The inconvenient truth about ISIS

Jul 3, 2015 11:24 AM

HBH91

Views

370279

Likes

10882

Dislikes

2265

The inconvenient truth about ISIS

The last time i posted a comment about ISIS, i got downvoted and you guys did not like what i had to say.
Hear me out this time, and if you still disagree feel free to downvote me to oblivion.

Who exactly is ISIS and where did they come from?

The Iraq War

ISIS is entirely a creation of the United States’ behavior in Iraq.

When the U.S. first invaded Iraq, it blew the country apart. By destroying the existing government, toppling Saddam Hussein, and destroying the infrastructure, the U.S. left behind a power vacuum that would never have existed under Hussein.

The impact caused by the actions of the United States is a historical fact that media just won’t discuss.

This has to do with U.S. action in the region, which destroyed the infrastructure, which destroyed Iraq society, which destroyed the Iraqi government, while there were a lot of people who weren’t “as happy as larks” while living under Saddam Hussein, they also weren’t at odds with Hussein in the same way they were with the government established by the U.S.

The militant group ISIS was formed as a small insurgent group in Iraq in 2006. While they tried to create problems for the U.S. military, they had no money and no real ability to recruit.

The Syrian Civil War

It wasn’t until 2009 that ISIS shifted its focus from Iraq, where it was largely unsuccessful in developing a foothold, and focused on the civil war in Syria.

While in Syria, ISIS still struggled to gain a foothold. This is attributed to the fact that two larger groups fighting against President Bashar al-Assad were overpowering them: al-Nusra Front – or al-Qaeda – and the Free Syrian Army.

Then, came a pivotal moment that most Americans aren’t even aware of. In June 2013, a Northern General for the Free Syrian Army spoke out on Al Jazeera Qatar and stated that if international forces did not send weapons, the rebels attempting to overthrow Syrian president Bashar al-Assad would lose their war within a month.

The U.S. was covertly funding Syrian rebels. Although Obama acted as if he was proceeding with caution, politicians such as Senator John McCain demanded action.

Within a matter of weeks of the Syrian general making his plea for international help, the U.S., the Saudis, Jordan, Qatar, Turkey and Israel began providing weapons, training and money to so-called rebel groups like the Free Syrian Army.

In September 2013, American media outlets began reporting that weapons were being given to Syrian rebels. CNN reported that while the weapons are not “American-made,” they were “funded and organized by the CIA.”

However, things began to fall apart when less than one year after the U.S. supplied Syrian “freedom fighters” with weapons, those weapons ended up in the hands of ISIS fighters.

Those ISIS fighters came from the group McCain insisted would help the U.S. overthrow Assad: the Free Syrian Army. The army was not only sending the Islamic State weapons, it was also sending them fighters.

It wasn’t until June 2014 that ISIS went from being a “no-name group in Syria” to a group that was “heavily armed and trained by U.S. and Coalition Special Forces.” This revitalized group made a dramatic entrance by crossing back over the Syrian border into Iraq and capturing Mosul and much of the northern part of the country.

One of the most important facts that mainstream media ignores time and time again is that ISIS was able to grow so fast, because of all the U.S. military equipment they were able to seize – equipment that the US military left in Iraq. Truckloads of Humvees, tanks and weaponry that instead of taking or destroying, the U.S. government simply decided to leave behind.

However, even when the U.S. government became aware that ISIS fighters were capturing U.S. equipment, it did nothing. The lack of action attributed to the fact that ISIS fighters were taking the equipment back into Syria to continue fighting Assad, which was what the U.S. government wanted.

How is it that the United States, with all of its intelligence capabilities, didn’t know this threat was coming? How many billions did the US spend, maybe a hundred billion on total intelligence community budge over the year? How did they have no idea?”

The U.S. did know who ISIS was, but the so-called Islamic State was doing what the Obama administration wanted.

The ISIS fighters continued to do what the Obama administration wanted, and in late summer 2014, they were labeled the new boogeyman in the war on terror.

Over the past few months, the U.S. government, who acted like they had never even heard of ISIS, suddenly, with the help of media has turned the Islamic State into the new focus of the war on terror. Now, as ISIS has continued its rise, recruitment is exploding and the group is becoming stunningly wealthy.

ISIS controlled oil fields

ISIS makes $2 million a day off of selling oil, and the United States’ response, of “undercutting the competition” by blowing up oil fields makes no sense. Why is the U.S., which is known for sanctioning anything that moves, when it’s angry, is not placing sanctions on the banks or the oil companies that are involved?

In addition to those questions, Americans should also be asking, Why is the U.S. sending $500 million to the Free Syrian Army to fight ISIS when the FSA is one of the biggest suppliers of fighters and weapons to ISIS? and Why is the US sending new and more powerful weapons to the FSA like anti-aircraft missiles – weapons that we know will be in the hands of ISIS?

The mainstream media will say that ISIS is the “creation of American inaction,” the reality is that they are the “product of direct action.”

This direct action started with “the action of creating a power vacuum in Iraq” and manifested into the “arming violent Jihadists, hoping they would overthrow a leader in a neighboring Middle Eastern country.”

The U.S. government is a victim of its own insane policies, due to the fact that it is very good at blowing things up, but really bad at putting them back together.

It isn’t the U.S. government being held hostage by crazy policies; rather it is the American people.

Thank you for reading.

LOL...no.

10 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 1

I would say the Kurds in Iraq were a little bit worse off than being less than "happy as larks"

10 years ago | Likes 22 Dislikes 2

some sources would be beneficial to the credibility of this storyline

10 years ago | Likes 28 Dislikes 4

Before the Americans entered Iraq, it used to rain gumdrops and everybody would cry candy tears.

