Why ISIS is rich (oil only small part of why)

Discussion in 'World Events' started by Billy T, Nov 22, 2015.

  1. Billy T Use Sugar Cane Alcohol car Fuel Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,198
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. sculptor Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,466
    from your link:


    Answer: ISIL and other radical Sunni rebels are funded and supplied by Saudi Arabia and Qatar. And, by extension, by the USA. We supply them with weapons and intel, and they send planeloads of the weapons and ammunition to the rebels and pass on our intel.

    Knowing that, with the Russians involved, we cannot remove the legitimate government of Syria, we are now concentrating on destroying Syrian infrastructure to leave behind a struggling bankrupt government. It's a spite thing.

    Maybe, if we stop supporting the rebels and stop bombing their country, the refugee crises would cease to exist?
     
    Schmelzer likes this.
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,910

    Oh, so where is your evidence the US is or has supplied ISIS with weapons and intelligence? Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proofs. The US has supplied Iraq with weapons which latter fell into the hands of ISIS when Iraqi troops dropped their panties and ran before a single bullet had been fired.

    Well first, what makes a dictatorship legitimate? Assad is part of a dynastic dictatorship. He wasn't legitimately elected to office. Why do you think the Syrian rebels are not legitimate? Were the American founding fathers not legitimate when they overthrew British rule? Do you not believe that people have the right of self-determination?

    Two, Russian involvement does nothing to preclude the elimination of the Assad regime. Talks are being held with the US and other allied partners including the Gulf States in order to determine Assad's fate. And where do you get this notion we, the US, are concentrating on destroying Syrian infrastructure? Do you have any evidence to back that up? That's another extraordinary claim. What the US is doing and has done is to destroy ISIS infrastructure, to cut off its supply lines. And that is a good thing.

    The US has not attacked any position held by the Free Syrian Army. It has only attacked positions held by ISIS. ISIS does not control all of Syria only a portion of the state. US involvement and actions are in no way a "spite thing". It's to eliminate the terrorist threat posed by ISIS and nothing more.

    Well a couple of things, first the refugee problem began long before the US began any involvement in Syria. It began when Assad, what you have labeled as the legitimate government" began using sarin and other weapons of mass destruction on its own people in order to retain control of the country. The refuge problem was exacerbated with the creation of ISIS. The US government stepped in to rescue thousands of Syrian refugees from ISIS and certain death and slavery.

    So the bottom line is you have your facts screwed up. US and allied bombings of ISIS targets in Syria have absolutely nothing to do with Syrian refugees or Assad's problem with legitimacy. The Syrian civil war began long before the US became involved, and Syrians do have the right of self-determination. Just as American founding fathers had the right to rebel, Syrians also have the right to self-determination.
     
    Last edited: Nov 22, 2015
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. CptBork Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,460
    But Joe, if Syrians, Ukrainians and other peoples of the world are granted the right to self-determination, it'll be impossible for Russia and China to ever bring the U.S. to its knees. If the U.S. isn't brought to its knees, it'll be impossible for disgruntled Americans and foreigners to come take your decadent lunch money away. So try to be reasonable for a change and give everyone who hates you whatever they want, because obviously if you weren't a vicious colonial sodomizer and corporate backscratcher, they wouldn't hate you.
     
  8. C C Consular Corps - "the backbone of diplomacy" Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,320
    Apparently so, even in an indirect sense. The US has been accused of destabilizing the Middle East in some putative manner that exceeded just the confines of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. But the initial cause for the Syrian uprising (and the consequent brutal retaliation of Assad, the refugee crisis, international terrorism, etc) was placed at the doorstep of the Arab Spring.

    Since the retrospective opponents and other critics of the Bush legacy had earlier debunked or absolved it of being responsible for the Arab Spring (which they might regret now?), the US thereby can't hold itself indirectly responsible for triggering that people's rebellion against Assad's government.
     
  9. CptBork Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,460
    Whatever one might truthfully say about the Middle East and the impacts of foreign interventions, one can't pretend that it's ever been peaceful and civilized, and it's never been secular or tolerant. Ok, maybe it used to be tolerant by Visigoth standards, but there's never been an Arab Abe Lincoln, or he was executed very quickly if there ever was.
     
  10. sculptor Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,466
    America views its close ally, Qatar, as a terrorist funding trouble spot. Washington has gone so far as to call the small Persian Gulf state a permissive environment for financing terrorist groups.

