The Rise of ISIS Explained:

[Aim64C]

You must be registered for see links

This is an older article that I was only recently made aware of, but it resonates strongly with my own observations and analysis. To quote some notable sections:

Lopez spent two decades in the field as a CIA operations officer; was an instructor for military intelligence and special forces students; has been a consultant, intelligence analyst and researcher within the defense sector; and has published two books on Iran. She currently manages the counterjihad and Shariah programs at the Center for Security Policy, run by Frank Gaffney, former assistant secretary of defense for international security policy during the Reagan administration.

WND asked Lopez if it really would have been possible to form a credible, non-Islamist, fighting force.

“No, I don’t think it was possible to find a truly credible, capable, pro-Western force in Syria,” she said. “Yes, there were those who were not jihadi. Early in the conflict in Syria, in 2011, there were (acceptable) groups. There were military defectors from Assad’s regime who could have been classified as genuinely secular. Pro-Western? Not so sure. Genuinely pro-democracy? Not so sure.”

“The CIA has proved it is completely incapable of operating in this environment,” she said. “But I’m not on the inside, and can’t be sure what they are telling him. What we do know is what we see.”

As an example, she described how U.S. special forces were sent to Jordan to train people who turned out to be jihadis, even though it was reported they “vetted everybody.”

“They vetted them and asked, ‘Did you ever belong to al-Qaida?’ and they said ‘Oh, no – not me!’ But did they ever ask them what their ideology was? They’re not allowed to. We’re not allowed to define our enemy so how can we even identify our enemy? So, we fall into things like this where we actually train future ISIS jihadis, according to the Jordanian security officials.”

Lopez lauded the reporting of WND’s Aaron Klein in exposing the U.S training of what would become ISIS troops, saying, “Aaron is super. I did a radio interview with him in Tel Aviv. He is a very good reporter, very careful.”

“We pull all our forces out, which has been done, and we let them take over,” Lopez explained. “I think that’s already underway. This book’s argument says Iran should be enabled to do exactly what it is doing, which is take over the entire Persian Gulf region.”

She then quoted from the book: “We cannot and should not stand in the way of Iran’s quest to dominate Islam.” That includes throwing Israel under the bus, she added.

WND asked why the Obama administration would do something, were it known, that would be widely perceived as opposed to the best interest of the U.S.

“Its not in the United States’ best interests, but it is one way of getting us out of Muslim lands, which is what this administration wants done. They are trying to be even-handed between the Shiites and the Sunni, especially with the Muslim Brotherhood clamoring in their ear,” she said. “So, what happens? Arab Spring. North Africa goes to the Sunnis: al-Qaida and the Muslim Brotherhood. They should be happy with that: They get Tunisia, Libya and Egypt. The Persian Gulf region goes to Iran.”

Just in case it wasn’t already clear enough, she spelled out exactly what Obama’s plan would mean: A return to the barbaric past of the Dark Ages.

“So, the plan of this administration is to pull out of the Middle East, allow it to revert to Islamic control, as in the caliphates of old, or imamates, in the case of the Shiites. And to allow Islam to resurge, which is exactly what’s happening.”

WND asked, Obama’s plan is to take us back 1,300 years?

“Well, not us, but to let the Middle East do that,” she clarified.

“There have been monkey wrenches,” she said. “Syria was supposed to be (reserved) for Iran and under the control of (Syrian President Bashar al-) Assad. He winds up with a rump state. Syria is another Humpty-Dumpty. Also, the Kurds are a fly in the ointment. They are Muslims, but not jihadis. They should be our natural allies in the Middle East. Recent events have forced the hand of the administration to assist the Kurds, especially as they are assisting such minorities as Yezidis and Christians to escape this savage slaughter.”

Lopez said Obama only threatened Assad, “because of the infiltration of his government by the Muslim Brotherhood, who are clamoring in his ear at the National Security Council, ‘Do something, do something.’”

“They wanted help for their Muslim Brotherhood brothers. But the Middle East and Syria is designated for Iran, so what’s Obama gonna do? He decided on half and half. Give the Muslim Brotherhood Sunnis a little bit of aid, but not enough to overturn Assad. Make the Brotherhood happy. But don’t overturn Assad. And, at the same time, back and support Iran to be the hegemon.”

Lopez said, in addition to infiltrating the administration, the Brotherhood has established influence over many branches of the federal government over the last few decades.

The analyst maintains that infiltration has caused our elected political leadership, political appointees, the intelligence community and the military to all become “gradually blindfolded to what actual Islam really is.”

“They became incapable of seeing the history of Islam, the doctrine, the law, the scripture that motivates and animates Islamic terrorism,” she explained. “Those things became divorced. You were not allowed to talk about them anymore. Between 2011 and 2012 there was an actual purge in our government that removed hundreds of pages of presentations, PowerPoint presentations, curriculum and the instructors. They were taken out of all government curriculum, including the military.”

How could this have happened?

“It was done under the request, pressure and urging of the Muslim Brotherhood. The Muslim Brotherhood, as a matter of fact, were the advisers who oversaw the purge. They were the ones who actually supervised the purge.”