10 years ago | Likes 69 Dislikes 16

Hey guys, if you want to learn more, Frontline on PBS has a really good documentary called "the rise of isis" free to watch on their website

10 years ago | Likes 295 Dislikes 4

Much better than OP's bullshit.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 5

Frontline is badass

10 years ago | Likes 20 Dislikes 0

.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

+1

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

the risis

10 years ago | Likes 33 Dislikes 0

Thank you.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Thank you

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Reply to remember...cheers

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

.

7 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

thank you, watching it now

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Like some other people here have done, .

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Lol it says none of this babble

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Ill check later, thanks

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Reply to remember. I like it.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

i should watch this

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Thank you

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Will definitely watch this. Thanks. This seems to be a repeat of the creation of Al-Queda.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Why do they have flags with dildos and butt plugs?

10 years ago | Likes 520 Dislikes 23

IKR!

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Reference game on point

10 years ago | Likes 28 Dislikes 1

A thank yuo

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Asking the real question here

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Asking the right questions, i see.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

I don't know but it offends me greatly

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

dude :)

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

(´ڡ`ლ)

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

"ISIS is entirely a creation of the United States’ behavior in Iraq." <- stopped reading right there

10 years ago | Likes 39 Dislikes 13

ISIS is NOT "entirely a creation" of U.S. actions. Pressure to reestablish the Caliphate (ISIS's main goal) has been around for CENTURIES

10 years ago | Likes 66 Dislikes 8

And centuries is NOT an exaggeration.

10 years ago | Likes 18 Dislikes 1

Yes, their goal always existed. I think what OP saying is they wouldn't proceed this far towards their goal without US's actions.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 3

Then OP shouldn't have said "ISIS is entirely a creation of the United States’ behavior in Iraq."

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 2

Yeah, that first sentence is a bad summary by OP.He tries to say ISIS already existed but became this strong because of US' actions in Iraq.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Yeah, that first sentence is a bad summary by OP.He tries to say ISIS already existed but became this strong because of US' actions in Iraq.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Oversimplified bullshit.

10 years ago | Likes 25 Dislikes 8

A geopolitical issue with only one cause! That makes sense...

10 years ago | Likes 16 Dislikes 4

You earn your down vote Op, not because you aren't partially correct, but because geopolitics is never cut and dry.

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

Can we at least agree to call them Daesh and not Isis?

10 years ago | Likes 46 Dislikes 7

They have stone age mentality but picked up an English name. Give me a fucking break. It's all lies to shape what u think through propaganda

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

i know, it messed up Archer for me too.

10 years ago | Likes 15 Dislikes 0

I'm only vaguely aware that those were their origins, but I assume it involves more than just them now.

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 1

It's more about not giving them credit as a "state." They also don't like the name so that's a plus.

10 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 0

I think we can agree to call them Dildos. Monsters don't deserve a rightful name.

10 years ago | Likes 13 Dislikes 1

how about we call them monsters! Dildos actually bring joy to some people, unlike monsters.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I agree; dehumanizing enemies of our respective govt and world views is a wonderful tactic that has no negative consequences.

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Yeah but it helps when you have to refer to them...

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

why? who cares what we call those retards?

10 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 6

Calling them ISIS lends them indirect support

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

how?

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Imagine your child renames themselves Hitler in rebellion. You still call them by their actual name, not the one they give themselves.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

they like to be called isis or IS as it gives them legitimacy in their eyes. They don't like being called daesh.

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

oh okay makes sense

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Is it just me or did anyone else notice that this is under the milf subreddit?

10 years ago | Likes 76 Dislikes 3

I think Imgur mobile suffers from a bug that gives some posts a (source), indicating it's from Reddit. While in fact this isn't true 1/2

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Since from browser it's uploaded by an Imgurian. Either way, because the post doesn't actually exist on Reddit I guess it gets fucky.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I'm on mobile and yes

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Nope but now I know what I'm doing for the next 20 min or so.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Huh?

10 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

Militants I'd Like to Fucking end.

10 years ago | Likes 21 Dislikes 1

Milfe. It's French.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

This

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

....motherfuckers....

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

No, and I'm not really sure how to see that. I don't really do the Reddit thing. Teach me?

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

So sick of this logical flaw, because it places blame wherever you like. You could follow it back as far as you want, too. (1/2)

10 years ago | Likes 20 Dislikes 7

(2/2) Blame Islam for the Iraq war because of 9/11. No wait, blame Israel because 9/11 is a result of Palestine. No wait, blame Hitler...

10 years ago | Likes 13 Dislikes 4

Love all the sources...love a good isis article that doesnt even mention the kurds

10 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 2

But. No. That's not... no. It's not right at... NO!

10 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 1

And I'm sure you'll be happy to cite all of your verifiable sources with indisputable evidence and hard facts.

10 years ago | Likes 123 Dislikes 22

Bro, cite your sauce through an edit

10 years ago | Likes 16 Dislikes 0

You should get google. It's awesome.

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 29

You should include sources in your post, it's common courtesy.

10 years ago | Likes 22 Dislikes 2

It's not my post dipshit. There's not enough hours in the day to educate someone who doesn't want to learn.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 22

I'll let you know when I've started caring what people who resort to petty name calling on the internet have to say.

