ISIS – IRAQ - KURDISTAN : NEWS THREAD

[Anthea]

Huffington Post

Islamic State Take On Charles Darwin Banning Evolution From Curriculum In Iraq

The extremist-held Iraqi city of Mosul is set to usher in a new school year. But unlike years past, there will be no art or music. Classes about history, literature and Christianity have been "permanently annulled."

The Islamic State group has declared patriotic songs blasphemous and ordered that certain pictures be torn out of textbooks.

But instead of compliance, Iraq's second largest city has — at least so far — responded to the Sunni militants' demands with silence.

Although the extremists stipulated that the school year would begin early in September, pupils have uniformly not shown up for class, according to residents who spoke anonymously because of safety concerns.

They said families were keeping their children home out of mixed feelings of fear, resistance and uncertainty.

"What's important to us now is that the children continue receiving knowledge correctly, even if they lose a whole academic year and an official certification," a Mosul resident who identified himself as Abu Hassan told The Associated Press, giving only his nickname for fear of reprisals.

He and his wife have opted for home schooling, picking up the required readings at the local market.

Part of the Islamic State group's core strategy is to establish administration over lands that it controls to project an image of itself as a ruler and not just a fighting force.

In parts of Syria under its control, the group now administers courts, fixes roads and even polices traffic.

It recently imposed a curriculum in schools in its Syrian stronghold, Raqqa, scrapping subjects such as philosophy and chemistry, and fine-tuning the sciences to fit with its ideology.

In Mosul, schools have been presented with a new set of rules, advertised in a two-page bulletin posted on mosques, in markets and on electricity poles.

The statement cheered "good news of the establishment of the Islamic State Education Diwan by the caliph who seeks to eliminate ignorance, to spread religious sciences and to fight the decayed curriculum."

The new Mosul curriculum stresses that any reference to the republics of Iraq or Syria must be replaced with "Islamic State."

Pictures that violate its ultra-conservative interpretation of Islam will be ripped out of books. Anthems and lyrics that encourage love of country are now viewed as a show of "polytheism and blasphemy," and are strictly banned.

The new curriculum even went so far as to explicitly ban Charles Darwin's theory of evolution — although it was not previously taught in Iraqi schools.

Abu Hassan and his fellow residents acknowledge the risks involved in keeping the children at home, but say that protecting their minds is equally important. "They will brainwash them and contaminate their thoughts," he said.

In a statement posted across Mosul, the "caliph," calls upon professionals in Iraq and abroad "to teach and serve the Muslims in order to improve the people of the Islamic state in the fields of all religious and other sciences."

Gender-segregated schools are not new to Iraq, which legally prohibits co-ed classes beyond age 12, with some segregating from a much younger age. However, in Mosul, the new guidelines declared that teachers must also be segregated, with men teaching at boys' schools, and women teaching girls.

The Education Ministry in Baghdad says it has virtually no contact with Mosul and other towns and cities in nearly one-third of the country ruled to some degree by the Islamic State group.

"The situation in Mosul is so difficult because it is far too dangerous for us to know exactly what is happening," said Salama al-Hassan, a spokeswoman for ministry.

Students also face hardships elsewhere across Iraq amid growing pressure to cater to more than 1.8 million people people displaced by the militants' advance.

The education statement put out by the militants in Mosul ends with a chilling reminder of its willingness to use brutal force. "This announcement is binding," it concludes. "Anyone who acts against it will face punishment."

Back on UK soil meanwhile, children under the age of ten are being "trained as jihadists", London's Deputy Mayor said as he issued a stark warning on the threat to the nation's capital.

Stephen Greenhalgh told the Evening Standard that both he and London Mayor Boris Johnson have been shown examples of primary school children having been subjected to propaganda and “extremist ideology” by their families in a bid to radicalise them as "junior jihadis."

Although Greenhalgh insisted to the paper that Londoners should not be “panicked” by recent reports of British terrorists returning to the UK from Syria and Iraq, he branded the indoctrination of children in the nation's capital as "horrendous."

"The threat of radicalisation of young people is real and this is a problem that is going to be with us not just for a couple of years, but for the next generation," he said.

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/09 ... _hp_ref=tw

[Anthea]

BBC News Middle East

Obama: No US combat mission against IS in Iraq

President Barack Obama has told an audience of US troops their comrades fighting Islamic State (IS) militants in Iraq will not have a combat mission.

Mr Obama said he would not commit "to fighting another ground war in Iraq".

His comments at a military base in Florida came a day after a top US general said he would recommend ground troops if the air strikes failed.

The US has already undertaken 174 air strikes against IS in Iraq since mid-August.

In the most recent air strikes on Tuesday and Wednesday, US forces destroyed two IS armed vehicles north-west of Erbil and several units south-west of Baghdad, according to US Central Command (Centcom).

Mr Obama's new strategy calls for similar attacks in Syria, and calls on a coalition of 40 countries to confront the militant group.

