you just had to see the picture on al Ahram to know it's true:
Poor man... he had to board an Egyptair flight? Or that's what it looks like...

The problem with all these "surprise" visits (in Baghdad and Irbil) is that you get the feeling the guy pops up uninvited. It's embarassing.

Posted by: Mina | Jun 24 2014 7:39 utc | 61


Buddhists dont fight? Check Myanmar.

Posted by: Anonymous | Jun 24 2014 8:10 utc | 62


Borrowing from the words of Goldfinger, 'Oh, no, Mr. B, I expect them to DIE!'

This is clearly a 'Wag the Dog' diversion for Boko Haram (Salafi's for the KSA)
kidnapping of 300 school girls, threatening to tear the veil from the despicable
practices of forced marriage, child marriage and harems of the House of Saud.

This is clearly a 'Wag the Dog' diversion for Ukraine (Globalists for the US-EU)
kidnapping of an entire country, threatening to tear the veil from the despicable
war crimes practices of US-EU in Libya, Syria and eventually the whole Levant.

And as I've pointed out before, three weeks ago the Iraqi's boasted they have
restored crude oil production to pre-Gulf War levels, at more than 3.4MMBD, and
Inshallah, would soon be able to produce as much as 8 MMBD of sweet light crude.

This represents an EXISTENTIAL THREAT to the Sauds, US Frackers and CA Tar Sands!
As I pointed out, DEMAND IS FLAT OR FALLING, and there is a world glut of crude.
No wonder the Saudi's immediately claimed they could boost production to 15 MMBD.

ISIShaam is exactly that. A sham. A diversion. The occupation of empty lands for
the purpose of further Balkinization of the Levant. It's all according to Plan.
The plan is to grab oil futures contracts, and spike the price of KSA-USA-CA oil!

Sure, ISIS got lucky and robbed some banks, ...who knows how much cash, and sure,
got lucky again and looted an armory, ...who knows how many weapons, but they are
like a slinky rolling down the stairs: eventually, inevitably, they will all DIE.

In the meantime, the world's BILLIONAIRES are enjoying the diversion to deregulate
finance, to deregulate world trade, to enact greater 'structural adjustments' and
to tighten the noose on everyone reading this blog devoted to Reading Tea Leaves.

Posted by: chip nikh | Jun 24 2014 8:23 utc | 63

@ stop teling lies: I grew up in a country which still has real dervishes, but hey, feel free to believe whatever you want :)

Citing Wiki: "Sufi orders generally preach to deny oneself and to destroy the ego-self (nafs) and its worldly desires."

Which is all you need to know about real dervishes.

The sad situation that every splinter group of idiots will call themselves this or that doesn't really change things - they're not sufis. The only sufi state we ever had was I think Nigeria in the early 20th century.

Posted by: T2015 | Jun 24 2014 8:24 utc | 64

Regarding the fighting: if you ever see a Buddhist fight, then he is clearly a non-believer. Same goes for Sufis, which are by the way banned and forbidden in most moslem countries.

Posted by: T2015 | Jun 24 2014 8:30 utc | 65


I was watching a BBC broadcast from Palestine, about the time
that American girl got run over twice by an Israeli bulldozer, and
the reporter was talking to an old broken down Palestinian farmer
who was complaining that Israeli bulldozers had pushed over his
400-year old olive orchard, after the local magistrate ruled that
his family's settling the land for at least 400 year was illegal
because the documents were in Arabic instead of in Yiddish. Nice.

But here's what got me: A white Mercedes pulls up, and a coiffured
Israeli woman gets out, looking very pissed off at this farmer still
hanging around, after being bulldozed off his family's farm lands.

"We won, you lost!" she shouted as he cringed, "It's just business,
get over it! NOW GET OFF MY LAND!!"

That's the phrase that should ring in your mind whenever The Chosen,
the 1% Elites deregulate global financial looting, or deregulate
global trade looting, or transfer their private debt swaps onto the
taxpayers' backs, or double then triple the burden of 'government' so
that nothing moves, nothing breathes under 'structural adjustments',
as the Sherif makes his orderly rounds, kicking Peons to the Curb.