10 years ago | Likes 14 Dislikes 3

You don't live up to your username. "You disappoint me." - me, your mom and dad, your girlfriend, your boss LOL

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 13

He can't do that when he's just taking Ben Swann's word for it. http://truthinmedia.com/truth-in-media-the-origin-of-isis/

10 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 1

The copy pasta is strong with this post.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Funny how no one seems to have a problem when the media reports shit like "government sources say" "cia sources say" "fbi sources say"

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 2

Yeah but good media people will actually have literally spoken to the sources.

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 1

you hope/assume. and "good media people"? what metric determines that, our trust because they're in the media?

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 4

I don't trust all media sources. I trust NPR. I do not trust Fox News. I don't have a particular metric other than reliability in the past.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

NPR succumbs to pressure all the time. no media source is infallible when they are for profit or require revenue from corporate donations

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 2

Maybe this will be the rise of another Middle East myth, like how it's widely known to those who know nothing that the CIA created al Qaeda?

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Mark my words, there will never be indisputable facts or sources when it comes to things like this. Indeed, all of history is written by (1)

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

human beings with agendas (2)

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I understand it's important to cite our sources but, the broad strokes here are easily verifiable with a few quick searches.

10 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 5

It's strange, how aren't those broad strokes just common knowledge? There's almost too many sources to cite there...

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

are you just linking random shit now or? reply to my comment about the origins of daesh

10 years ago | Likes 14 Dislikes 6

A news article does not count as "hard evidence"

10 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

More research than you have done though yeah?

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 2

Ahh, it appears the media has covered this, despite you using the bait line "the media doesn't cover this" multiple times.

10 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 0

Lol daily mail

10 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 0

Pinnacle of journalism there!

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Obviously that clearly states those were democratic Iraq forces that were killed and their equipment stolen, nothing to do with FSA

10 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 0

You're saying that equipment, given to the Iraqis, later captured by ISIS forces, is America supporting ISIS?

10 years ago | Likes 28 Dislikes 1

We left it unguarded. If you leave your gun on the counter at a store and a kids kills themselves it's your fault.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 3

A) No we didn't, we gave the equipment to the IDF. B) That analogy was completely inappropriate, even by my standards.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

I'm pretty sure if someone stole my car by any means, it would mean they stole my car and I didn't contribute to people dying.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

"Left for the Iraqis"

10 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 37

(1/2) based on US foreign intervention track record and all around shady ass behavior benefitting weapons manufacturers & oil tycoons,

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 5

Semantics, you're arguing semantics. I hardly think captured equipment qualifies as proof of support.

10 years ago | Likes 18 Dislikes 2

is my post too inconvenient for you to respond or..? lol the irony

10 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 8

hi, i see that youre still responding to others but not to my post? why not my post? can you edit your post to include my historical facts?

10 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 8

(2/2) I whole-heartedly believe US supported ISIS in some way and is currently doing so. I believe you OP, blind patriotism runs wild

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 5

As an Iraqi, I can confirm the part about Iraq. My cousins who are at the front lines of the Iraqi army have repeatedly reported finding....

10 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

Yea, that shit was given to the Iraqi's, and they pussed out and left it, like most of us knew they would.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 2

...American equipment at the sites where ISIS used to settle.

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

how about the iraqi army that abandon all of its posts with supplies from the US army that were givin to them to combat isis.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Yes, but the reports were about equipment which even the Iraqi army didn't have. For example, 7 km range snipers (1/2)

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

ISIS' recruitment in Iraq has a lot to do with the sectarian lines that have pre-existed but were further exposed by President Maliki's gov.

10 years ago | Likes 13 Dislikes 2

They also dissolved the entire army, putting many trained soldiers and officers out on the streets. They gladly joined up with the militias.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

As well has the US trusting military grade equipment to Iraqi forces which in many cases have either given up or lost in the initial attack

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

Needless to say its complicated and Imgur isn't exactly the best medium to explain geopolitical and sociopolitical problems. -Just Saying

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

They never existed under Saddam, Assad, Mubarak, etc., because all dissent was violently repressed. Now its a bunch of failed states.

10 years ago | Likes 245 Dislikes 14

Yeah, these states often failed because of the U.S. The States putsches states that dont address their ideology anymore.

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 11

ISIS recruited in Syria regularly from 2006-2009 without the Mukhabarat interfering. Assad supported them to hurt the U.S. in Iraq.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

A lot of the intial military successes were attributed to ex-Iraqi soldiers/officers ejected from the army after the fall of Saddam (1)

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Or so I read at least, I find it weird there is no mention of that 2/2

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

A lot of what OP wrote is bullshit, with just enough fact backing it to sound plausible, so I don't think research is their strong suit.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

True, I think Zakaria said it best: Iraq exists only as a concept now. "Iraqis" identify not by 'nationality' but by Sunni/Shiite

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Exactly. It blows my mind that people think having Saddam in power is better in any way

10 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 3

I mean, it'd be better for us.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 2

Not to mention, they could freely walk around their towns and shop, in safety. Before the West destroyed it, it was somewhat beautiful.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Well, the people had a 90% literacy rate for a start. They had schools, medicine and a working infrastructure...

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

It's absolutely better. You can negotiate with a rational actor.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Don't agree? Say goodbye to your family and hometown

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Which happens with ISIS too, but much more arbitrarily and with much more regularity.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

And ISIL seems worse than the likes of Saddam because of the media, but Saddam literally killed hundreds of thousands of civilians.

10 years ago | Likes 63 Dislikes 7

[deleted]

[deleted]

10 years ago (deleted Feb 24, 2017 7:23 PM) | Likes 0 Dislikes 0

Yeah, my step grandfather was a minister in Iraq before saddam came to power. He took his family and got out while he still could.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

[deleted]

[deleted]

10 years ago (deleted Feb 24, 2017 7:23 PM) | Likes 0 Dislikes 0

At least they got out!