During testimony at a Senate hearing on Tuesday, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen Martin Dempsey confirmed that under the current plan, US military advisers would help the Iraqi army to plan attacks against IS, also known as Isil and Isis.

But Gen Dempsey also said he would recommend a ground troop operation to the president if the international coalition failed to destroy IS.

The jihadist group controls large areas of Syria and northern Iraq. It has 20,000-31,000 fighters in Iraq and Syria, according to CIA estimates.

Stepped up strikes

Mr Obama arrived overnight in Tampa, Florida, where Centcom - responsible for the Middle East and Central Asia - is based.

After briefings with top military officials, Mr Obama told an assembly of troops that "the American forces that have been deployed to Iraq do not and will not have a combat mission".

But the US would see that the group was eventually defeated, Mr Obama said - "If you threaten America, you will find no safe haven."

"We cannot do for the Iraqis what they must do for themselves," Mr Obama said.

"After a decade of massive ground deployments it is more effective to use our unique capabilities in support of our partners on the ground so they can secure their own countries' futures," Mr Obama said.

Mr Obama highlighted partner countries like France and the UK, which were already flying reconnaissance flights, and Saudi Arabia, which has agreed to host a US-led training programme for Syrian rebel groups fighting IS.

But the US president added there was "some things only we can do".

"Our armed forces are unparalleled and unique," Mr Obama said. "So when we've got a big problem somewhere around the world, it falls on our shoulders."

Meanwhile, Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi on Wednesday rejected as "out of the question" the possibility that foreign ground troops would be allowed to fight in his country.

"Not only is it not necessary," he told the Associated Press, "we don't want them. We won't allow them. Full stop."

The night before the Iraqi and US leaders' remarks, IS released what analysts described as a video response to the US moves.

The slickly produced, Hollywood-style trailer for a film entitled Flames of War refers to Mr Obama's insistence that US combat troops will not be returning to fight in Iraq.

In an apparent taunt, it depicts wounded US troops, masked executioners standing over kneeling captives, and declares at the conclusion: "Fighting has just begun."

Analysis: Jonathan Marcus, BBC defence correspondent

A commitment to avoid "boots on the ground" is seen as the acid test of President Obama's commitment to avoid drawing the US into another extended war in Iraq. But the US has already deployed some 1,600 military personnel to Iraq.

They are helping to protect US diplomatic facilities, operate drones, and train and mentor Iraqi forces. So far these mentoring teams are at the headquarters level. But many experts believe that this will eventually have to extend to units on the battlefield.

Senior US commanders already envisage a potential wider role for US forces. For now this is anathema to the White House which is still "selling" its new Iraq policy to its domestic audience.

But over time, a refusal to deploy major US combat units may make more sense than blanket statements about "no boots on the ground."

Link tp Article and Videos:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-29235083

[Anthea]

Thye Independent

Isis release 'Flames of War' video warning Obama of attacks troops could face in Iraq


The video comes after the President vowed to 'degrade and destroy' Isis

The Islamic State (Isis) group has released a video appearing to warn the US that fighters are waiting in Iraq if President Barack Obama chooses to send troops in there.

The 52-second film, entitled ‘Flames of War’ purports to be a trailer and shows tanks being hit, wounded US soldiers and men on their knees as they are about to be executed. It features blockbuster style slow-motion replays and explosions and appears to have been released by the Al Hayat Media Centre, which distributes Isis propaganda.

It then shows a clip of Mr Obama saying American combat troops will not be returning to Iraq, followed by a strapline that reads: "fighting has just begun".

The video, released on Tuesday, ends with the text “coming soon”. It appears to have been released hours after General Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said in testimony to the Senate Armed Services Committee that if current Iraq strategy is not sufficient he could recommend deploying US soldiers.

The film is one of a series released by Isis, including footage showing the beheadings of two American journalists and a British aid worker.

The group has also released propaganda videos aimed at persuading people from the West to join fighting in Iraq and Syria.

The US military has already stepped up its campaign against Isis militants with a series of air strikes across Iraq and Syria after President Obama vowed last week to “degrade and ultimately destroy” the group.

US Central Command said earlier today that military forces using fighter aircraft launched two air strikes north-west of Irbil and hit an armed truck and fighters.

Three other air strikes south-west of Baghdad hit anti-aircraft artillery, a truck and two boats on the Euphrates River that were resupplying the militants.

Previously, the strikes were limited to protecting US interests and personnel, assisting Iraqi refugees and securing critical infrastructure in Iraq. Under the new strategy, US forces are going after Isis militants wherever they are.

Mr Obama has so far ruled out troops on the ground, but Gen Dempsey suggested he could at some point recommend sending some to embed with the Iraqi and Kurdish forces in a “close combat advising” role.

