since al-Qaeda has disavowed the terrorist group ISIS

#1 Posted by whipassmt (14423 posts) -

The terrorist group known as ISIS or ISIL: (ISIS being short for The Islamic State in Iraq and Syria - and also the Islamic State in Iraq and al-Sham, ISIL being short for The Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant) has been in the news recently. They have taken multiple Iraqi cities in the past year or so - including Tikrit and Mosul- , capturing weapons (including possibly Humvees and Stinger missiles), executing Iraqi soldiers, and implementing strict Sharia law (as well as gun control), forcing non-Muslims to pay a special tax and Shiite Muslims to worship in the Sunni manner, and seizing about $450 million in bank heists. The big threat now is that they might even take Baghdad (I actually think that if the Iraqis fight, they can successfully defend Baghdad and inflict large casualties on ISIS, but according to Lt. Col. Ralph Peters ISIS may have as many as 15,000 to 20,000 troops).

Some reports on ISIS have describe the organization as having been "disowned" or "disavowed" by al Qaeda. The cause for the al Qaeda's repudiation of the group is that ISIS was fighting with the group Jabhat al Nusra which is al Qaeda's ally/affiliate in Syria. It is also said that ISIS is too "brutal" for al Qaeda.

According to Wikipedia, ISIS started out as the group Tawhid wal Jihad which in 2004 became an al Qaeda affiliate commonly referred to as Al Qaeda in Iraq (AQI). AQI joined some other Jihadi groups to form the Mujahideen Shura Council which then joined some other groups to form the Islamic State in Iraq (ISI). Recently ISI changed its name to the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant because it had capitalized on the civil war in Syria and expanded to that country.

So since ISIS has now been repudiated by al Qaeda do you think al Qaeda will join in the fight against ISIS? How should the U.S. react?

I don't think the U.S. should let al Qaeda play a major role in the fight against ISIS, lest we risk al Qaeda being able to take credit once ISIS is defeated. The U.S. should play the big role, so that we can claim the gratitude of those who would be saved from ISIS and that our enemies cannot do so and portray themselves as heroes.

#2 Posted by Open-Casket (72 posts) -

Should just throw their weapons down, and play kickball.

#3 Posted by BranKetra (49619 posts) -

Debating on who should take responsibility for neutralizing ISIS forces for glory is the wrong approach.

#4 Posted by vfibsux (4252 posts) -

@whipassmt said:

The terrorist group known as ISIS or ISIL: (ISIS being short for The Islamic State in Iraq and Syria - and also the Islamic State in Iraq and al-Sham, ISIL being short for The Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant) has been in the news recently. They have taken multiple Iraqi cities in the past year or so - including Tikrit and Mosul- , capturing weapons (including possibly Humvees and Stinger missiles), executing Iraqi soldiers, and implementing strict Sharia law (as well as gun control), forcing non-Muslims to pay a special tax and Shiite Muslims to worship in the Sunni manner, and seizing about $450 million in bank heists. The big threat now is that they might even take Baghdad (I actually think that if the Iraqis fight, they can successfully defend Baghdad and inflict large casualties on ISIS, but according to Lt. Col. Ralph Peters ISIS may have as many as 15,000 to 20,000 troops).

Some reports on ISIS have describe the organization as having been "disowned" or "disavowed" by al Qaeda. The cause for the al Qaeda's repudiation of the group is that ISIS was fighting with the group Jabhat al Nusra which is al Qaeda's ally/affiliate in Syria. It is also said that ISIS is too "brutal" for al Qaeda.

According to Wikipedia, ISIS started out as the group Tawhid wal Jihad which in 2004 became an al Qaeda affiliate commonly referred to as Al Qaeda in Iraq (AQI). AQI joined some other Jihadi groups to form the Mujahideen Shura Council which then joined some other groups to form the Islamic State in Iraq (ISI). Recently ISI changed its name to the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant because it had capitalized on the civil war in Syria and expanded to that country.

So since ISIS has now been repudiated by al Qaeda do you think al Qaeda will join in the fight against ISIS? How should the U.S. react?

I don't think the U.S. should let al Qaeda play a major role in the fight against ISIS, lest we risk al Qaeda being able to take credit once ISIS is defeated. The U.S. should play the big role, so that we can claim the gratitude of those who would be saved from ISIS and that our enemies cannot do so and portray themselves as heroes.

We need to stay out of it, this is a Shiite/Sunni war of religion. We have no business in it.

Saudi Arabia is funding ISIL yet is our "friend".

ISIL fights Syria/Assad who is our enemy.

Iran, our enemy, fights ISIL.

Iraq is friends with Iran, our enemy.

Since we are taking sides it appears ISIL is actually our most logical ally in this. That is how messed up it is and why we should stay out of it.

#5 Posted by playmynutz (6349 posts) -

It's about to get ugly :-(

#6 Posted by LostProphetFLCL (17719 posts) -

I am still trying to figure out how Sterling and crew fucked up so bad this time...

Loading Video...

#7 Posted by foxhound_fox (90625 posts) -

Fundamentalist religion is such a great thing!

#8 Posted by Byshop (12621 posts) -

@LostProphetFLCL: Beat me to it.

-Byshop