"We won, you lost! It's just business, get over it! NOW GET OFF MY LAND!!"

Posted by: chip nikh | Jun 24 2014 9:01 utc | 66

I don't give a shit where you grew up. You're posting utterly false nonsense - again. The fact is that members of the Sufi orders have always been in the forefront of armed defense of the Umma. ALWAYS.

Now why don't you sit down and write a lengthy load of shit about how the flag og Sri Lanka is clear proof that the illuminati have taken over the world. You'll feel better afterwards and it'll be at least as useful as the usual nonsense you spout.

Same goes for Sufis, which are by the way banned and forbidden in most moslem countries.

It is a blatant lie to say that members of the Sufi orders are forbidden from fighting. The reverse is the truth.

Posted by: stop telling lies | Jun 24 2014 9:07 utc | 67


Clearly Bernard is paying a Final Price for cracking the Code
on Ukraine, and exposing US-EUs nefarious war crimes in Kiev
and in Syria, and in Libya, then across MENA and the Levant.

Swarms of CIA/NSA/DOD trolls who've appeared out of nowhere,
and now are dominating MoA dialogue in the same way the ISIS
mercenaries were paid to dominant Iraq's new oil freedoms.

I'll raise a glass to Bernard for doing what nobody in the
main stream media had the balls to do: expose the Empire.
It's like that final scene in The Matrix, the Meltdown.

Posted by: chip nikh | Jun 24 2014 9:13 utc | 68

Stratfor's weekly sitrep came this morning. Mostly crap as usual, but highly supportive of divide and rule:

When we consider Ukraine and Iraq, they are of course radically different, but they have a single thing in common: To the extent that the United States has any interest in the regions, it cannot act with direct force. Instead, it must act with indirect force by using the interests and hostilities of the parties on the ground to serve as the first line of containment. If the United States intervenes at all, it will do so by supporting factions that are of interest to Washington. In Ukraine, this would mean supporting the former Soviet satellite states in Central Europe. In Iraq, it would mean applying sufficient force to prevent the annihilation of any of the country's three major groups, but not enough force to attempt to resolve the conflict.

Posted by: okie farmer | Jun 24 2014 9:55 utc | 69

Anyone doubting how Isis is serving imperial designs should read today's MK Bhadrakummar essay

Sorry for not hyper linking but that's hard to do from a phone. Anyway, the essay is very chilling. Some of the main points:

1) US intends to go through NATO and not the UN for any "authorization" for strikes.

2) Denis Ross is out there advocating that Syria and Iraq be treated as one combat zone...meaning the us can bomb Syria and not just "Isis". And since everyone is in a panick about Isis, there won't be much international condemnation.

3) Russia is distracted with Ukraine

4) The last of Syria's chemical weapons are gone.

It is absolutely imperative that Iraq not allow any US entry into the conflict at all. Not one single adviser. That will be all the opening the the empire needs. It's the string that unravels the whole sweater.

The good news is that Ayatollah Khamenei understands all this. The bad news is that I'm not so sure Maliki and the Iraqi government do.

The only other thing that might give the empire pause is that an attack on Syria might give Russia the political space it needs to enter Ukraine.

Posted by: Lysander | Jun 24 2014 10:10 utc | 70

@ 67: right back at you, regarding lies and nonsense. The "fact" is that any idiot can call himself anything. Those people are NOT sufis, because they show that they belong to the world of matter, which is opposing the basics of the teaching at its core. It's like a "christian mass-murderer", such is as much of a christian as those fightera are "sufi".

And please stop twisting what I said. I didn't say they're forbidden from figting, but they're (or were at some point) completely forbidden as a religious group in those countries. Persecuted, decimated, shrines destroyed etc. in most sunni cou8ntries, but even the "worldly" Turkey did forbid and decimate them some 100 years ago. Even in Persia they were killed and decimated. So now you want to tell me that these oppressed and decimated Dervishes are supposedly fighting for their very oppressors? Hubba-wa???