    The United States says it does not have evidence that the government of Qatar is funding the terrorist group now known as the Islamic State (ISIS). But it does believe that private individuals in Qatar are helping to finance this group and others like it. And it thinks the Gulf state is not doing enough to stop this.

    To influence Qatar's policies, the United States has employed a carrot-and-stick approach. It heaps praise on its ally for developing new anti-terrorist financing regulations, while privately discouraging and sometimes publicly admonishing its support for terrorist organizations.

    Yet the fundamental problem is that America's counterterrorism agenda sometimes conflicts with what Qatar perceives to be its own political interests. Qatar's security strategy has been to provide support to a wide range of regional and international groups in order to bolster its position at home and abroad. This strategy has involved generously supporting Islamist organizations, including militant ones like Hamas and the Taliban. Allowing private local fundraising for Islamist groups abroad forms part of this approach. Closing channels of support to militant Islamists -- i.e., what Washington would like Doha to do -- would be inimical to Qatar's basic approach to its own security.

    http://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/view/qatar-and-isis-funding-the-u.s.-approach
     
  11. Schmelzer Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,003
    Nice article http://www.moonofalabama.org/2015/1...e-videos-to-claim-us-airstrike-successes.html describes how "
    PBS NewsHour Uses Russian Airstrike Footage While Claiming U.S. Airstrike Successes". It is, anyway, quite clear that the US did not even try to destroy the IS oil trucks. With the funny excuse that the truckers are civilians. And if the claimed destruction of 116 trucks by the US has really happened or if it was only claimed, after the shameful for the US presentation at G20 by Putin of pictures of long columns of 100s of oil trucks, nobody knows.
     
  12. sculptor Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,466
  13. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,910
    Oh poor Baby Putin, he got his hand caught in the Ukrainian cookie jar.
     
  14. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,910
    Oh, and where is your evidence of that claim? Why on Earth would PBS use Russian air strike footage and misrepresent it? It's not like they don't have ample footage of successful American airstrikes. To date, the US has delivered 8,500 successful airstrikes on ISIS targets.

    Below is a link to the PBS web site. Show me which video was misrepresented. It always amazes me that you accept without question whatever the Russian state owned and controlled media tells you. Your penchant for brain dead fallacies is simply amazing.

    http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/france-launches-massive-air-strike-on-isis-in-syria/
     
  15. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,910
    Well, here is the thing, your reference is a well known pro Israeli group.

    "John Mearsheimer, a University of Chicago political science professor, and Stephen Walt, academic dean at Harvard University's Kennedy School of Government, describe it as "part of the core" of the pro-Israeli lobby in the United States.[38] Discussing the group in their book, The Israel Lobby and US Foreign Policy, Mearsheimer and Walt write: "Although WINEP plays down its links to Israel and claims that it provides a 'balanced and realistic' perspective on Middle East issues, this is not the case. In fact, WINEP is funded and run by individuals who are deeply committed to advancing Israel's agenda ... Many of its personnel are genuine scholars or experienced former officials, but they are hardly neutral observers on most Middle East issues and there is little diversity of views within WINEP's ranks." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Washington_Institute_for_Near_East_Policy#Criticism

    So anything from this group should be taken with a grain of salt. Whither individuals within Qatar have funded ISIS isn't known. But what is known is Arab Gulf states, including Qatar, have flown bombing missions against ISIS targets and constitue a portion of the nations allied against ISIS. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_intervention_against_ISIL
     
  16. Schmelzer Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,003
    You are unable to follow the links provided in the link I have given?

    the usage of the Russian videos at 2:22,
    the Russian video of hitting the oil storage sites,
    the Russian video of hitting the tankers.
    The US has not provided such video proofs of their claims, so they use what is available for free, they are anyway known to be liars by everybody who cares, so they don't really care about such minor things like this. Or, as http://www.moonofalabama.org/2015/1...e-videos-to-claim-us-airstrike-successes.html has formulated it: "I have found no video of U.S. hits on Islamic State oil tanker assemblies. The U.S. PBS NewsHour did not find any either."

    Oh, you have some background information that http://www.moonofalabama.org/about.html ist owned and controlled by the Russian state? Evidence please, except that you don't like what he writes.
     