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Like when he used chemical weapons on the kurds.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Hey now, Saddam had time, they'll get there. The killing is far from over.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Agreed, because of the political environment and how the media conducts itself nowadays, that fact has been overlooked.

10 years ago | Likes 14 Dislikes 1

It's true. In terms of numbers, Saddam was way worse. In terms of morale, international threat, stability, etc, he was better.

10 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

And the thing that most of the western world failed to learn is how Saddam operated really is how you can bring peace to middle east. (1)

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

the very concept of personal choice and having a say in government is culturally alien to them to the point that they can't understand it.(3

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Of course such methods we see as brutal and oppressive but the people in the middle east only truly respond to such tactics as (2)

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

i agree with you but they did exist under saddam, just not calling themselves the same, there were precursor groups before iraq, before 9/11

10 years ago | Likes 23 Dislikes 6

You're referring to "generic sunni extremist group" not ISIS.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 2

uhh do you think that daesh just formed itself spontaneously from regular iraqis? the fuck are you smoking? there IS A CLEAR LINEAGE

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

No, Daesh just didn't exist under Saddam nor did any "pre-cursor" groups like it. That's why I said generic Sunni extremist group.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

daesh is literally the unity of saddam baathist loyalist, sunni tribes, with al-qaeda in iraq which was called differently even before 9/11

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Which, again, DIDN'T EXIST UNDER SADDAM. Did no one read what I was responding to? What was this pre-cursor group in Iraq that became ISIS?

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

al-qaeda in iraq

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 2

daesh was just spontaneously created in 2006?! and not forming off the backbone of al-qaeda in iraq which was Jama'at al-Tawhid wal-Jihad?!

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Oh, so now you want to talk about JORDANIAN extremist groups, not Iraqi ones. Okay.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

are you being dense on purpose because you're wrong or do you actually believe the shit that you post?

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

you do realize that many of the foreign fighters flooding into iraq relied on al zarqawi's local contacts?

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Back in the days, like the Taliban in the war against Russia, they were funded, armed, and seen as freedom fighters by Russia, USA, Egypt

10 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

True. The GIA (Algerian Islamic Group), later called Aqmi (Al Qaedi in Islamic Maghreb) dates back to the Algerian war with France. (1)

10 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

most of this unsourced anti-US rant is just propaganda with no historical basis

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 4

was talking about 'Jama'at al-Tawhid wal-Jihad', later 'al-qaeda in iraq'. they helped plan 9/11, so its funny to hear that US created them

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 2

I don't think OP's point is to say the US created them. More like the US played a game of influence thinking they would control (1)

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

"ISIS is entirely a creation of the United States’ behavior in Iraq." yeah please stop trying to whitewash this crappy post

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 2

the situation but ended supporting a monster that changed a lot over time.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

1) Actually, there's evidence that ISIS leadership is largely made up of ex-Iraqi Guard members.

10 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 1

2) So the belief is that disbanding the Iraqi military, effectively forcing them into unemployment, is what created ISIS.

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

3) The alternative would have been to allow Saddam supporters to continue controlling the Iraqi military.

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Well as you see, the US chose Maliki who didnt want ex iraqi guard members, resulting in a splitted society.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Yeah, well, I didn't say US did well in Iraq. I'm just saying ISIS isn't quite as much of a conspiracy as some think ;)

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

1:Well there you go, the US didn't do great in Iraq. They really destroyed the country and the structure

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

2: It's a "gold mine" for terrorist when a country doesnt have security, which lead to ISIS in Syria/Iraq

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

[Multiple Citations Needed]

10 years ago | Likes 2789 Dislikes 70

Have to agree with this. A lot of information in this post is nonsense to the point of: Let me make a speech.

10 years ago | Likes 51 Dislikes 3

So you agree or no?

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Nah that's inconvenient too.

10 years ago | Likes 27 Dislikes 1

[Citations Intensify]

10 years ago | Likes 15 Dislikes 0

so much bovine excreta in OPs post you need to look in the cow pasture for any citations...

10 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

This has been shown in US policy decisions before, during Iran-Irag war 1980s and in Nicaragua and other South/Central American countries.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I learned most of what's in this post from this documentary https://vimeo.com/128725600

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Dat run-on sentence though... http://imgur.com/7ReEJ6f

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

Good place to start would be Atlantic's profile on Maliki from 2013.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

It seems like this post contains an interesting mix of objective fact and utter bullshit, both presented as the former.

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

This doc is worth watching: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nyfm75jmkbI

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

[unless the information is straight from the Pentagon, because they never lie to anyone]

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 8

Citation: please read or watch The Shock Doctrine by Naomi Klein.

10 years ago | Likes 13 Dislikes 4

A good example of a well researched book on the subject of criminal wars started by the US

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 2

If many understood things now a days is that corporations and countries profit of this shit that has a huge role as well.

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 7

Nah that's inconvenient too.

10 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 2

That is literally just more conjecture. We want facts not people with the same opinion.

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

[deleted]

[deleted]

10 years ago (deleted Nov 22, 2015 2:22 AM) | Likes 0 Dislikes 0

If someone is posting something, it isn't up to me to prove them right.

10 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 1

[deleted]

[deleted]

10 years ago (deleted Nov 22, 2015 2:22 AM) | Likes 0 Dislikes 0

Wow you are dumb

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

You do know that the citations are just proof he isn't pulling this all outs his ass right?