Through intermediaries?

“No, directly,” she replied. “They were tapped to become advisers about what should be removed from the curriculum.”

I remember the "purge."

Many of our training materials regarding counter-terrorism and insurgency changed in precisely that time frame.

So, WND asked, the enemy is our consultant on how to deal with our enemy?

Lopez said, not only that, but “all of this infiltration completely suborns our national security apparatus.”

“They’re very smart,” she added. “These guys are not camel-jockeys with towels on their heads. These are sophisticated operators. This has been going on for more than 1,300 years. It just happens that we live in the 21st century. That doesn’t make us unique or immune or in some kind of historical bubble.”

Is cultural jihad a bigger threat than the military jihad?

The former CIA operative said that is true inside the United States, but in the Middle East, the bigger threat is military conquest.

“The Muslim Brotherhood is the vanguard of Islam and Islamic jihad. The forces of Islam, historically, have conquered every, single major civilization they’ve ever taken on, except for two. Western Civilization, or whatever’s left of it, and the Han Chinese. The Muslims have defeated the Buddhists, the Byzantines, Christianity in the Middle East, Jews in the Middle East, Hindus and the Persians. This includes huge, sophisticated civilizations.”

This was written six months ago.

For those who find the U.S. actions on the globe confusing - this is the best and most coherent explanation I've seen... that also proves to be predictive.

 

[Hattake Ryuzaki]

They truly are the most dominate organized religion now aren't they.

 

[NineSNS]

Truly a no-win situation for anybody that doesn't want to see civilization dragged backwards a thousand years.

 

[WhistleBlower]

Isis will reign supreme. Their numbers only increase by each day and whilst many countries are fighting against them its not deterring isis. :/

Isis is like that bird shit stuck on your car. You get your sponge wet and you gotta scrub hard for it it to dissapear.

 

[Prometheus Beta]

Was my detailed post here deleted? Well Im not sure why but Ill try to make it a bit less "offensive".


This seems like a very err... Neoconservative analysis. Now I don't disagree with them in their assessment of Islam - you and I know very well what that religion is all about.

The problem I have with all this, Aim64C, is that the Neocons have proved time and time again to not understand the world very well beyond the realm of ideology. I mean yes, Islam is the ideology they say it is but I think there is also such a thing as human nature beyond one's ideological convictions.

For example, one aspect of human nature that the Neocons do not understand very well is its tribal nature; and the Middle East is a very tribal place. Frankly, I think anyone who understands it well could have predicted the eventual collapse of Syria and Iraq (both with histories of being ruled by sectarian tyrannies) and the concomitant group warfare - along ethnic and sectarian lines (Kurds, Shiites, Sunnis, Alawites).

Yes, ISIS are what you say they are Aim64C, but they are also based on the tribal Sunni Arab kinship group - just as the Taliban are as much a Pashtun movement as they are an Islamic group. In Afghanistan there are several other Sunni majority ethnic groups but interestingly, they mostly do not join the Taliban or the insurgency (in fact they were our allies in the invasion). The Taliban is an ethnic as much as an Islamic phenomenon.

So what am I trying to argue here? That our depowering of the Sunnis and propping up Mr Maliki, who is virtually a Shiite dictator (and was seen as a proxy of Iran by Sunni Arabs), and responsible for more than just the marginalization of the Sunnis in Iraq, had something to do with the rise of ISIS. Ok, I will moderate that statement: these "political grievances" are necessary but not sufficient conditions for the rise of groups like ISIS, at best.

Groups like ISIS will always exist (you know why); the real question is to what extent they will be able to draw the support of the surrounding Muslim population. And therein is where I think lies the relevance of the so called "political grievances".

Now I don't disagree with the Neocons that it is in our interests to stop nuclear proliferation. The problem is that many of them now want us to invade and occupy Iran. Given the absolute failure of a track record that military occupation in the Middle East has had, can you blame for me being wary of that suggestion?

Lets see if my understanding of that region is predictive: Afghanistan will go the way of Iraq, almost certainly within the decade. The state will ultimately collapse and there will be a relapse to the post Soviet invasion civil war - a civil war between ethnic and sectarian groups. And so all the resources we burned on state-building will have been for naught.

Id like your commentary on this analysis Aim64C if you don't mind; admittedly it is a slightly idealistic one that ignores err certain aspects of Islam that you have warned about, but I think this is probably the best remedy for those "political grievances".

You must be registered for see links

 

[Aim64C]

Was my detailed post here deleted? Well Im not sure why but Ill try to make it a bit less "offensive".


This seems like a very err... Neoconservative analysis. Now I don't disagree with them in their assessment of Islam - you and I know very well what that religion is all about.

The problem I have with all this, Aim64C, is that the Neocons have proved time and time again to not understand the world very well beyond the realm of ideology. I mean yes, Islam is the ideology they say it is but I think there is also such a thing as human nature beyond one's ideological convictions.