"To be clear, if we reach the point where I believe our advisers should accompany Iraqi troops on attacks against specific Isis targets, I will recommend that to the president," Gen Dempsey told the Senate hearing.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world ... 37621.html

[Anthea]

Interesting discussion

phpBB [video]

[Anthea]

The Guardian

How to make Isis fall on its own sword

The Islamic State (Isis) is without question a very brutal extremist group with origins in the insurgency of the United States occupation of Iraq. It has rapidly ascended to global attention by taking control of swaths of territory in western and northern Iraq, including Mosul and other major cities.

Based on my experience as an all-source analyst in Iraq during the organization’s relative infancy, Isis cannot be defeated by bombs and bullets – even as the fight is taken to Syria, even if it is conducted by non-Western forces with air support.

I believe that Isis is fueled precisely by the operational and tactical successes of European and American military force that would be – and have been – used to defeat them. I believe that Isis strategically feeds off the mistakes and vulnerabilities of the very democratic western states they decry. The Islamic State’s center of gravity is, in many ways, the United States, the United Kingdom and those aligned with them in the region.

When it comes to regional insurgency with global implications, Isis leaders are canny strategists. It’s clear to me that they have a solid and complete understanding of the strengths and, more importantly, the weaknesses of the west. They know how we tick in America and Europe – and they know what pushes us toward intervention and overreach. This understanding is particularly clear considering the Islamic State’s astonishing success in recruiting numbers of Americans, Britons, Belgians, Danes and other Europeans in their call to arms.

Attacking Isis directly, by air strikes or special operations forces, is a very tempting option available to policymakers, with immediate (but not always good) results. Unfortunately, when the west fights fire with fire, we feed into a cycle of outrage, recruitment, organizing and even more fighting that goes back decades. This is exactly what happened in Iraq during the height of a civil war in 2006 and 2007, and it can only be expected to occur again.

And avoiding direct action with Isis can be successful. For instance, in 2009 and 2010, forerunners to the Isis group attacked civilians in suicide and car bombings in downtown Baghdad to try and provoke American intervention and sectarian unrest. But they were often not effective in their recruiting efforts when American and Iraqi forces refused (or were unable) to respond, because the barbarity and brutality of their attacks worked against them. When we did respond, however, the attacks were sold to the Sunni minority in Iraq as a justified response to an occupying government favoring the Shia government led by former prime minister Nouri al-Maliki.

Based on my intelligence work in Iraq during that period, I believe that only a very focused and consistent strategy of containment can be effective in reducing the growth and effectiveness of Isis as a threat. And so far, Western states seem to have adopted that strategy. With very public humanitarian disasters, however, like the ones on Mount Sinjar and Irbil in northern Iraq, and the beheadings of journalists James Foley and Steven Sotloff, this discipline gets tested and can begin to fray.

As a strategy to disrupt the growth of Isis, I suggest focusing on four arenas:

Counter the narrative in online Isis recruitment videos – including professionally made videos and amateur battle selfies – to avoid, as best as possible, the deliberate propaganda targeting of desperate and disaffected youth. This would rapidly prevent the recruitment of regional and western members.

Set clear, temporary borders in the region, publicly. This would discourage Isis from taking certain territory where humanitarian crises might be created, or humanitarian efforts impeded.

Establish an international moratorium on the payment of ransom for hostages, and work in the region to prevent Isis from stealing and taxing historical artifacts and valuable treasures as sources of income, and especially from taking over the oil reserves and refineries in Bayji, Iraq. This would disrupt and prevent Isis from maintaining stable and reliable sources of income.

Let Isis succeed in setting up a failed “state” – in a contained area and over a long enough period of time to prove itself unpopular and unable to govern. This might begin to discredit the leadership and ideology of Isis for good.

Eventually, if they are properly contained, I believe that Isis will not be able to sustain itself on rapid growth alone, and will begin to fracture internally. The organization will begin to disintegrate into several smaller, uncoordinated entities – ultimately failing in their objective of creating a strong state.

But the world just needs to be disciplined enough to let the Isis fire die out on its own, intervening carefully and avoiding the cyclic trap of “mission creep”. This is certainly a lot to ask for. But Isis is wielding a sharp, heavy and very deadly double-edged sword. Now just wait for them to fall on it.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... s-strategy

[Anthea]

CNN

Will UK stand for yet another war in Iraq?
By Tim Lister,

The atrocious murder of David Haines puts the United Kingdom and in particular Prime Minister David Cameron front and center in the evolving battle against ISIS. It's not as though he is short of work, with a referendum in Scotland this week and a problematic relationship with the European Union among current elections next year dominating a crowded schedule.

But the PM must now mobilize the British public for another campaign in Iraq, mindful that the last one was widely opposed.

Revulsion at the beheading of three hostages will likely provide a bedrock of support. There are a wide variety of options including: surveillance and support operations, limited airstrikes against ISIS positions in Iraq, extending those airstrikes to ISIS targets in Syria or even inserting Special Forces in support of the Syrian resistance, Iraqi Kurds or the Iraqi military.