10 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

This does sound very similar to how Saddam Hussein came into power. And, as someone else pointed out, that last picture is from the Gulf War

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

This is all I could think of while reading this. Some of these points are quite contrary or unrelated as well. A few I've never heard though

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

[Citations Intensify]

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Nah. If it's on the internet with pretty pictures and long explanations, it's the truth.

10 years ago | Likes 146 Dislikes 7

On tumblr this would get 100,000+ notes

10 years ago | Likes 19 Dislikes 0

Only if there was a commentary included about how it's oppressing white girls

10 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 0

Excuse me sir, check your priviledge, you don't know what it's like to be a white girl

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

I am a white girl... Irish, in fact.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Yeah I guess you're right, no need to question anything if its on the internet

10 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 0

Question everything!

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Why?! jk

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Yet more and more people have been speaking out about this for over a decade now, but you're just writing it off as false.

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 4

Your sarcastic reasoning, by saying "if it's on the internet, it must be true" to discredit him is honestly, the biggest problem.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 7

Is some of this true? Probably. There are also wild accusations and the whole premise here is quit whining America, you created this.

10 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

who are these people, where have they been speaking? No one is writing it off as false we just want sources. Claims require proof.

10 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

Just look at who I replied to in my original reply. It's a sarcastic comment. You don't want sources. You already have your beliefs.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 6

Google "how the US fuelled the rise of Isis in Syria and Iraq"

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

FFS, stop childishly downvoting it just because you refuse to believe it. Read what people link and learn something.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Great source bro, lulz

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

this is a misreading of the doc, the groups that want to create the salafist enclave are the muslim brotherhood, al-qaeda, salafist groups

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

while the supporting powers to the syrian rebels like the FSA are listed as: turkey, gulf states, western states, etc

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

There is a pbs documentary out on isis and it is nothing close to this

10 years ago | Likes 24 Dislikes 0

I took a class on foreign terrorism in college and most of this isn't true

10 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

Yea but PBS is a media outlet and therefore part of the conspiracy. WAKE UP SHEEPLE!

10 years ago | Likes 13 Dislikes 0

Sources or it didn't happen.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Gee it'd be a shame if we had to do our own research and actually think about something

10 years ago | Likes 19 Dislikes 25

That's like saying it's up to the employer to make a resume for all the people who apply

10 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 3

Luckily this is a website where people post stuff, not a place of employment

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 2

ISIS and Al Qaeda, are american funded militant groups trained by the CIA and (unbeknownst to them) foot mobile U.S. grunts. 1/3ish

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 2

The syrian war was an opportunity to arm them and make it look like an accident, and terrorist action. The syrain rebels who were given 2/3

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

The weapons were brutally murdered after ISIS aquired them, in a U.S. "misplacing action". Then the weapons circulated, and ISIS thrived 3/+

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

The origional ISIS recivers of the loot were given orders to camp in the open, and were carpetbombed, leaving no one left to tell of how 4/+

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

The weapons actually got to them. Also note their uniform, this is not a fucking videogame look again, this image has power and 5/+

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

from research i conducted ISIS was created from the ashes of AlQuida because they had

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

different views about how they should carry out their mission

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

ISIS (More accurately, ISIL) Is a combination of the remnants of Al-Qaeda and a religo-politcal group determined to reunite the Levant. 1/2

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

ISIL also has a number of Ex-Iraqi Army forces in its ranks. Their goal is to reunite the Levant because Mohammad said his nation would 2/?

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

be split into many different nations and only would survive. So they basically think all other nations are false and not real muslims 3/?

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

They want to reestablish the Amawi empire and Levant based in Bagdad as the center from Syria, Lebanon, Palestine, Jordan and Iraq. 4/4

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Oh, fuck this shit and fuck anyone who blindly upvotes this w/o actually doing research. Do your own reading; don't trust some ass online.

10 years ago | Likes 36 Dislikes 10

He's not wrong. Most of what he is saying is right

10 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 15

people are upvoting you and you're just saying stuff with no evidence to back up your point

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Exactly! That's what I just said.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Could poster supply links/ sources so those who are interested can do more research

10 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 1

http://www.vox.com/2014/11/7/7173665/isis-oil-money The 2 million dollars a day oil figure is an old, flawed estimate pre-airstrikes.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Also, they were selling oil at STEEP discounts, $20 instead of $65 a barrel for example.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

He portrays equipment taken from defeated Iraqi army troops as being "left behind" by the US.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

The pictures of burning oil fields are from 1991, not ISIS oil fields.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Well a lot (though not all) of what OP posted is bullshit, so I'm guessing they won't.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

The U.S. Has done this tons of times. We armed the Taliban to fight Russia in Afghanistan and created Al Qaeda.

10 years ago | Likes 46 Dislikes 14

Yep. The US just manipulate whatever happens in the middle east because people will gobble it up. also : http://puu.sh/iM3OW/b16858998e.jpg

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

No we the fuck did not. I'm so tired of this claim. We armed the mujahideen to fight the soviets. After the soviets left, we stopped. 1/?

10 years ago | Likes 16 Dislikes 4

Pakistan armed a financed one group of the many many mujahideen groups, the Taliban, which roamed Afghanistan, murdering the other 2/?

10 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 1

groups if the refused to join. Pakistan created the Taliban just as years of repression from dictatorships have created ISIS. 3/3

10 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 2

No, the Taliban didn't exist. That's terribly incorrect.

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

This ^^ that's the most frustrating thing the U.S don't seem to learn from past mistakes.