  17. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,910
    You were asked to prove your claim PBS used Russian footage and misrepresented it as American. While bullshit may be a substitute for proof in Mother Russia, in the rest of the world it isn't. So where is the proof? The fact is you have none, because that proof doesn't exist. It doesn't even make sense. Where do you get this belief the US has not provided video proof of claims? Don't tell me, Russian state owned and controlled media sources. Below is a link to the press office of the US Pentagon. It contains those US video clips you claim do not exist.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    http://www.defense.gov/News/Special-Reports/0814_Inherent-Resolve

    You mean this guy, the moonofalabama blogger?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!




    http://louisproyect.org/2013/12/20/jew-baiting-okay-at-moon-of-alabama-but-not-me/

    The fact is what Moonofalabama did was to copy and pasted material from Russian state owned and controlled media sources, and I think you know that. Your claim was all over Russian state controlled media sources, yet you chose to reference an obscure and specious blogger...yeah.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    You are yet again being more than a little dishonest.

    Russian sources:
    https://www.rt.com/usa/323070-pbs-isis-video-russian/

    US Media Shows Footage of Russian Airstrikes Passed Off ...
     
    Last edited: Nov 23, 2015
  18. Schmelzer Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,003
    What else do you need as a proof? Unable to recognize the use of the two linked Russian videos in the linked report?
    Compare 2.29 of the report with the beginning of the first Russian video, and the trucks at 2.35 with the 0.53 of the second Russian video?

    Or do you think it is ok to combine Russian videos of Russian airforce hitting IS oil delivery trucks with the comment "for the first time, the US is attacking oil delivery trucks"?????

    If it contains, fine, give the link to the video which shows how the trucks are destroyed.
    The Moon of Alabama article is dated "November 20, 2015 Posted by b at 08:29 AM", my own posting is dated Yesterday, Nov. 22 8:32 PM. Your Russian source, dated 23 Nov, 2015 09:11, tells us: "The fact was first noticed by the Moon of Alabama website, which noted that any average viewer of the PBS report would assume that the black-and-white explosions of oil trucks and tanks are from of US airstrikes filmed by US Air Force planes."

    So, to prove that MoA has copied Russian media you have to try harder, the article you linked claimed something very different. And why do you think I should read interesting sources only several days later when RT is citing them? That I like the MoA site is old news, I have mentioned it already at http://www.sciforums.com/threads/syria-september-2015-whats-up.152604/page-10#post-3337672
    And, no, I don't know how this guy looks like, so that I cannot tell. I see what he writes, and he writes interesting things, which one can check because he gives a lot of links.

    PS: Even if I don't know how he looks like, the picture is hardly an american blogger, because it has appeared with the description "A man hairdressed like the German Nazi leader Adolf Hitler, takes part in a neo-Nazi demonstration at a war cemetery in the east German village of Halbe south of Berlin, Saturday, Oct. 13, 2004." by http://www.haaretz.com/jewish/new-german-agency-set-up-to-combat-neo-nazi-propaganda-1.409091 without any further name or so. So this image is simply a personal defamation of MoA by your source.
     
    Last edited: Nov 23, 2015
  19. sculptor Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,466
  20. sculptor Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,466
    Very interesting link Joe: http://www.defense.gov/News/Special-Reports/0814_Inherent-Resolve
    from your link:

    y

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    Rough calculation $5,000,000,000.00 spent on 16,075 targets = a tad over $312,ooo per target---------------WOW such efficiency these guys really earn their money-----------?---------
    What exactly is it that we tax payers are paying for?
    What are they resolved to do?
    Are we keeping the world safe for democracy by buddying up to every petty dictator in sight?
     
    Last edited: Nov 23, 2015
  21. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,910
    That part is true, per my link.

    This part, not so much. I think you need to revisit your math. It works out to be about 311,000 dollars per target. That really isn't that bad especially when you consider those costs include fixed costs - costs the government would pay even if it wasn't bombing ISIS targets.
     
  22. sculptor Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,466
    yup
    math oops
    corrected
    thanx
     
  23. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,910
    LOL....well, you are long on conspiracies and really short on evidence. In fact, you have no evidence. Just scanning the above, I'm sure Israel will be surprised to know it has been supporting ISIS.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Unfortunately, your you and your fellow conspiracy enthusiasts, facts do matter.
     

Share This Page