As Islamic State militants routed in Iraq, their families fear reprisals

[metisdead]

Off topic posts and replies have been removed.  Having done a little research, the computer crime laws of Thailand do not apply to posts in this topic. 

[Morch]

10 hours ago, simple1 said:

In your opinion, what you believe the greater risk - the US to cease contributing to efforts to stabilise Iraq or walk away after assisting with destroying Daesh military capability. IMO unless the US can manage to assist the Iraqi government to engage Sunni and Shia the seeds of Islamist fanaticism will re-grow.

 

I don't know that the US "contributing to efforts to stabilise Iraq" is effective or much of a successes story to date. Apparently not enough so to prevent ISIS taking hold, Iranian involvement and Kurdish separatism. Would things be better off without the US around? I honestly don't know, and of course, there's no general answer to that - different parties, different interests.

 

The problem with US involvement is that it hangs on policy determined by changing administrations, while at the same time requiring a long term, constant and consistent commitment. Hard enough to assure at the best of times, perhaps impossible under the Trump administration.

 

In theory, you are correct - a long term investment in welfare, education and whatnot should provide a better answer to terrorism. There's just this issues of dealing with costs, short term debacles and changing circumstances. No easy solutions here.

 

 

[Morch]

8 hours ago, simple1 said:

From my reading of Western security agency comments, Islamist terror will continue for many years. One of the tools for counter terror policy is to minimise risk by contributing aid to try and stabilise countries which are known breeding grounds of political / religious extremist terror. At the moment international funding efforts to support Iraq is current estimated to be only 22% of target; IMO a significant red flag.

 

Not a red flag, but how things are. Maintaining long term cooperation and commitment on these sort of ventures is tricky at best. The decisions made are relevant to prevailing conditions at the time - when these change, the prospect comes under question. To add a complication, this is often a thankless task - interventions are often portrayed as negative by opposing parties, tangible gains on the core issues are difficult to come by etc.

 

Unless I'm very mistaken, countries not living up to pledges of aid monies and such is rather the norm.

[Morch]

7 hours ago, Kwasaki said:

Well US can they do everything else.

 

Iraq split into 3 separate muslim sects is a great idea.

 

The US could then sell them a couple of nuke missiles each to keep the peace.  

 

The US cannot, at this point and time, dictate anything in Iraq. Anything it does will have to take into account the positions of Iran, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Russia and perhaps, even the Iraqi people themselves.

 

 

[Morch]

6 hours ago, boomerangutang said:

I still maintain that ISIS wives are war criminals.  Same for all other family members of ISIS (other than children) who were in any way aiding ISIS fighters.  They're enablers.  Accomplices in crime.  I don't recommend killing them, but I think it's fair to incarcerate them.  Again, do it in such a way that they can't communicate with each other.  They get 2 meals a day; bread, water and bean mush.  They should appreciate being allowed to live.  If they'd been fighting Daesh and were caught, they would have been killed outright.

 

How 'bout some Chinese guy?  Just by someone drawing 9 dashes on a crudely drawn black-line-on-white-paper map (that a h.s. kid could have drawn in 3 minutes), the Chinese changed the geo-political landscape in a large region, which adversely affected 7 other countries directly, and may spark WWIII.

 

 

 

 

Referring to the latter part only, which was in response to the question of splitting Iraq - "Who's to do the splitting? And by what authority?" -

 

What does "some Chinese guy" got to do with it? How does drawing lines on the map going to fix a situation largely caused by drawing lines on a map?

[ilostmypassword]

20 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

The US cannot, at this point and time, dictate anything in Iraq. Anything it does will have to take into account the positions of Iran, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Russia and perhaps, even the Iraqi people themselves.

 

 

But mainly Iran and the Iraqis.

[Morch]

4 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

But mainly Iran and the Iraqis.

Not sure what you meant.

The "Iraqis" is a problematic term anyway, not that clear that national sentiment (if it exits) outweighs other associations.