10 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 7

Because the US measures mistakes by lost money, and these pseudo-wars have been quite lucrative.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

the soviets left. Taliban raged through Afghanistan, killing many of the groups we armed. Pakistan created the Taliban. Get it right.

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

It wasn't a mistake and if anyone actually thinks we created the Taliban, they're wrong. Pakistan financed and armed the Taliban after

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

Stopped reading this over simplification "ISIS is entirely a creation of the United States’ behavior in Iraq."

10 years ago | Likes 51 Dislikes 24

what a shame, it got really good after that

10 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 13

Actually it's full of inaccuracies.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Not that it's ENTIRELY inaccurate, but overall it paints a greatly skewed picture.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

It needs citations. Don't believe everything you read on the Internet.

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 2

& don't believe anything the government tells you either. So who do we believe?

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 2

good that i already know the story,even the DIA confirmed http://theantimedia.org/declassified-pentagon-report-proves-us-helped-create-isis/

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

See, that's what OP needed to do. I'm not saying there is no truth to what he said, but he needs to cite and source his info.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

No matter the origin and backstory... nothing justifies the shit they do, the killing of innocent people, the beheadings and the terror!

10 years ago | Likes 728 Dislikes 49

They're just doing their religion

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 3

*No matter the origin and backstory* Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it...

10 years ago | Likes 50 Dislikes 6

I feel this is missing the point. He's staying they're the bad guys regardless of the why. He's not saying that why and how aren't important

10 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 3

OP missed it here... If we do not know / ignore the 'who' & 'why' then we cannot understand the problem & in turn, effectively address it.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

He's not really addressing that though. He's on a bit of a tangent saying not to forget they are still absolutely the bad guys.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Sry, to clarify I meant OP the top level comment we're replying to.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Sure, but this isn't about justification. This is about learning from mistakes and understanding your enemy.

10 years ago | Likes 33 Dislikes 3

the ones who gave those people the tools to do so should be held accountable. Their actions have horrible consequences

10 years ago | Likes 18 Dislikes 1

Haha, accountability... in the UNITED STATES CONGRESS!?!

10 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 0

İmgur has been glorifying some organizations that does these, only because they're opposing ISIS. War is not good vs bad people.

10 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 1

What about this post did you perceive as trying to justify anybody's actions? Being funded by a corrupt and interventionist government 1/2

10 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 1

That argument works both ways.

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Nobody is supporting them the point he is making is that the US is partially responsible for creating them.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Terror is going to sleep and waking up to the sound of drones and not knowing whether your children will be collateral damage today.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

And before I get downvoted to oblivion, my point is the same: actions have consequences. Scared and angry people lash out.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

....or Saudi Arabia.....or North Korea....or Boko Haram

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

the serious humanitarian crisis with ISIS is that they believe it is their mandate to to slaughter, enslave, and behead their enemies.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Why do you think they do it? Don't paint them all to be comic book super villains, it makes it impossible to fight them ideologically.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

http://www.theatlantic.com/features/archive/2015/02/what-isis-really-wants/384980/ good explanation why they behave so alien

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

U.S. might've fucked up a lot of things but ISIS gets its doctrine from religious extremism.

10 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 7

Religious extremism is funded exclusively by Saudi Arabia, the US's biggest and second closest ally in the region.

10 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 2

Killing of Innocent people you say? Go watch HBO's Generation Kill. US military is just as screwed up at times.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 2

the argument goes both ways ofcourse, there are sick people everywhere.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

No one's justifying their behaviour.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

2/2 is not meant to cast anyone in a good light.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Who's justifying?

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Don't forget the slavery, sexual torture and human trafficking.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Islam explains it all. Those lunatics have yet to evolve. They need another million years or so to catch up.

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 32

looks like you've yet to evolve from tarring people with the same brush

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Quite the generalization you've got there...

10 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 1

*truth

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 10

*opinion

10 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 1

Dead bodies everywhere are not evidence of an opinion. Try to think.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 9

I'd rather venture to say that Islam, much like 5 planes on 9/11, is being hijacked.

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Islam, like all other religions has their idiots and extrmists. To say they are as they are because of Islam alone is wrong in my opinion.

10 years ago | Likes 14 Dislikes 1

I respectfully disagree good sir/madam. Have a great holiday weekend :)

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 14

You too.

10 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 2

It's not just an opinion.Islam is a larger secondary religions in the US and theyre peaceful and law abiding citizens since long before 2000

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

But the shit the U.S do is okay?

10 years ago | Likes 40 Dislikes 13

US: "Don't worry, I'm not making the same mistakes again."... World: "No, you're making all new ones."

10 years ago | Likes 17 Dislikes 4

Seems so because every top comment is about "Ok, maybe U.S. fucked up pretty bad, but shit happens", bothers the shit out of me...

10 years ago | Likes 34 Dislikes 6

Seriously. I was 12 when we invaded Iraq and I saw this shit coming even back then. Hurrrr derrr durrr blind patriotism.

10 years ago | Likes 17 Dislikes 3

Patriotism taken this far like the US do, becomes fanatism.

10 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

"Ok, maybe we fucked up pretty bad, but shit happens..." - The basis of U.S. foreign policy.

10 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 0

Same goes for the U.S. then but that just would be bigotry, if someone would admit that. Death Penalty is crime, war is terror.

10 years ago | Likes 42 Dislikes 20

yea you're right hacking off innocent peoples heads and humanely executing convicted murderers is basically the same thing

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 5

wow, such humanely executing, much convicted murderers

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 2

The ISIS uses a perverted kind of judices based on a perverted sense of morality. In there sense of justice, it is justified, so is it for u

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Agreed, it's sad. It all looks like a team thing. Your with us or against us. War is War, trying to define morality in war..