Cameron has been forthright about his government's determination to take down ISIS, saying at the weekend: "Step by step we will drive back, dismantle and ultimately destroy ISIL [also used as an acronym for the group] and what it stands for. We will do so in a calm, deliberate way but with an iron determination."

He added: "We will do everything in our power to hunt down these murderers and ensure they face justice, however long it takes."

"Ultimately" and "However long it takes" imply an indefinite campaign.

Implying the UK would join in air strikes, British Defense Minister Michael Fallon has told Royal Air Force personnel involved in surveillance flights: "There may well now be in the next few weeks and months other ways that we may need to help save life and protect people."

And that's just one element of this strategy. Cameron has been expansive about prodding the Iraqi government toward being more inclusive, saying it "badly needs to get itself together so it can represent all of the country." He is in favor of arming the Kurds, which in itself may be at odds with the aim of a unified Iraq, about mobilizing Arab states as part of a broad coalition to squeeze ISIS and about revitalizing moderate rebel groups in Syria.

The means and the goals of this multi-faceted campaign are yet to be fleshed out. In the words of his spokesman last week, "In terms of specific decisions about participation in further action, we are not at the stage of taking those decisions."

For example, Cameron has been cautious about whether air strikes might be extended to Syria. Cameron maintains that "President [Bashar al-]Assad has committed war crimes on his own people and is therefore illegitimate." But other parties in Britain are wary of air strikes in Syria, regarding them as dubious in international law. And many commentators believe some sort of understanding or accommodation with the Assad regime is an essential condition of effective action against ISIS strongholds in Raqqa and Idlib provinces.

Even Britain's Foreign Secretary, Philip Hammond, was out of step with Downing Street last week. "Let me be clear, Britain will not be taking part in air strikes in Syria," he told a news conference in Berlin. Hours later the PM's office said nothing had been ruled out.

One Conservative MP, John Baron, who is a member of the House of Commons Foreign Affairs committee, cautioned: "Air strikes into Syria are fraught with risks. The legal, technical and military differences between strikes in Iraq and Syria are marked. The UK should be advising caution."

But on Sunday came the first hint that the U.S. would be looking to allies for the Syrian part of the campaign. Secretary of State John Kerry told CBS Face The Nation: "We are going to do what they [the Syrians] haven't done, what they had plenty of opportunity to do, which is to take on ISIL and to degrade it and eliminate it as a threat."

"We will do that with allies," he added.

But Britain's military is already stretched. Units are still deployed in Afghanistan and the armed forces are hurting from a squeeze on defense spending. The Royal United Services Institute, a think-tank on military issues, concluded in a report this month that "on current spending plans and growth projections....UK defense spending is set to fall below the NATO 2 per cent target for the first time next financial year, to an estimated 1.88 per cent of GDP in 2015/16."

British planes would probably have to operate from Cyprus, flying a long circuitous route over Turkey to targets in northern Iraq. NATO flew 14,000 sorties in Libya to degrade the Gadhafi regime. Destroying ISIS may not be such a protracted effort, but it would be more than a commitment of a few weeks. And over Syria, planes would face the risk of encountering the Syrian air force and air defenses. A British pilot falling into the hands of ISIS or the Syrian regime is the stuff of nightmares.

There is the additional dilemma that any military action may hasten more beheadings of hostages, with another British citizen possibly the next victim.

And the coalition being mobilized is -- at best -- disparate, including 10 members of NATO and Middle Eastern states, including Jordan and Saudi Arabia. The division of labor among these states is yet to be worked out, though American officials are suggesting Arab states may provide air power and Kerry pronounced himself "extremely encouraged" by the response from governments on his latest tour of the region.

Some British politicians are more skeptical. The veteran Liberal Democrat MP, Menzies Campbell, warned last month that "a unified approach will be essential with no room for dissent or compromise between countries. The jihadists of IS [the Islamic State, as it calls itself] will most certainly test political resolve as well as security challenges."

Public support

Even before the murder of David Haines, opinion in Britain was moving toward air strikes. A ComRes poll for the Independent newspaper at the end of August found that 35% backing, with 50% opposed. A week later that support had nearly doubled, according to a poll by Opinium Research for the Daily Telegraph. And 27% said they would support Special Forces on the ground.

Cameron enjoys broad support for the domestic part of his anti-ISIS platform, which may include legislation to prevent suspected British extremists from traveling to Iraq and Syria and stopping those already there from coming home. Polls suggest public support higher than 80% for such moves. But identifying and tracking such people is a tall order -- and British military action could incite some of the several hundred British citizens thought to be fighting in Syria and Iraq to bring terror home.

A successful campaign over several months that squeezed ISIS into insignificance could bring political rewards at home. Cameron may be able to claim his decisive leadership was instrumental in facing down the world's most dangerous terror group, incidentally deflecting attention from thorny issues like immigration and Europe, where his Conservative Party is under pressure from the insurgent UK Independence Party.