[simple1]

1 hour ago, Morch said:

Unless I'm very mistaken, countries not living up to pledges of aid monies and such is rather the norm.

Yes, with very unfortunate consequences.  As an example identified as a root cause of the initial mass exodus of refugees from Turkey into the EU. A pity nations are not learning from prior errors of judgement.

Edited July 18, 2017 by simple1

[Kwasaki]

1 hour ago, Morch said:

 

The US cannot, at this point and time, dictate anything in Iraq. Anything it does will have to take into account the positions of Iran, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Russia and perhaps, even the Iraqi people themselves.

Hear you but American govs don't want anyone interfering with arms sales and all you mention will do as their told,  obviously not publicly. 

[Grubster]

I think the UN should start a donation center for those who wish to pay for refugees and other unwanted immigrants, then build communities for them with the money in whatever country that decides they want them, then the UN could decide who could or couldn't live there including these women and children. Antartica might want them, oops thats not a country but still a good spot.

[simple1]

15 minutes ago, Grubster said:

I think the UN should start a donation center for those who wish to pay for refugees and other unwanted immigrants, then build communities for them with the money in whatever country that decides they want them<snip>

UNHCR

Edited July 18, 2017 by simple1

[Morch]

39 minutes ago, simple1 said:

Yes, with very unfortunate consequences.  As an example identified as a root cause of the initial mass exodus of refugees from Turkey into the EU. A pity nations are not learning from prior errors of judgement.

 

Well, that's one way of seeing it. Another would be donor countries not eager to cooperate with Turkey's Erdogan. Can't say I do not understand this point of view. And that's one more issue - more often than not, aid funds are needed in countries where the regime is not always easy to deal with, to put it mildly.

[Morch]

25 minutes ago, Kwasaki said:

Hear you but American govs don't want anyone interfering with arms sales and all you mention will do as their told,  obviously not publicly. 

 

The US does not sell arms to Iran, or to Russia, so the argument is irrelevant there. With regard to other countries in the region, there's currently this "thing" going on between GCC members, most of which are nominally US allies and buying US arms. So far, the US does not seem to be able to sort things out. Think you're over estimating the current US influence in the ME.

[Kwasaki]

1 minute ago, Morch said:

Think you're over estimating the current US influence in the ME.

l don't think so but time will tell.

[klikster]

8 hours ago, boomerangutang said:

I still maintain that ISIS wives are war criminals.  Same for all other family members of ISIS (other than children) who were in any way aiding ISIS fighters.  They're enablers.  Accomplices in crime.  I don't recommend killing them, but I think it's fair to incarcerate them.  Again, do it in such a way that they can't communicate with each other.  They get 2 meals a day; bread, water and bean mush.  They should appreciate being allowed to live.  If they'd been fighting Daesh and were caught, they would have been killed outright.

 

 

Interesting, very interesting, Herr Boomer.

[boomerangutang]

42 minutes ago, Grubster said:

I think the UN should start a donation center for those who wish to pay for refugees and other unwanted immigrants, then build communities for them with the money in whatever country that decides they want them, then the UN could decide who could or couldn't live there including these women and children. Antartica might want them, oops thats not a country but still a good spot.

There are always a certain segment of people who are quick to forgive, and sometimes they act like no crime has been committed.  What shall we call them?  Mega-humanists?  Bleeding heart liberals?  

I'm ok with forgiveness in some scenarios (and to some degrees).  But if a criminal is caught, there should be consequences.  Aiding and giving tangible support to a criminal, is somewhat criminal behavior in itself, depending on the degree of assistance.  ISIS wives and the adult children of ISIS fighters, if not fighters themselves, were likely offering tangible support.  Besides wifely duties, they were variously making ammunition, acting as spies, target acquisition, decoy operations, digging trenches, and other such activity which aided the war effort.  They are/were essentially combatants and should be treated as such.

 

I know you jest about Antarctica, but thankfully there are treaties which keep Antarctica relatively pristine.  I was thinking, the other day, what if Chinese seafarers were the first to land at Antarctica.  Not only would they have declared the entire continent as Chinese territory, they likely would have slaughtered the penguins for meat.   Sorry, for going off topic.

