Salafist ISIS ‘execute’ 1,700 Iraqi Soldiers

Why are organized soldiers attacking Iraq, and who are these Army combatants in Iraq? And, who is funding them?

The first question includes the component of timing: Iraq is neither militarily or economically capable of confronting the ISIS without the U.S. The U.S. pulled out and declares it will not return. The timing is right. Who these combatants are is included in why they are there.

The “Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant” also referred to as “Islamic State in Iraq and Syria” or “Islamic State in Iraq and al-Sham” gives us the abbreviations: ISIS or ISIL. They are a militant group in Iraq and Syria. Specifically claiming Iraq and Syria, with implied future claims, the ultimate goal being Caliphate over the Levant—which includes Lebanon, Israel, Jordan, Cyprus and Southern Turkey. This of course, is just the beginning. The group was established in the early years of the Iraq War and pledged allegiance to al-Qaeda in 2004. The ISIS split with al Qaeda over a power struggle.

Power struggles are occurring with more frequency as groups claim different leadership and related but different Jihadist methods, regions and goals. The split in terrorist networks should not be mistaken as weakening them as is often claimed by the U.S. administration. The Obama presidency appeasement, pull-out and following-from-behind policies, has had the effect of emboldening the terrorist organizations globally. These groups have multiplied in number and ever-expanding globally into other vulnerable nations- biding their time for the U.S. pullout in Afghanistan and now invading Iraq.

The leader of ISIS/ISIL is al-Sham Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, who oversees thousands of fighters in his stated goal to create a Sunni Islamist caliphate, currently spreading across the borders of Iraq and Syria – merely the beginning of a planned world-wide Caliphate.

If you doubt such a Caliphate could reach U.S. shores, be aware that the Saudis have already funded and converted radical Mosques in the U.S. Sounds like a conspiracy theory? Do the research. Perhaps more alarming is that the advisors to the U.S. from Clinton to Bush to Obama have consistently been Salafist sympathizers, including CAIR (The Coming Revolution, Walid Phares, p.101, 2010). The Department of Home Security Advisory Council is woefully under informed. One example: Mohamed Elibiary received an appointment to the DHS Advisory Council. The U.S. government and security officials unwittingly appoint Jihadist-sympathetic Muslims to represent the U.S in explaining events in the such regions as the Middle East and South Asia, Malaysia and Africa, often with recommendations from University faculty who are also radical sympathizers, and with such zeal, and apparent ignorance, that the appointed are not properly vetted.

U.S. DHS Advisor Mohamed Elibiary tweeted on Twitter that the recent takeover of Iraqi cities by a violent terror group is proof that a Muslim “caliphate” is making an “inevitable” return.  “As I’ve said b4 inevitable that ‘Caliphate’ returns,” Elibiary tweeted in response to a question about the terror group Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), which is currently seeking to overthrow the Iraqi government and establish a fundamentalist Sharia law in the country.

Who is funding such a terrorist organizations? ISIS/ISIL are Saudi-funded. That is QATAR, Bahrain, and KSA. The combatants are Wahhabi/Salafist invaders who are taking advantage of the U.S. pull-out and stated decisions of U.S. aversion to return to Iraq, and Washington’s general lack of commitment in foreign affairs. “Americans always invade, disrupt and leave,” has been the mantra since Vietnam.

The disloyalty within the ranks of the Iraqi Army are partially due to Maliki’s disregard for Sunni involvement within the government, since our influence there has waned. Whether you agree with the U.S. invasion of Iraq or not, the U.S. troop presence held the conflicting sects in check; the pull-out left the expected vacuum, and left the country open for invasion. The ISIS are making their move hiding in broad day light.

Since 2011 I have been writing about the Saudi’s involvement: “Sleeping with the Enemy: US Partnership with Saudi-Wahhabis – by Rusty Walker: https://lubpak.com/archives/66449

The first U.S. TV report broaching this subject that I have seen by a major mainstream press, finally came recently by a liberal station and reporter, Katie Couric, on Yahoo Tech, who questioned Secretary of State John Kerry:

“There are also reports that countries like Kuwait, Qatar and Saudi Arabia are funding the rebels.” Astoundingly, Katie Couric, has finally verbalized something LUBP and myself have been reporting, that our own allies are funding the Jihadists. Kerry’s response is worth repeating for its stunning lack of content:

Kerry, “We are very, very concerned about that reality…in the end, the United States of America is going to have to do what President Obama judges is in the best interests of the United States of America.…if there’s some divergence with some other people in the region, then so be it.” There is no real actionable meaning within this statement, although he did admit that it was true. “So be it” is not informative.

Saudi Arabia [Kingdom of Saudi Arabia) (KSA)], along with QATAR and Bahrain, has been funding Salafist operations throughout the world for decades. The KSA has more money than sense. They hold the illusion of stability through decades of pay-offs to terrorist organizations and appeasement strategies to what they perceive to be existential threats from its enemies, which include both Shia, and their own extremist Sunnis, enraged over the KSA allowing US to use Arab air strips in attacks on Muslims, going back to the Kuwaiti Desert Storm to present.