But with a general election due by May next year, taking on ISIS is fraught with peril for the British PM.

http://edition.cnn.com/2014/09/16/world ... ct-lister/

[Anthea]

The Independent

Islamic State: YouTube video of British hostage John Cantlie released by Isis



A British newspaper photographer has became the latest kidnap victim to appear in an Islamic State (Isis) propaganda video which he admits is a desperate attempt to save his life.

John Cantlie, who has been held by Isis for almost two years since he disappeared while covering the conflict in Syria in 2012, is the third Briton confirmed to be held by Isis.

But the latest video is stark contrast to previous Isis films showing Western hostages being beheaded.

The film was taken indoors with the hostage sitting behind a desk against a black background but wearing the distinctive orange top seen in other videos. No explicit threats are made to his life and no one else is present in the video.

In the 3m 20s clip entitled "Lend Me Your Ears", Mr Cantlie introduces himself and explains his predicament, before saying that the public should act to “change this seemingly inevitable sequence of events”.

In comments that are likely to have been made under duress, he calls for the American and British governments to change their policies on hostage-taking and not to intervene in Iraq or Syria.

“It’s true I am a prisoner,” he says. “That I cannot deny. But seeing as I have been abandoned by my Government and my fate now lies in the hands of the Islamic State I have nothing to lose.

“Maybe I will live and maybe I will die. But I want to take this opportunity to convey some facts that you can verify. Facts that if you contemplate might help preserving lives.”

He then reveals that he has filmed several “programmes” which he says will “show the truth as the Western media tries to drag the public back to the abyss of another war with the Islamic State”.

“I’ll show you the truth behind what happened when many European citizens were imprisoned and later released by the Islamic State and how the British and American Governments thought they could do it differently to every other European country.”

“They negotiated with the Islamic State and got their people home while the British and Americans were left behind.”

He makes no mention in the footage to the murders of three of his fellow hostages in recent weeks – US journalists James Foley and Steven Sotloff and British aid worker David Haines.

Following the release of the video, former Security minister Pauline Neville-Jones said Isis militants appeared to be changing their social media tactics. "It sounds a bit like a variation in the tactics,” she said. “They may indeed be aware of the extraordinarily adverse publicity which they deserve to get over their extremely brutal murders.

“I think they may be seeking to drum up support among those to which they wish to appeal by rehearsing the history of injustice which the West inflicts on people like themselves. And they’re using this journalist, if it is a journalist, as a vehicle for that kind of messaging. It sounds an entirely cynical exploit on their part obviously aimed at a certain audience.”

The Labour MP Shabana Mahmood said the release of the latest video showing another British hostage was a "shocking development".

"My heart goes out to the hostage and his family. It’s just another shocking development and Isil [another name for Isis] are showing I think very clearly to the world that these are not men and women who have love for God in their hearts. They are fanatics and they are monsters, and I think it’s really important that we all come together to say that we reject who and what they are.”

The video's release comes on the day that a group of more than 100 leading British Muslims joined together to denounce the capture by Isis of another British national, Alan Henning.

In their statement to The Independent, the community said that to harm Mr Henning would be “the worst condemnable sin” against Islam, and they plead with Isis to see the error of their ways and set him free.

In Islam, concern for fellow humans and the duty to help everyone is a religious obligation,” they write. “Anyone undertaking a humanitarian act is paving his or her way to receive help from heaven.

On Saturday, Isis released footage which showed the murder of Mr Haines, and threatened to kill Mr Henning next.

David Cameron called the killing “pure evil” and “a despicable and appalling murder”, and has since paved the way for Britain to join the US in direct air strikes against Isis in Syria.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/ho ... 41605.html

[Anthea]

BBC News Middle East

Who will fight Islamic State?
By Jeremy Bowen

There are some big holes in President Barack Obama's plans to fight Islamic State (IS).

The biggest is among the most crucial: If American troops are not going to take the fight to IS on the ground, who will?

The problem is less acute in Iraq. The Kurdish peshmerga are keen to fight, and should be effective as long as they get the training and heavy weapons they need.

And Shia militias there are also fighting IS and are backed by Iran, trained by Iranians or Lebanese fighters from Hezbollah, and have a bloodthirsty reputation - although any excesses could have the effect of making Arab Sunnis in Iraq turn to IS, or other militias, for protection.

But muddled thinking and analysis flaw the US approach to Syria. It rests on the hope that there will be "moderate" opposition fighters who can be armed and trained to attack IS under a protective blanket of US air power.

For more than three years, Western governments have attempted to create a moderate Syrian opposition that it can support with words and perhaps even with weapons. Very little has been achieved that has had an effect within Syria itself.

Now an idea that had seemed to have been abandoned, of building up a moderate force, has been dusted off. The Pentagon has its doubts about the plans announced by President Obama, judging by the remarks in congressional testimony the other day by America's most senior military office, General Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Not long after the president said emphatically that there would be no combat mission for US ground troops, General Dempsey that there might have to be one. He wanted to keep his options open, in case of complicated military operations, or more seriously if the mission was failing.