[Kwasaki]

3 hours ago, boomerangutang said:

I'm ok with forgiveness in some scenarios (and to some degrees).  But if a criminal is caught, there should be consequences.

I'm OK with it too, lets put them in the good old US of A in Trump Tower.. 

Edited July 18, 2017 by Kwasaki

[Caps]

The IS families are that much in fear if reprisals that, five female would-be suicide bombers preparing to target security force personnel were captured getting ready in Mosul, maybe they need more do-gooders to go and give them a hug! 
 

[simple1]

10 hours ago, Morch said:

 

Well, that's one way of seeing it. Another would be donor countries not eager to cooperate with Turkey's Erdogan. Can't say I do not understand this point of view. And that's one more issue - more often than not, aid funds are needed in countries where the regime is not always easy to deal with, to put it mildly.

Just in case anyone is actually interested in the plight of refugees in host countries in the M.E. region, including Iraq,  who are supported by UNHCR. The info below is relevant  to the OP as the same issues will be faced by Iraqi refugees and influencing ongoing recruitment into Islamist groups.

 

"The primary regional appeal and strategy - the Regional Refugee and Resilience Plan (3RP) for 2017 -calls for $4.63bn to continue delivering vital protection and assistance for refugees and host communities. To date – only $433m of the amount requested has been received, just 9% of what is needed". 

 

http://www.unhcr.org/en-au/news/press/2017/4/58e340324/lack-funding-help-syrian-refugees-hosts-risk-brussels-syria-conference.html

 

IMO the above is proof of strategic stupidity.

Edited July 18, 2017 by simple1

[halloween]

On 18/07/2017 at 5:25 AM, simple1 said:

In your opinion, what you believe the greater risk - the US to cease contributing to efforts to stabilise Iraq or walk away after assisting with destroying Daesh military capability. IMO unless the US can manage to assist the Iraqi government to engage Sunni and Shia the seeds of Islamist fanaticism will re-grow.

What makes you think it won't regrow anyway?

[halloween]

2 hours ago, simple1 said:

Just in case anyone is actually interested in the plight of refugees in host countries in the M.E. region, including Iraq,  who are supported by UNHCR. The info below is relevant  to the OP as the same issues will be faced by Iraqi refugees and influencing ongoing recruitment into Islamist groups.

 

"The primary regional appeal and strategy - the Regional Refugee and Resilience Plan (3RP) for 2017 -calls for $4.63bn to continue delivering vital protection and assistance for refugees and host communities. To date – only $433m of the amount requested has been received, just 9% of what is needed". 

 

http://www.unhcr.org/en-au/news/press/2017/4/58e340324/lack-funding-help-syrian-refugees-hosts-risk-brussels-syria-conference.html

 

IMO the above is proof of strategic stupidity.

Instead of world leaders deciding whether to support these people, why don't they ask the people they represent. Then we could have a truly democratic decision whether or not to help them breed a whole new generation of terrorists.

IMHO they will do that anyway, but the numbers will be less if they actually have to take care of their own welfare. Meanwhile, our tax dollars could be used to help those who need it at home.

[simple1]

15 minutes ago, halloween said:

What makes you think it won't regrow anyway?

Agree, all the analysts indicate Islamist groups will be around for a long time. However, whatever can be done to minimise risk is 'good'.

[simple1]

1 minute ago, halloween said:

Instead of world leaders deciding whether to support these people, why don't they ask the people they represent. Then we could have a truly democratic decision whether or not to help them breed a whole new generation of terrorists.

IMHO they will do that anyway, but the numbers will be less if they actually have to take care of their own welfare. Meanwhile, our tax dollars could be used to help those who need it at home.