Shiite Iran is also a threat to KSA. While some ask, “Will the ISIS mass murdering of Shias open up thirst for revenge?” The ISIS is merely continuing its terrorist affiliate genocidal attacks on Shias, that is, other like-minded radical Sunni Salafists with the same agenda (Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP); Lashkar-e-Omar (LeO); Sipah-e-Sahaba Pakistan (SSP) Sipah-e-Sahaba Pakistan ; Lashkar-e-Toiba (LeT); Ahlu Sunna Wal Jama (ASWJ);Muslim Brotherhood; HAMAS, Hezbollah; Tehreek-e-Jaferia Pakistan (TJP); Lashkar-eJhangvi (LeJ); Sipah-e-Muhammad Pakistan (SMP) ; Islamic Jihad Movement in Palestine; Al Qaeda, Jamaat Ansar al-Sunna; Turkestan Islamic Movement, Haqqani Network;  Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan;, and the ISIS- Islamic State of Iraq, and the Levant. There are more.

This genocidal intention perpetrated against perceived Kafirs, the Shia, and Ahmadis, has been going on for more than a decade in Afghanistan, Iraq, Burma, Malaysia, Pakistan and Syria. Other minorities Christians, Hindus, and Jews are also the enemy.

The Saudis regularly buy-off any trouble from extremist groups so they are not attacked. Rich princes within the family and oil magnates also play duplicitous roles, allies to the U.S., and covertly ship arms to Syria, Pakistani Deobandis, and Iraq. KSA, Qatar, and Kuwait are first and foremost for their own self-interest- Machiavellian is nothing new to self-interest of politicians and nations. While this is a common strategy of geopolitics, the KSA uses petro-dollars to influence and threaten control over oil prices to influence the Western world and Middle East/ South Asia.

The U.S. remain allies because we are held hostage to control of gas prices by Saudi decisions. Apparently, the U.S. administrations are willing to remain dependent, buy oil, rather than drilling in the vast natural gas and oil resources in the U.S.. Further, the United States believes it needs the KSA to guarantee an ally in the Middle Eastern region (in addition to Israel) to access landing space for air strike capability and deployment of US forces in the event Iranian, Syrian, Iraqi catastrophic developments.

There are the oil-rich Sheiks who are indeed radical Sunnis who sympathize with the extremists. They also funded bin Laden’s original al Qaeda, and splinter groups even today. This is why their own disgruntled Wahhabi/Salafists don’t attack them. It is also why extremist Madrassas continue in southern KSA and Pakistan.

It is instructive to remember that not only were 15 of the 19 hijackers Saudi Arabian, but “The 9/11 Commission Report” also identified the missing 20^th hijacker.  He was yet another Saudi national named Mohammed al-Kahtani, who was prevented from entering the U.S. by an alert customs agent at Orlando International Airport just weeks prior to the attacks (p. 248).

This is not a sectarian war between Sunnis and Shias. It is radical Sunni “Salafists” against Shia and Kurds in Iraq. Add to this, that Maliki ruined any cooperation of all sects within Iraq, by firing the top generals of the Baathists, resulting in the subsequent disintegration of infrastructure. The Sunnis and Kurds in the Iraqi Army understandably have no loyalty to a united Iraq.

Prime Minister Tony Abbott stated in parliament that Iraq may escalate to an extent where a terrorist state is born out of it – threatening not just Iraq and the Middle East but the whole world:

“It seems that this group has proceeded through Iraq with maximum violence and terror to the civilian population and has behaved with extraordinary brutality towards surrendering Iraqi soldiers and policemen.”

http://au.ibtimes.com/articles/555983/20140617/iraq-crisis-australia.htm#.U6Any-8g9fw

Iraqi P.M. Maliki’s disregard for the Baathist Sunnis has contributed to the discontent in Iraq; many of those Sunnis in the Iraqi Army laid down their weapons in an effort to join the rebels. Many of them are also being murdered unexpectedly by ISIL killing these moderate Baathist/Sunnis if they have not pledged to join the Salafist ideology.

“Washington has made clear it wants Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki to embrace Sunni politicians as a condition of U.S. support to fight a lightning advance by forces from the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant…But the Shi’ite prime minister has moved in the opposite direction, announcing a crackdown on politicians and officers he considers “traitors” and lashing out at neighbouring Sunni countries for stoking militancy.”

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/06/17/us-iraq-security-idUSKBN0EP0KJ20140617

Observing other consequences of ISIS action in the region: the Kurds are consolidating for an independent Kurdistan.

Historically, we may recall Iraq was an invention of the post-Ottoman Empire British map-making with little regard for the Sunni, Shia, Kurd antagonists. While well-intentioned, the Middle East regions were not well-defined. The colonialist British fled far too quickly to transition leadership when the colonial system broke down. Israel the prime example of demarcation following quick evacuation, the nascent nation left to its own fate; Iraq, Mesopotamia, certainly can be another example.

Because the ISIS/ISIL are Takfiri (Muslims who accuse other Muslims of apostasy) Arab Wahabbi/ Salafists are intent on one thing: a Caliphate that includes no Kafirs (disbelievers), in their view: Shias or moderate Sunnis and Ahmadis. Their enemies also include Christians, Hindus, Sufis, and Jews.