Posted by: T2015 | Jun 24 2014 10:38 utc | 71

Oh and of course defense of the Umma is something entirely different from the current strand of "ISIS/Nusra/Qaida" would-be-moslems playing the imperial tune in Iraq and Syria, but I'm sure you WILL find some way to compare that... like involving entirely different topics (flag) or freely inventing your own versions of the content of my posts (supposedly Illuminati ruling the world, which I never said).

You sir are a bullshit artist. Either quote fully or stop quoting at all. And certainly not your interpretation of stuff that never was said in that context.

Posted by: T2015 | Jun 24 2014 10:44 utc | 72

Lysander, this article from al Manar agrees with Bhadrakumar:

But why an Iraqi, who is sane, national, or willing for independence, should ask the U.S. forces to intervene to support him? And against whom? And for what purpose?

Does anyone in Iraq believe that the return of U.S. occupation provides a stable ruling or a security solution for the problem of Takfiri movements? Have our past experiences showed that the U.S. is already capable to protect its soldiers before asking whether it is really capable of confronting terrorism? Is it true that among us are people who believe that Americans represent security, military, political and even economic guarantees?

He Who Requests U.S. Support Is a Traitor!

Posted by: okie farmer | Jun 24 2014 10:45 utc | 73

The usual desperate Sunni rebels logic is now in Iraq:

"We ask ISIS or other Islamist fighters to help us topple our dictator because we don't have enough popular support and not enough military power. After we reach our goals, they'll hand over the cities to us and they leave"

Sunni Arab tribes will take control of Anbar within “two days”—Islamic Army founder
Dabash said the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), the militant group that on June 10 took control of Mosul and sent shockwaves throughout Iraq and the region, had “handed control of the city over to the other factions.”

Posted by: virgile | Jun 24 2014 12:33 utc | 74

Other factions? Which factions?

Posted by: T2015 | Jun 24 2014 13:15 utc | 75

Who benefits?

why, israel as always! Their Al-CIAedas and ISIS in Syria are about to get extinct so they had to protect them by bombing the SAA.

The US will make a few bombing runs in Iraq just as a token move against ISIS with a lot of Hurra and bravado from CNN,Ahmanpour, BBC & Co who then will switch to mediasilence.

Then they, hoping that Putin will be occupied with their Nazi clients in Ukraine, will immediately fly over to Syria on a pretext to finnish them off but in reality to become ISIS air force in a Libya all over again man hunt for Dr.Assad and the Syrian Arab Army, the NDF and every people militia fighting against the cuttroaths.

Posted by: Notsofast | Jun 24 2014 13:34 utc | 76

Posted by: T2015 | Jun 24, 2014 6:38:10 AM | 71

Sufi mystic orders

An overwhelming majority of Muslim and non-Muslim Kurds are followers of one of many mystic Sufi orders (or tariqa). The bonds of the Muslim Kurds, for example, to different Sufi orders have traditionally been stronger than to orthodox Muslim practices. Sufi rituals in Kurdistan, led by Sufi masters, or shaykhs, contain so many clearly non-Islamic rites and practices that an objective observer would not consider them Islamic in the orthodox sense...A more recent arrival into Kurdistan is the Sunni Naqshbandi order, founded by Baha al-Din Naqshband of Bukhârâ (AD 1317-1389) and introduced from central Asia, perhaps by the Turkic tribes and/or Turkic Bakshis, whence they were arriving in these parts of the Middle East since the 12th century.

Today, the people in northern, and to some extent western, Kurdistan follow the Naqshbandi order, while central and eastern Kurdistan are still Qâdiri. The Barzani tribe is led by Naqshbandi Sufi masters, who exercise temporal, as much as spiritual, influence in their area.

and Jaysh Rijal al-Tariqa al-Naqshbandia - formed December 2006

The group's connection to Sufism yet embrace of violence is controversial, as many Sufi followers believe that Sufism strongly eschews harming others.[5] Due to the religion's peaceful and apolitical reputation, Sufism was tolerated under the Saddam regime and was even adopted by several Baathist party members.[6] However, as the official spokesman for JRTN claimed on Al-Zawra Iraqi channel, "We fight for the integrity and unity of Iraq, land and people, to maintain its Arab and Islamic identity," fighting as a nationalist rather than a Sufi.[7]

Someone is gaming identity politics.