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Hmm I think I'm misinterpreting what you're saying but U.S. doesn't actively kill innocents and terrorize unlike ISIS

10 years ago | Likes 18 Dislikes 15

K

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 6

Drone strikes in pakistan?.Once they bombed a little girl and over the radio said oh it was a two legged dog?.There are people, afraid.

10 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 2

those wedding drone strikes tho. *looks up at highest comment* it is fucking complicated as shit.

10 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 3

you my friend will be shocked by how ugly the truth is

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 3

The US actively kills innocents all the time. And the US military is a terrorist organisation by any definition of the word.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 2

Fox News has lied to you.

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 4

True. The same goes for al qaeda.

10 years ago | Likes 141 Dislikes 24

Or the U.S. army.

10 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

I dont understand the point of funding ether side. Why the fuck did US interfere with someone else's war again!? Did they think that 1/2

10 years ago | Likes 19 Dislikes 7

funding the other side would end the war faster with less casualities? Or did they want to remove the otherside by doing this and get 2/3:P

10 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 6

to try to be the "hero" that ended the war? US pls, fix your stuff you powerhungry piece of shit.

10 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 6

I dont think its completely about power we just always support rebels. We love a good revolution. I wonder why?

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I dont think its completely about power we just always support rebels. We love a good revolution. I wonder why?

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

During the cold war US created al qaeda to fight the soviet union. During the syrian civil war, ISIS emerged . same scenario all over again.

10 years ago | Likes 25 Dislikes 8

They didn't create al qaeda, they trained militants that gave way to al queada forming.

10 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 2

Might as well have created it lol

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 2

That is not entirely accurate. The US funded the Mujahideen in Afghanistan, Al-Qaeda was a splinter group of the muja that wanted to expand.

10 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 1

Leaving a bookmark here cuz I'm actually learning some shit

10 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

"ISIS is entirely a creation of the US’ behavior in Iraq." No. Also the civil war in Syria, Sykes-Picot agreement. Don't oversimplify.

10 years ago | Likes 546 Dislikes 40

It is the result of screwing people over and over again by western giants, in the name of oil and military bases.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 8

From OP I learned the US had nothing to do with ISIS; ISIS is entirely a creation of the Syrian civil war. ISIS in Iraq apparently failed.

10 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 2

Which it didn't. At all. They control Iraq's second largest city, most of the Anbar province and oil fields.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

It's a mutation of a wider-followed movement that boils down to the Sunnis wanting to get power in Iraq again, as they always had it.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

The United States AND the UK. We are partly responsible for this shitstorm. Credit where it's due dammit.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Oh, so I guess the secular totalitarian regimes that the US put an end to didn't stabilize their respective territories of sectarianism.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Yeah, almost like pluralistic governments tend to be more effective.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

What is the US doing in Iraq anyways? What is US military doing anywhere outside the USA? It's invading, you do understand that?

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 8

Why bother stepping into someone else's yard when you see someone being beaten by another?

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

2) the fact that the military had ADVISED OBAMA THAT THIS WOULD HAPPEN, and Obama ignored it simply because he wanted to do the popular

10 years ago | Likes 57 Dislikes 11

George Bush signed an agreement that we were to leave by 2011. Let's not play partisan politics and leave that out.

10 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 14

who said anything about partisan politics. It was a dumb idea to pull out at that point no matter WHO said it

10 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 2

While I agree that it was a mistake to pull out, if they hadnt, Iraq could have brought the us before the un for illegal occupation

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

so? the UN can't DO anything without the UN security council's approval, which we possess a seat on. if we vote against action, the UN can't

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

2) DO anything. one vote on the UN security council can stop an intervention dead in its tracks

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

3) thing of leaving Iraq. The voters are the primary reason for ISIS. Had we stayed, this would not have happened.

10 years ago | Likes 46 Dislikes 9

[deleted]

[deleted]

10 years ago (deleted Jul 3, 2015 4:52 PM) | Likes 0 Dislikes 0

please, we were sustaining the iraqi government, a president with a pair of balls could've done whatever they wanted with our military there

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 2

Don't forget the prisoners the US military had that our civilian leaders forced us to release who would later go on to lead ISIS

10 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

Well to be fair, if you campaign to masses that they're loved ones can come home from a war zone then the results are to be expected

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

And probably why Hillary resigned.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

NTM Robert Gates.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

the ISIS making 2 million a day on oil is also a load of crap. I'm going to need a citation somewhere. Otherwise you're just foxnews or cnn.

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

http://www.vox.com/2014/11/7/7173665/isis-oil-money Looks like the 2 million dollar figure was an inaccurate estimate.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Maybe not that much,but they are making money to support their operations and recruitment is undeniable

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

ISIS is more a product of the US LEAVING Iraq too early than it was about the Iraq war in general. I love how nobody wants to bring up 1)

10 years ago | Likes 89 Dislikes 16

Also disbanding the Iraqi army after the invasion and only slowly reorganizing it years later with new, inexperienced leadership

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

experience means dick if the old leaders were corrupt.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Very true, I don't have the solution. Unfortunately many unemployed Iraqi army officers turned to ISIS.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Ikr? More like we removed a tyrant that kept different ethnicities/races/whatever from killing each other... And look what happened (1/2)

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

ISIS is a product by US entering Iraq. In Saddam's times none/very few tried to attack the country or the people. 1)

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Saddam had very hard penalty for people who joind terrorist org. I dont say that he is a good guys, but by US invading Iraq people miss him.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

because he was so busy killing everyone who opposed him!