Alliances with jihadists

America's problem is that the politics of the war in Syria are tangled. Finding allies it can trust will be difficult.

Most Syrian armed opposition groups fear and hate IS. Some have been fighting them this year. But their wars against IS have helped to blur some of the distinctions between the groups. Something similar has happened because of the need to pool resources to take on the Syrian regime.

I spent a day with a Syrian army unit about 20 minutes drive south of Damascus. On the other side of the front line, about 300m (984ft) away, was a joint force of armed rebels. It included al-Nusra, Syria's al-Qaeda affiliate; the Islamic Front; and the supposed moderates of the Free Syria Army (FSA).

I have met many FSA fighters and they do have moderate views, certainly in comparison with jihadist groups. But the fighters are often religious and see no problem with building up alliances with the jihadists against a common enemy. Fighters also move from one group to another.

The trouble with that from America's perspective is that it does not want its weapons, or men it has trained, finding their way into al-Qaeda and its like. But among the Syrian rebels, alliances are fluid and change according to the state of the war.

Making a force of the kind the Americans want - so tight and so strong that its weapons never get to jihadists - might be impossible. It will be just as hard to train it to beat IS.

Then there is the effect of US bombing, when and if it happens in Syria. It has been bad enough for Syrians who have been in places that have been hit by the Syrian air force. Its barrel bombs are even more terrifying than conventional air strikes.

Now they face the prospect of American raids too. In all the places the Americans have bombed, innocent people get killed as well as the fighters or leaders who have been targeted. That tends to increase support for the groups that are being attacked.



In purely military terms, IS is far from invincible. But it carries a message that has a real resonance among some people, mainly young men of fighting age, who are alienated and excluded from the societies in which they grew up.

Its threat, to Sunni Arab royal families more than Western democracies, lies in that message rather than military power.

The air forces of Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, bought at vast expense from the British and the Americans, are capable of knocking out every tank Islamic State can capture or buy. But it is highly unlikely that they would do that, and not just because the Americans are there to do it for them.

They fear the effect that killing Sunnis, not just jihadists, might have on some of their own young men, some of whom have already joined IS. It is a fair bet that they are already gripped by the power of the videos IS puts on the web. They horrify many but amplify the message of jihad, exciting and motivating those who need brutal answers to their problems.

IS is not trying to get mass appeal. It wants disciplined, dedicated cadres who seek death. It does not need many people to cause trouble outside the borders of the parts of Syria and Iraq it has declared its caliphate.

That is why IS is being treated with great caution by America's Arab allies - and why this could be the beginning of another long, hard, bloody episode in the Middle East.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-29260015

[Piling]

First French strikes in Iraq against ISIS, this morning. Rafale planes destroy a 'logistic depot' (probably stockage place of weapons and tanks). Said it was successful.

Others operations will follow the next days.

[Anthea]

CNN

Bill Clinton: U.S. has proven it can't win an Iraq land war
By Gabe LaMonica

Former President Bill Clinton voiced support for the U.S. strategy to defeat ISIS and said only the Iraqi people can win a land war in Iraq.

Speaking Thursday night on "The Daily Show with Jon Stewart," Clinton said the United States has proven it can't win an Iraq war with boots on the ground, but that moderate Sunni tribal leaders working with an inclusive Iraqi government can.

"We can't win a land war in Iraq, but they can and we can help them," Clinton said.

Clinton said he thinks President Barack Obama's strategy to combat ISIS, or the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, "has a chance to succeed."

"The Iraqi government finally includes Sunnis who were representing those tribal leaders who are moderate and without whom ISIS cannot be defeated," he said.

"We can give them intelligence, and we can do bombing, and we have to do that to send a signal to them. That there's a price for decapitating those people," he said, referring to the recent beheadings of American journalists James Foley and Steven Sotloff and of British aid work David Haines.

"You can't let people get away with that, that's a terrible signal to the world," he said.

Clinton also believes that the Ebola outbreak in West Africa can be stopped, but that "it will take a Herculean effort."

"A lot of these people can survive if they get proper care quickly, and we can stop the epidemic and let it burn itself out," Clinton said.

Obama, 2012 GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney, former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and officials from the World Health Organization, the United Nations and Doctors without Borders will gather with the former president at a meeting of his Clinton Global Initiative, which starts Sunday. The Ebola outbreak "probably represents the confluence of all the various things that you can do at Clinton Global Initiative," said Stewart.

"This is an emergency because nobody knows how to cure this," said Clinton.

The World Health Organization said Thursday that the death toll in the Ebola epidemic has risen to 2,622 dead. The number of reported infections is 5,335, though the actual number is "almost certainly" higher, Clinton noted.