Posted by: somebody | Jun 24 2014 13:45 utc | 77

Posted by: Lysander | Jun 24, 2014 6:10:49 AM | 70

1) US intends to go through NATO and not the UN for any "authorization" for strikes.

NATO did not make it last time, remember? It had to be a "coalition of the willing".
Maliki could legalize air strikes ....

Posted by: somebody | Jun 24 2014 14:08 utc | 78

Maliki can legalize air strikes in Syria? My point was that once they start bombing in Iraq they ccan blend it into bombing Syria. Maliki can open the door. But he can't legalize it.

Posted by: Lysander | Jun 24 2014 14:15 utc | 79

Posted by: Lysander | Jun 24, 2014 10:15:04 AM | 79
Russia would be in a position to deter, I assume. Hezbollah routinely threaten Israel in case the US attack Syria. In any case the US could not be sure what would happen should they hit anything else but ISIS. They stopped doing what they were planning to do the last time. Nothing in the equation has changed.

Stratfor has a new conspiracy theory

Both Saudi Arabia and Russia share two key interests: undermining the U.S.-Iranian negotiating track and ensuring oil prices remain at a comfortable level, i.e., above $100 a barrel. There is little either can do to keep Iran and the United States from negotiating a settlement. In fact, the jihadist threat in Iraq creates another layer of cooperation between Iran and the United States. That said, Washington is now facing another major Middle Eastern maelstrom at the same time it has been anxiously trying to prove to itself and everyone else that the United States has bigger issues to deal with in other parts of the world, namely, in Russia's backyard. Moreover, the United States and Turkey are not of one mind on how to manage Iraq at a time when Washington needs Ankara's cooperation against Russia. If an Iraq-sized distraction buys Moscow time to manage its own periphery with limited U.S. interference, all the better for Putin. Meanwhile, if Saudi Arabia can weaken Iran and test U.S.-Iranian cooperation, it might well be worth the risk for Riyadh to try -- at least for the time being.

The conspiracy theory I believe in at the moment is this

These strategic concerns, motivated by fear of expanding Iranian influence, impacted Syria primarily in relation to pipeline geopolitics. In 2009 - the same year former French foreign minister Dumas alleges the British began planning operations in Syria - Assad refused to sign a proposed agreement with Qatar that would run a pipeline from the latter's North field, contiguous with Iran's South Pars field, through Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Syria and on to Turkey, with a view to supply European markets - albeit crucially bypassing Russia. Assad's rationale was "to protect the interests of [his] Russian ally, which is Europe's top supplier of natural gas."

Instead, the following year, Assad pursued negotiations for an alternative $10 billion pipeline plan with Iran, across Iraq to Syria, that would also potentially allow Iran to supply gas to Europe from its South Pars field shared with Qatar. The Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) for the project was signed in July 2012 - just as Syria's civil war was spreading to Damascus and Aleppo - and earlier this year Iraq signed a framework agreement for construction of the gas pipelines.

The Iran-Iraq-Syria pipeline plan was a "direct slap in the face" to Qatar's plans. No wonder Saudi Prince Bandar bin Sultan, in a failed attempt to bribe Russia to switch sides, told President Vladmir Putin that "whatever regime comes after" Assad, it will be "completely" in Saudi Arabia's hands and will "not sign any agreement allowing any Gulf country to transport its gas across Syria to Europe and compete with Russian gas exports", according to diplomatic sources. When Putin refused, the Prince vowed military action.

I believe this especially after NATO chief Rasmussen overstepped his mandate by commenting on the environmental issues of shale gas offering - a conspiracy theory

Anders Fogh Rasmussen, secretary-general of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (Nato), and former premier of Denmark, told the Chatham House thinktank in London on Thursday that Vladimir Putin’s government was behind attempts to discredit fracking, according to reports.