For example, one aspect of human nature that the Neocons do not understand very well is its tribal nature; and the Middle East is a very tribal place. Frankly, I think anyone who understands it well could have predicted the eventual collapse of Syria and Iraq (both with histories of being ruled by sectarian tyrannies) and the concomitant group warfare - along ethnic and sectarian lines (Kurds, Shiites, Sunnis, Alawites).

Yes, ISIS are what you say they are Aim64C, but they are also based on the tribal Sunni Arab kinship group - just as the Taliban are as much a Pashtun movement as they are an Islamic group. In Afghanistan there are several other Sunni majority ethnic groups but interestingly, they mostly do not join the Taliban or the insurgency (in fact they were our allies in the invasion). The Taliban is an ethnic as much as an Islamic phenomenon.

So what am I trying to argue here? That our depowering of the Sunnis and propping up Mr Maliki, who is virtually a Shiite dictator (and was seen as a proxy of Iran by Sunni Arabs), and responsible for more than just the marginalization of the Sunnis in Iraq, had something to do with the rise of ISIS. Ok, I will moderate that statement: these "political grievances" are necessary but not sufficient conditions for the rise of groups like ISIS, at best.

Groups like ISIS will always exist (you know why); the real question is to what extent they will be able to draw the support of the surrounding Muslim population. And therein is where I think lies the relevance of the so called "political grievances".

Now I don't disagree with the Neocons that it is in our interests to stop nuclear proliferation. The problem is that many of them now want us to invade and occupy Iran. Given the absolute failure of a track record that military occupation in the Middle East has had, can you blame for me being wary of that suggestion?

Lets see if my understanding of that region is predictive: Afghanistan will go the way of Iraq, almost certainly within the decade. The state will ultimately collapse and there will be a relapse to the post Soviet invasion civil war - a civil war between ethnic and sectarian groups. And so all the resources we burned on state-building will have been for naught.

Id like your commentary on this analysis Aim64C if you don't mind; admittedly it is a slightly idealistic one that ignores err certain aspects of Islam that you have warned about, but I think this is probably the best remedy for those "political grievances".

You must be registered for see links

I would say your analysis, from a national standpoint, is accurate and applicable.

As a nation, the U.S. has very little business in the Middle East. We should neither be king-makers nor king-breakers.

It is difficult to tell if the British-established authoritarian system would have lasted long enough to allow western influence to take hold in the Middle East - but it's pretty clear that the Middle East has a very effective barrier against the influence of other cultures/ideologies.

As a nation and government - the U.S. should have not gotten involved in the Middle East.

I've actually become a proponent of disbanding the federal military (spare for the Navy/Marines) all together and only having federal authority to co-opt National Guard units. I'm not sure if you are familiar with the distinction between the two - but the National Guard is the state funded and commanded military specific to each state. A large standing national army is too much power simply floating around with far too many people trying to figure out how to make use of it.

I am also a proponent of releasing all of our arms restrictions on trade. We're some of the best killers on the planet, and by all means, if people want someone killed - they can contract the job and our companies can make it happen (or whatever security mission it may be). Want an F-22? Buy four and you get the fifth free if you sign an exclusive maintenance contract that lasts five years.

We never go where we aren't paid to be there by someone.

Even if it is self-funded.

Which is what I, personally, believe the response to Islam needs to be:

Spoiler

You must be registered for see images

The Crusades are a sore spot for Islam, and rightly so.

These strange hedonistic pagan-christian-things came storming out of Europe with superior alloys, armors, weapons, tactics - and prayed to concept of God that the Qu'ran stated was false and that he would never allow victory over them. Worse - they claimed their cause in the name of something other than Allah.

It was the first time Islam really had to deal with the idea of losing ground. Having the tables turned on them was no fun at all. It was the cause of great "fitnah."

The main reason the crusades stopped was both a narrow mission objective (take back Israel and secure a safe route of pilgrimage for Jews and Christians) and internal politics that made such abroad excursions difficult (kind of hard to justify sending thousands of able-bodied men with arms and equipment when the douche next door sees that as an opportunity to take a few towns).

Time for private citizens to adopt the unconstrained campaign objective.

Why?

You must be registered for see images

Whether we like it or not - Islam sees Christianity as a sort of mutated copy of itself. Islam treats all Christians equally and has no distinction of state from religion. To them, Christianity is a nation as real and as coherent as a caliphate.

The beheading of the Coptic Christians is the fate they plan for any Christian they can get a hold of - that is precisely the message of the video.

Which is why it is incumbent upon people as free actors, not under government mandate or verdict, to band together and fix their little red wagon.

I realize that's going to make me a "hateful" and "primitive" person in some people's eyes around here - but they are the same ones who continue to be shocked and appalled by ISIS continual expansion and activity... while suggesting anyone who cites the problem as being somehow related to Islam is worse than joining up with ISIS to buy four wives and cut off peoples' heads.

*shrug*

Can't win for losing.

 

[Natsu Shazneel]

I hope one day these guys get whipped out from the face of the planet. These are not humans. These are monsters!

 

[Jin Hayami]

I'm going back for round three boys.
I got a picture with a midget on target last time.
This time I'm gonna try to get a video up on funker530.