Clinton said that this Ebola epidemic is different than previous outbreaks in remote rural areas mainly because of the density of people in the urban areas in which it is striking.

"There are a lot of people there and there are just too many bodies brushing up against one another every day," he said.

http://edition.cnn.com/2014/09/19/polit ... aily-show/

[Anthea]

PUK Media

28 civilians killed and wounded in Kirkuk

A car bomb exploded on Friday, September 19th, in the market for the sale of arms near the market Alhasiri, the explosion resulted in killing and wounding several civilians and destroys many places.

A security source of Kirkuk police told PUKmedia that a car bomb exploded on Friday in the market for the sale of arms, resulted in killing 8 civilians and wounding 20 others.

GRAPHIC CONTENT

phpBB [video]

http://www.pukmedia.com/EN/EN_Direje.aspx?Jimare=21741

[Anthea]

PUK Media

A car bomb exploded in Baghdad

A car bomb exploded on Friday, September 19th, in Al- Karada downtown of Baghdad, the explosion resulted in killing and wounding several civilians.

A security source in a statement told PUKmedia that a car bomb exploded near many popular restaurants in Al- Karda, resulted in killing and wounding 17 civilians.

phpBB [video]

http://www.pukmedia.com/EN/EN_Direje.aspx?Jimare=21738

[Anthea]

Washington Post

Army chief of staff says U.S. may need more troops in Iraq
By Craig Whitlock

Gen. Ray Odierno, the Army chief of staff, said Friday it might be necessary to deploy more U.S. forces to Iraq beyond the 1,600 troops already there, warning that the fight against the Islamic State will intensify and could go on for years.

Odierno, who served as the top U.S. military commander during the last war in Iraq, also said he would not rule out the need to send small numbers of U.S. ground troops into combat as tactical airstrike spotters or as front-line advisers embedded with Iraq forces.

In a breakfast interview with the Defense Writers Group, Odierno said that “1,600 is a good start” and that “I don’t think there’s a rush, a rush to have lots of people in there now.” But he predicated that as operations accelerate against jihadist fighters from the Islamic State, military commanders will revisit U.S. troop levels. “Based on that assessment, we’ll make further decisions,” he said.

President Obama has authorized the deployment of the 1,600 U.S. troops in several stages since June, most recently on Sept. 10, when he sent an additional 475 personnel to Iraq. Most serve as advisers to Iraqi and Kurdish forces or as security for the U.S. Embassy and the international airport in Baghdad.

While Obama has repeatedly insisted he will not send U.S. ground forces into combat in Iraq, he has not indicated whether he thinks more troops will be necessary in the coming months to carry out his strategy against the Islamic State.

Any recommendations from military commanders to send more troops to Iraq would have to receive the endorsement of Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel before going to the White House for final approval.

Asked if Hagel was open to the idea of deploying more troops, his spokesman, Rear Adm. John Kirby, said in an e-mail: “The Secretary is — and will remain — open to hearing the advice and counsel of senior military leaders. He expects that advice to be candid, forthright and forward-looking.”

Thousands of U.S. troops are stationed at bases in nearby Persian Gulf countries, from which they are carrying out a campaign of airstrikes and surveillance missions targeting the Islamic State, a group that has seized large parts of territory in Iraq and Syria.

On Friday, France joined the United States in the air war, conducting its first airstrike against Islamic State targets in Iraq. Rafale fighter jets destroyed an Islamic State supply depot near Mosul, according to President Francois Hollande. He said more French operations would follow in “coming days.”

Obama has sought to rally a broad international alliance to counter the extremist group. There have been pledges of support, yet to be detailed, but France is the first to accompany the United States in conducting airstrikes.

France has several Rafale fighters and other warplanes stationed at al-Dhafra Air Base in the United Arab Emirates. The U.S. military also maintains a force at al-Dhafra, a key staging area for its air operations over Iraq.

In his interview, Odierno said the fight against the Islamic State will become more difficult as Iraqi and Kurdish forces, with the help of U.S. air power and advisers, go on the offensive and try to retake territory.

“This is going to go on,” he said. “This is not a short term — I think the president said three years. I agree with that — three years, maybe longer. And so what we want to do is do this right. Assess it properly, see how it’s going, adjust as we go along, to make sure we can sustain this.”

Odierno said he supported the Obama administration’s current strategy to train and equip Iraqi, Kurdish and Syrian proxy forces to attack Islamic State insurgents, while keeping U.S. troops out of any firefights on the ground.

But he said targeting Islamic State fighters and leaders with U.S. airstrikes will become more complicated as they retreat from open spaces they once controlled and into major cities and other populated areas.

“The worst thing that can happen for us is if we start killing innocent Iraqis, innocent civilians,” he said. “So we have to be very careful and precise on how we’re doing this. We’ll have to determine that, as we go forward, if we can sustain the level of preciseness that is necessary to limit civilian casualties.”