Rasmussen said: “I have met allies who can report that Russia, as part of their sophisticated information and disinformation operations, engaged actively with so-called non-governmental organisations - environmental organisations working against shale gas - to maintain European dependence on imported Russian gas.”

He declined to give details of those operations, saying: “That is my interpretation.”

It is a joke. People should refuse to die for this.

Posted by: somebody | Jun 24 2014 14:48 utc | 80

Lysander @70
You should read the "Speaking Freely" piece in AToL by Zorawar Daulet Singh. This puts Bhadrakumar's article in a more realistic perspective.

The quality of his analysis is exemplified by Bhadrakumar's conclusion,
"The Arab Spring may arrive, finally, in Iraq and Syria riding on Obama’s shoulders just when everyone thought it was mere chimera."

Posted by: bevin | Jun 24 2014 14:58 utc | 81

Mike Whitney has a good article in Counterpunch today:
"Today’s head-scratcher: How could a two-mile long column of jihadi-filled white Toyota Land rovers barrel across the Syrian border into Iraq–sending plumes of dust up into the atmosphere –without US spy satellites detecting their whereabouts when those same satellites can read a damn license plate from outer space? And why has the media failed to inquire about this massive Intelligence failure?....

".....I think the intelligence went straight to the top, where Obama and his neocon colleagues came up with the plan that is unfolding as we speak. They figured, if they just look the other way and let these homicidal madhatters seize a few cities and raise a little Hell, they’d be able to kill two birds with one stone, that is, get rid of al Mailiki and partition the country at the same time. But, it’s not going to work out like Obama expects, mainly because this is just about the dumbest plan ever conjured up. I would give it an 80 percent chance blowing up in Obama’s face in less than a month’s time. This turkey has failure written all over it.

"As for the sectarian issue, well, Iraq was never a sectarian society until the war. The problems arose due to a deliberate policy to pit one sect against the other in order to change the narrative of what was really going on the ground. And what was really going on was a very successful guerilla war was being waged by opponents of the US occupation who were launching in excess of 100 attacks per day on US soldiers. To change the storyline–which was causing all kinds of problems at home where support for the war was rapidly eroding–US counterinsurgency masterminds concocted a goofy plan to blow up the Golden Dome Mosque, blame it on the Sunnis, and then unleash the most savage, genocidal counterinsurgency operation of all-time. The western media were instructed to characterize developments in Iraq as part of a bloody civil war between Shia and Sunnis. But it was all a lie. The bloodletting was inevitable result of US policy which the Guardian effectively chronicled in a shocking, but indispensable hour-long video which can be seen here. James Steele: America’s mystery man in Iraq - video

"The US made every effort to fuel sectarian animosities to divert attention from the attacks on US soldiers. And due to a savage and deceptive counterinsurgency plan that employed death squads, torture, assassinations, and massive ethnic cleansing, they succeeded in confusing Iraqis as to who was really behind the daily atrocities, the human rights violations and the mountain of carnage.

"You’d have to be a fool to blame al-Maliki for any of this. As brutal as he may be, he’s not responsible for the divisions in Iraqi society. That’s all Washington’s doing. Just as Washington is entirely responsible for the current condition of the country and for the million or so people who were killed in the war."

Posted by: bevin | Jun 24 2014 15:07 utc | 82


The Qatar pipeline theory makes sense but is entirely consistent with Isis as a western intelligence front. Europe wants that gas, now more than ever. The only quibble between us is to what degree the CIA subcontracts it's work to Qatar. An interesting question, but hardly one that refutes the main point; Isis is a US sponsored creation that does its bidding.

For the Qatari plan to work, though, you have to overthrow the Syrian government. Which ultimately means a NATO bombing campaign. Isis, combined with bombing in Iraq provides a distraction. Compared with the political situation of August and September of 2013, this is a much better position that the US can attack from. And Syria's chemical arsenal is gone.