This is not an Iranian – Syrian Shia conspiracy, it is a Radical Sunni Salafist fundamentalist core, no different than al Qaeda. As for Iran, it certainly has one objective, and that is, consolidating all Shiites in the Iraqi populous and eventual sole hegemony over the region. Any offers from Iran to Iraq must be seen through that subterfuge.

Now, the ISIS have forcibly acquired controlling acquisition of lands stretching from Syria across northern Iraq, to the doors of Baghdad. Note also they have begun to destroy Shia temples and mosques in Iraq, while Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani in Iraq, has taken a nationalistic stance. The key Shia Cleric in Iraq, al-Sistani, has presented a positive voice in encouraging all of Iraq to take up forces against the ISIS/ISIL. While Shia militias have been given a bad name stemming from attacks on U.S. troops prior to 2007, the Shia militia are now dedicated to staving off ISIS attacks.

The Western world should have and could have been prepared, and should have known this was coming, as it is now in the hands of radicals that will not stop.

Next theater of war: It has possibly already started in Pakistan when Taliban boldly took over Karachi airport alarming the Pakistan Army into action; Granted, a feeble attempt, but a possible up-coming theater: Pakistan Taliban and al Qaeda makes their move across the Durand line to join Afghanistan Taliban against Afghan National Army (ANA). In honor of American troops who lost their lives there, we hope our training will ay off. There are also the Afghan tribal communities in fear of draconian measures of the Taliban. The world should hope this fragile Army is indeed well-trained by U.S. forces, and so will not break ranks there.

Al Qaeda affiliates are also at work in Somalia and Sudan. There was Benghazi (administration cover-up notwithstanding), and more American Embassies will be in danger. No guarantees of safety anywhere.

My final point here is that when the U.S. President Bush expected a short war, with no exit policy, or understanding of the rival sects, and Obama claimed in 2011 that the “war is over” in Afghanistan and Iraq, simply because we are pulling our forces out, American strategies appear naïve. History is proving only dire unintended consequences come from poor planning, and not learning from history. Obama has touted al Qaeda’s demise 32 times since the Benghazi attack. These politically-motivated declarations are not helpful. It ruins credibility with the U.S. and its leaders across the world. An American president cannot decide when a war is over. The enemy decides. And, the enemy is increasing globally.

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/obama-touts-al-qaeda-s-demise-32-times-benghazi-attack-0

U.S. Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel ordered the aircraft carrier USS George H.W. Bush to the Persian Gulf to “protect” American lives and interests. The order gives President Barack Obama “additional flexibility” in case military measures are required to safeguard Americans in Iraq, said Pentagon spokesman Rear Adm. John Kirby. Still a paradox remains when the president declares there will be no troops sent in to Iraq. I am not suggesting that we do send in troops. But, should a nation declare absolutes in the absence of a crystal ball, or keep all options on the table?

The aircraft carrier will be accompanied by a guided-missile cruiser and a guided-missile destroyer, said Rear Adm. John Kirby, a Pentagon press secretary.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/06/17/world/meast/iraq-crisis/

Armies and Navies are efficient and provide the weight behind peaceful words of statesmanship. But a feverish effort to create them once a crisis is has begun, does not provide a clear strategy for a solution. That is, the president stating he would not send in troops but having a Nimitz-class carrier present could be seen as mutually exclusive postures. We have the troubling counterpoint of the known and unknown here.

However, there is none of the troubling counterpoint of the known and unknown common in geopolitical intrigue in my following historical observation: When America is mistaken for being weak and isolationist, history has shown that the world is a more dangerous place.

No one in the Western World wants the daunting aspect of a widening war. But, the American people may not get to decide this, if we are complaisant it will be decided for us. American citizens and the world at large has the right to expect a clear U.S. Foreign Policy. In the absence of this, ISIS and other terrorists will continue to be emboldened to more blood stained invasions.

I’ll end with a hopeful of note optimism and solidarity between East and West:

The perpetrators of these crimes against humanity, we are assured by Islamic scholars, are not following true Islam. They are those the Quran describes as “going astray from the right path.” The battle for the hearts and minds of Islam from these fanatics is bringing together moderate Sunnis and Shias, and Ahmadis and Sufis who have a stake in the outcome, the fight against this violent minority.

Perhaps it is time for all the Islamic Ummah to pressure the Muslim extremists in concert with the Western world to come back to the Five Pillars of Wisdom that does not include Jihad (except in Khariji).

The ISIS are clearly not the Muslim mainstream. In the words of the contemporary scholar, Majid M. Khadduri, (bellum justum ) ”Just War” in Islamic tradition. Jihad is defensive by nature. Perhaps with a free and ijtihad-oriented theology initially accepted by Islam, the Ummah can regain its ground. The lost ground of a radicalized religion that imposed dogma forced by armies and Jihadists. Rather the intellectual clerics and scholars of Islam, together with the Western world and Eastern world, we may become tolerant of each other, truly pluralistic, and in such a way break the cycle of violence.

I sound too optimistic? Then, history provides a grim portent of things to come.

 

 

 

 

Comments

comments