Asked if it might become necessary to embed U.S. tactical air controllers or Special Operations Forces with Iraqi troops on the front lines, Odierno replied: “I don’t rule anything out. I don’t ever rule anything out, personally.”

Other U.S. commanders have also indicated that they would like Obama to give them more leeway and relent on his stated opposition to U.S. troops becoming involved in ground combat.

On Tuesday, Army Gen. Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, testified before Congress that, if necessary, he might recommend to Obama in the future that he permit small teams to embed with Iraq forces.

Dempsey also acknowledged that Army Gen. Lloyd Austin, the commander for the Middle East, had already recommended doing so in the case of at least one battle in Iraq but was overruled.

There are signs that the White House is becoming more flexible. Obama aides said this week that the president might consider cases in which U.S. advisers could embed with Iraqi forces or call in airstrikes, although they shied away from describing such roles as combat missions.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/nat ... story.html

[Anthea]

BBC News

Turkish hostages held by IS in Iraq released

phpBB [video]

Dozens of hostages seized by Islamic State (IS) from the Turkish consulate in the northern Iraqi city of Mosul have been freed and are back in Turkey.

PM Ahmet Davutoglu said the 49 had been taken to the southern city of Sanliurfa by the Turkish intelligence agency.

Details are unclear but President Recep Tayyip Erdogan said it had been a "detailed and secret operation".

The hostages were seized after IS militants overran Mosul in a rapid advance in June.

Turkey has refused direct involvement in the military campaign against IS partly because of fears over the hostages' safety.

The 49 hostages were employees from the consulate - 46 Turks and three local Iraqis - and included Consul General Ozturk Yilmaz, other diplomats, children and special forces police, officials said.

Mr Davutoglu said they were all in good health and that they were released early on Saturday.

"I am sharing joyful news which as a nation we have been waiting for,'' he said.

"In the early hours our citizens were handed over to us and we brought them back to our country."

Mr Davutoglu flew to Sanliurfa and was bringing the hostages back to Ankara on his plane.

He did not give details on the circumstances of their release but broadcaster NTV reported that Turkey had not paid a ransom. It did not say how it obtained the information.

More than 30 Turkish lorry drivers, who were also seized in Mosul in June, were freed a month later but details of their release were not made public.

IS has seized large areas of Iraq and Syria. Estimates say the group could have up to 30,000 fighters.

The US has carried out more than 170 air strikes in Iraq since August. French jets carried out their first strikes on Friday.

Also on Friday, Turkey opened a stretch of its south-eastern border to thousands of Syrian Kurds fleeing an IS advance.

Turkish troops had earlier blocked them from crossing, triggering angry protests from Turkish Kurds.

Turkey has been under pressure from Western countries to tighten up its borders with Syria and Iraq and to stem the flow of foreign fighters joining the militants.

More than 847,000 Syrian refugees have crossed into Turkey since the uprising against Syrian President Bashar al-Assad began in 2011.

Iran 'has role'

More than 30 nations have joined a US-led coalition to take on IS militants, but Turkey - a Nato member - has said it will only allow humanitarian and logistical operations from a Nato air base on its soil.

Syria and Iran have been excluded from the coalition. However, the US has said Iran still has a role to play.

On Thursday, the US Senate approved Mr Obama's plan to arm and train moderate Syrian rebels to fight IS.

US air strikes are now expected in Syria after the Senate approved President Barack Obama's plan to arm and train moderate Syrian rebels.

However, he has ruled out a ground operation in Iraq or Syria.

Analysis: Mark Lowen, BBC News, Istanbul

When Turkey said it would not sign up to the military coalition against Islamic State, it was galling for the US. Turkey has the second largest army in Nato and hosts a huge US airbase. The reason was clear: with 49 hostages held by IS in Iraq, there was the fear of retribution if Turkey played too active a role.

Now that the group has been released, will it change Ankara's stance? Unlikely. Turkey was reluctant to get too involved in the fight against IS. It shares long, vulnerable borders with Iraq and Syria, there is some recruitment of militants on its territory and it has large commercial interests in the region, which it fears could be targeted.

Critics say Turkey's decision is because it has supported the militants against Syria's President Assad, something Ankara denies. There is a precedent. In 2003, Turkey also refused the use of its base for the Iraq invasion. This vital western ally is wary of the fights it picks.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-29291946

[Piling]

French Rafales striking ISIS (just predated for the fun)

Here, an interesting story about a former Kurdish member of ISIS, telling how he was recruited :

http://www.yourmiddleeast.com/culture/e ... mber_26696

Foreign fighters of ISIS are scums even for Jihadists lol :

I saw many foreign recruits who were put in the suicide squads not because they were "great and God wanted it" as IS commanders praised them in front of us, but basically because they were useless for IS, they spoke no Arabic, they weren’t good fighters and had no professional skills. They were brainwashed into the “women in heaven” and those they could rape on earth before they eventually killed themselves. I am alive partly thanks to my qualifications.