This doesn't mean they will attack or their goals will be achieved, but there should be no mistaking what they want to do.

Posted by: Lysander | Jun 24 2014 15:19 utc | 83

Every time Bashar al Asad has been able to brief for a second, there was an escalation coming...

The way I understand ISIL+Baathists+Sunni tribes is that each degree in the pyramid answer to chiefs which he thinks are the ultimate echelon. You need to be sure that the guys completely below do not read or hear anything but aljazeera or to put enough material online that they actually believe it is ISIL/ISIS who is in the foreground.

Posted by: Mina | Jun 24 2014 15:31 utc | 84

Contra Mike Whitney, I doubt if Obama had much if anything to do with coming up with the plan. Obama is a figurehead, a public relations spokesman. The decisions are made elsewhere.

Posted by: lysias | Jun 24 2014 15:45 utc | 85

Posted by: T2015

The only "faction" is the Baathist Sunnis still nostalgic of the good old time when their leader Saddam Hussein was keeping the Kurds and Shias with a bloody leash...
The Arab Sunnis lead and fed by the GCC corrupted leaders have no more recourse and representent than ISIS and Al Nusra they believe are "pure" and "well intentioned".
A violent wake up is waiting for them...
Egypt, Tunisia, Syria and soon Libya woke up after Morsi, Annahda, Al Nusra and the islamists in Libya: They got rid of their islamists opponents, politically or militarily. They have a moslem secular governement.
These Islamists frustrated in these countries have found a fertile ground in Iraq where they could use the Sunni Baathists troops. No wonder there are 3,500 tunisians in the ranks of ISIS.

I doubt this will last. They will be annihilated but it will cost a lot of civilians lives.

Posted by: Virgile | Jun 24 2014 15:48 utc | 86


Thinking through the "figurehead/puppet model" in viewing the US war criminals - while accurate - also lends itself I believe - like incompetence - to ameliorating the individual's culpability vis a vis their crimes against humanity as it lends itself to the "following orders" defense.

Similarly to charges of "incompetence" the buck never has to stop in the "puppet" model when accusations/allegations start to fly: there's always someone farther up the ladder who was supposedly "really" responsible but whom will we will never see as the faux/sham democratic processes allowing for "accountability" from the people - knee-slap - protect those really in charge just as effectively as some well-paid lackey falling on his sword for his whorelord in the analogous "incompetence" situation.

Oh, someone is guilty of something? Oh well, pissants, either vote him out of office - chortle - or else he/she didn't know what he/she was doing in the first place and they can't really be blamed, right? Take your pick, fuckers. Choose well.

Thus, while most undoubtedly it is accurate to state that Obama is a "figurehead/puppet" carrying out the commands of his masters, he is a war criminal just the same as are the people pulling Obama's strings. They are all war criminals guilty of committing crimes for which people have been executed for in the past according to established laws. Certainly, some fish are bigger than others but they all deserve to fry.

Unfortunately, the whore waters run deep here in good ole Merka. I mean, maybe if we started running in the puppets for war crimes we would start to see some more strings, huh? The war criminal mannequin factory has stop cranking out product at some point, right?

In the end, if these fucking criminals want to keep playing games utilizing terms like "incompetence" and "following orders/I'm a puppet" etc then I believe it is incumbent upon society to start playing its own "games" by not recognizing their "playacting" any longer as valid in the face of the unpunished and unrelenting destruction they have brought upon the planet.

The absurdities that we are told to swallow have been too great for a long time.

Posted by: JSorrentine | Jun 24 2014 16:49 utc | 87

Adding quickly:

Understanding that TPB are very wary of the "court" of public opinion, the "incompetence" and "puppet" strategies are deliberately rolled out so that it is more difficult for society to even BEGIN to think of these people as criminals MUCH LESS begin to go about doing anything concrete about it.

The MSM really should be viewed as the Defense Attorney for the war criminal elite as these strategies are identical to those utilized by real defense attorneys in trial.