Yep, a common opinion, aspects of which I disagree with - as I said policy that reduces threat should be utilised - not talking to appeasement of Islamist groups, though at some point political dialogue comes into play e.g. Syria / Afghanistan. In many cases overseas aid does assist our economies e.g. reducing the numbers attempting illegal economic migration, reduce the necessity of military engagement, jobs etc etc

[halloween]

Just now, simple1 said:

Yep, a common opinion, aspects of which I disagree with - as I said policy that reduces threat should be utilised - not talking to appeasement of Islamist groups, though at some point political dialogue comes into play e.g. Syria / Afghanistan. In many cases overseas aid does assist our economies e.g. reducing the numbers attempting illegal economic migration, reduce the necessity of military engagement, jobs etc etc

Give them money and they will hate you anyway. It is moot whether giving them aid and increasing the birth rate will result in more or less terrorists, as the children are being born into the same hard line families and indoctrinated with the same religion.

And I'm all for a hard line on illegal immigration - Oz has plenty of desert where we can store illegals until they decide they want to go home.

[boomerangutang]

Americans, in particular, always think that shoveling tons of money at a problem will fix it.  Money helps, but there are so many grave problems in the world (I just found out that 25% of the world's coral reefs have died in the past 15 years due to warming oceans), that there's not near enough money to pile on them.  

 

As much as anything else, improvements in the M.East are reliant on educating children.  They're not going to get rid of their mean-spirited belief systems, but hopefully they can downplay some of the most radical teachings they're now encumbered with.  I'm referring, of course, to radical aspects of Islam.  In their place, enable kids to learn about weird (to Arabs) concepts like cooperation, tolerance, art, music, dance, appreciation for nature, inventing useful things, science, etc.   How to nurture movements toward reason, and away from fanaticism?  I don't have all the answers, but I do have some suggestions.

[Morch]

4 hours ago, simple1 said:

Just in case anyone is actually interested in the plight of refugees in host countries in the M.E. region, including Iraq,  who are supported by UNHCR. The info below is relevant  to the OP as the same issues will be faced by Iraqi refugees and influencing ongoing recruitment into Islamist groups.

 

"The primary regional appeal and strategy - the Regional Refugee and Resilience Plan (3RP) for 2017 -calls for $4.63bn to continue delivering vital protection and assistance for refugees and host communities. To date – only $433m of the amount requested has been received, just 9% of what is needed". 

 

http://www.unhcr.org/en-au/news/press/2017/4/58e340324/lack-funding-help-syrian-refugees-hosts-risk-brussels-syria-conference.html

 

IMO the above is proof of strategic stupidity.

 

Ah, but then I'm not a huge fan when it comes to the efficiency  of such efforts and the bodies/organizations trusted with carrying them out. Other than saying donor countries are bad for not living up to commitment, perhaps additional factors should be addressed - use or misuse of funds, host country not living up to its end of things, and the ever present political constraints relevant to each country.

[Morch]

1 hour ago, halloween said:

Give them money and they will hate you anyway. It is moot whether giving them aid and increasing the birth rate will result in more or less terrorists, as the children are being born into the same hard line families and indoctrinated with the same religion.

And I'm all for a hard line on illegal immigration - Oz has plenty of desert where we can store illegals until they decide they want to go home.

 

"... We give them money-but are they grateful?
No, they're spiteful and they're hateful.."

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0jTzgR-ClB4

[simple1]

2 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Ah, but then I'm not a huge fan when it comes to the efficiency  of such efforts and the bodies/organizations trusted with carrying them out. Other than saying donor countries are bad for not living up to commitment, perhaps additional factors should be addressed - use or misuse of funds, host country not living up to its end of things, and the ever present political constraints relevant to each country.

fair enough, but I'm not going to post a thesis

[Scott]

An off-topic, inflammatory post has been removed.  

[Orton Rd]

5 hours ago, simple1 said:

Just in case anyone is actually interested in the plight of refugees in host countries in the M.E. region, including Iraq,

Not interested in them at all, they deserve all they get IMHO if they are connected to islamic state, the topic of the thread of course

Edited July 19, 2017 by Orton Rd