Look at how successfully the Iraq War criminals have been, they're all over the TV now, people are buying fucking paintings by Bremer and W, etc etc. America "feels better" because they are "out of office" - nudge, wink - and we can ridicule them about what a "bad" job they did in Iraq, right? Take it away, John Stewart!!!

I can't tell you how many people I personally know who - even fake lefties - who actually feel sorry for W. b/c they think he was in over his head and just had no idea what was going on. Feel sorry?!!!

People have to start seeing that the very real purpose of all of this media face/print time accorded to these criminals is NECESSARILY to prevent us from viewing them as deliberate criminals but rather as either bungling idiots or idiots following orders.

Posted by: JSorrentine | Jun 24 2014 17:13 utc | 88

Posted by: Lysander | Jun 24, 2014 11:19:53 AM | 83

Well, Al Manar (Hezbollah) cites Winep (AIPAC) - and both seem to agree that it is a Saudi on Iran proxy war.
Which side the US will take is anybody's guess - probably both.

Posted by: somebody | Jun 24 2014 17:19 utc | 89

Of course traitorous and criminal motives were at work, but note in a healthy country, when even incompetence reaches criminal proportions, as in thousands of lost US troop lives and tens of thousands of limbs, there is no problem punishing it severely, as in capitally.

On the issue of Bush, personally, whether he privately believed Saddam had WMDs would be hard to prove. What is not hard to prove is,
(but Obama had no cause to press an investigation, planning possible crimes of his own) Bush lied to the public by cherrypicking the intelligence reports, suppressing the more authoritative and relying on the less authoritiative, presenting the latter only to the public.

Posted by: truthbetold | Jun 24 2014 18:05 utc | 90

One last thing (I've really got to run):

With the "incompetence" defense in mind, now when I look at the ridiculous - I mean absolutely fucking retarded - public on-record comments nearly all of these war criminals made about Iraq 10+ years ago I see not incompetence but premeditated future ALIBIS for the crimes they knew they were about to commit.

I mean really, you're going to tell me that career politicians who had various positions within the MIC such as Cheney, Rumsfeld etc had just NO FUCKING IDEA that Iraq was going to turn out the way it did?

That these same people - ALL EITHER SIGNATORIES/AUTHORS OR ADHERENTS - of various LONG TERM plans calling for the reshaping of the ME into a balkanized mess etc, these same fucking war criminals could honestly MEAN some of the following statements:

We will be greeted as liberators.

This war will last 3 months.

We need only 50,0000 troops.

There are no ethnic rivalries in Iraq that will flare up.

Democracy will take hold and shine from Damascus to Tehran.

And on and on and on....go ahead there a LOADS of them!!

Of course, they said these things to sell the illegal war for the public but now in hindsight I don't see ANY INCOMPETENCE.

I see DELIBERATE Cover-Your-Ass BEFORE the fact statements.

I see these fuckers - on the cusp of actively launching their long-dreamed of plans - laying the grounds for their OWN EXCULPATION.

Yup, to ensure that they could kick off their crime wave - I won't even speak to 9/11 right now - AND be around to direct it once it really got going, every single one of these fucking criminals NEEDED to get in front of a microphone and say THE STUPIDEST FUCKING SHIT they could think of so that once it turned into the bloody murderous mess THEY WANTED from the beginning they could point to their own "ineptitude". "Shamed" but free to fight another day.

Ha ha, they said Iraq would be a "cakewalk"!!What a bunch of fucking maroons!!!

Why, everyone can see that instead of being a bunch of model democratic states the ME has nearly devolved into a bunch of small ethnic satraps ruled by warlords!!!Ha ah, eat it Rummy and Wolfie!! You're fucking stoopid.

Yes, yes, it's just JSorrentine being conspiratorial again blah blah blah but when you look at the UTTER FUCKING ABSURDITY of what seasoned DC MIC veterans - like Cheney and Rumsfeld especially - said about Iraq you have to come away thinking - especially in light of what's been going on a la Libya, Sudan, Syria, Iraq, etc - that these fuckers were playing with us, rolling out their own defenses before hand.


Posted by: JSorrentine | Jun 24 2014 18:22 utc | 91

The latest NYT/CBS News poll has Obama at 40% approval, 54% disapproval. The disapproval rating is noteworthy because it represents a 6-point jump since May.

Obama has managed to stay out, just barely, of the thirties on his approval rating, the death knell for any president. But not for too longer.

Iraq is going to get worse; it's likely to go the way of Syria with bloody battle followed by bloody battle. Obama will go down as a weak, ineffective executive who committed numerous crimes and blunders.

Posted by: Mike Maloney | Jun 24 2014 18:28 utc | 92

They had motive to believe in their own misjudgements of the outcome, did Cheney and Wolfowitz, etc.
Which was, among other things ,they gave Iraq to Iran which they now are trying to remedy. Probably never saw that
Hezbollah was going to give Israel a whipping and strengthen itself either in the interim.

Posted by: truthbetold | Jun 24 2014 18:38 utc | 93

@91 I don't think you're being conspiratorial JS. You're pissed off. Gotcha. The world is run by criminals and we let them get away with it. Check. I think most people here agree with you. Any idea what we can do about it?

Posted by: dh | Jun 24 2014 18:52 utc | 94

"there are now no possibilities for a diplomatic end of Russian aggression against Ukraine,” given Moscow’s continuing aggression.

....That increases the risk either that Ukraine will be lost to the West unless outside forces become involved given that it remains uncertain whether Kyiv’s military will be able to stand up to this expanded Russian invasion. In Illarionov’s view, “only the Anglo-Saxon world could oppose Putin,” but it is far from certain whether it will.
That world, which includes the United States, Great Britain and “the so-called ‘frontline states’” of Poland and the Baltic countries, is one with which Moscow has no intention of conducting serious talks about Ukraine. Instead, Illarionov says, Moscow believes its “ally can and must be continental Europe with Germany at the head.”

Let's hope the knave Illarionov is right, Putin is staying the course to the mentioned goal-- and that the Iraq-Syria theater helps him achieve it.

Posted by: truthbetold | Jun 24 2014 18:53 utc | 95

@95 I thought Angles and Saxons came from Germany.

Posted by: dh | Jun 24 2014 18:59 utc | 96

The people who think Sorrentine is being conspiratorial, are being conspiratorial. Sorrentine is a little obnoxious but gets things right most of the time, or at least this time.

Posted by: Massinissa | Jun 24 2014 19:04 utc | 97

Time to update on ukraine topic, some new stuff happend today.

Posted by: Anonymous | Jun 24 2014 19:07 utc | 98

ISIS was born in Iraq

ISIS does have Iraqi roots, being born out of the struggle against the U.S. occupation of Iraq. But ISIS was all but extinguished in Iraq when the U.S. paid other Sunni groups to fight it, driving ISIS into Syria.

In Syria ISIS was instantly transformed from a U.S. enemy to an unofficial ally, since both ISIS and the U.S. were targeting the Assad government for destruction.

During ISIS’ Syrian growth spurt, the Obama administration consciously minimized or completely overlooked the role of ISIS and the other al-Qaeda linked Syrian “rebels” — such as Jabhat al-Nusra and Ahrar al-Sham — who were getting the majority of the Gulf states cash and guns, ensuring that they would be the dominant rebel force in Syria.

Obama essentially used the Syrian extremist groups as leverage against Assad, allowing the U.S. and Gulf states to dump huge sums of money into the terrorist group’s coffers. It was hoped that if the rebels were strong enough, Assad’s inner circle would turn against him and install a more U.S. friendly government — regime change accomplished.

Posted by: Virgile | Jun 24 2014 19:18 utc | 99

"But ISIS was all but extinguished in Iraq when the U.S. paid other Sunni groups to fight it, driving ISIS into Syria"

Virgile that's nonsense from RINF
And the timeline doesn't even work

Posted by: Penny | Jun 24 2014 19:30 utc | 100

next page »

The comments to this entry are closed.