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

2) And attacking other countries!

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Very true man, I bet you also believe that he had nuclear weapons?

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

nobody said he had nukes. we said he had WMDs which include chemical and bio weapons

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Ikr? More like we removed a tyrant that kept different ethnicities/races/whatever from killing each other... And look what happened (1/2)

10 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 0

It wasn't peaceful under Saddam, he was killing people too. But it was working in a fucked up way, people weren't killing each other as much

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

True

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

(2/2) They should of split the country in 3, Kurds, Shias, and Sunnis. But oil makes its hard because that revenue can't be split regionally

10 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 0

So until when should we have stayed? The mistake was probably invading in the first place.

10 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 6

It probably would've helped.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

2) said that he would attack the US, and considering he was the largest military power in the middle east at that time, made him a threat

10 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 4

not at all. Sadaam was a mass murdering dictator who used chemical weapons on his own people, killed them for dissent, and repeatedly

10 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 5

He also compensated the families of suicide bombers with thousands of dollars for attacking civilians.

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

exactly.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Is the situation now meaningfully better? Was the situation during the insurgency?

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 2

THE POINT was to keep a military presence there long enough so that we could CREATE a stable government. unfortunately, too many people

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

5) and pull out anyways CAUSING the mess we have right now.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

3) consequences of that stupid decision.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

2) wanted immediate progress, and told the government to get out before that could be accomplished, and the world is dealing with the

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

4) the POINT of me discussing this was to point out that it COULD have been stable were people not stupid enough to ignore the warnings

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Why did the US army enter Iraq in the first place? Why is US constantly interfering and invading other countries?

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 7

3) he also previously invaded Kuwait and committed genocide multiple times. if ANYONE deserved to be invaded, it was Sadaam controlled Iraqq

10 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

You do understand that the USA is not the world police officer, can you understand that?

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 4

well then who the hell else is going to stop murderous dictators?

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

2) importantly, PAID SUICIDE BOMBER'S families as a way to encourage that type of behavior.

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 1

because Sadaam was a mass murdering dictator who silenced opposition, gassed his own people, threatened to attack the US, and most 1)

10 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 2

So if someone threatens you, you immediatelly go and KILL them? Why doesn't the US invade North Korea then? Oh, no oil, right.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 2

3) hell did the military spend a lot of time BURNING The oil fields controlled by the enemy?

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 2

2) and the only reason we DON'T Invade North Korea is China has their back. Also, if the US was so damn concerned with oil, why the

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 2

threatening wasn't the only reason, I listed a lot of them. not the least of which was he LITERALLY paid terrorists to commit terrorism.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 2

That's no why the US went in and you know it. Besides, Saddam bought the bio-weapons from the US in the first place.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 2

2) stop Iran, which he broke. Second, Yes it IS the reason we went to war. Why do YOU think it was? and don't give me the "so we could sell

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

3) Iraqi oil" crap because if that were true, we wouldn't have spent half our time BURNING IT

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

they weren't bio weapons, they were chemical weapons. And they were sold to him under very strict agreement they would be only used to 1)

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

This seems pretty legit info, but as with any info, [citation needed]. Also, any organized military group that kills civilians, are shit.

10 years ago | Likes 1161 Dislikes 49

What's that? I can't hear you over laser-guided missiles used to obliterate hospitals in 2003.

10 years ago | Likes 13 Dislikes 1

Most of the text in OP's post was copied from a TV report written by Ben Swann http://truthinmedia.com/truth-in-media-the-origin-of-isis/

10 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 1

Lol what, you mean like we (USA) do? We bomb villages and strategic locations without even checking (or caring) if there are civilians there

10 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 1

There's a recent Frontline documentary that laid out some of this information, although OP's post is somewhat editorialized.

10 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 1

Like the U.S army.

10 years ago | Likes 20 Dislikes 11

America kills civilians. Look up Julian Assange, from wikileaks

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Well the US has killed hundreds of thousands of civillians so...

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 3

Not as a deliberate action, like ISIS does daily.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 4

Including the U.S. military?

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 3

You ARE aware that you have drones regularly bombing innocent civilians, right?

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 2

"You have drones" I'm not from U.S., I'm actually really, really far away from U.S.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

So every single military force ever?

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Including Saddam Hussein...who murdered countless civilians of his own country...for shits and giggles...

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Lol the u.s. army.

8 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Don't think op is supporting ISIS... That last part goes without saying. And I'm pretty sure the US military tops that list of shit.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

This seems legit, on basis that I remember reading news articles about some of those stuff, some years ago. Still would want sources,

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Ummm drone strikes often kill multiple civilians, only because they are in the area of a supposed target.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Almost all of them then.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

This left out a lot of info too.It's a good and broad description,but it's missing details.Ex: our disbanding Iraqi military fed into this

10 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

But my brother studies this for a living. Foreign relations with a focus on the middle east, and terrorism. I'd have to consult him first.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

I can't give you sources right now, it'd take half an essay to type up the sources for this guy's posts or go into any more detail.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

You mean when the US dropped a giant bomb on the civilian population of Japan? TWICE.

10 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 3

After they dropped leaflets warning the civilians of what was going to happen and to leave.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Exactly. And pretty much all the fucking military organizations ever.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

He said the US just left the military shit, no we fucking did not. The Iraq military fucking handed over what we gave them.

10 years ago | Likes 28 Dislikes 4

The US knew the Iraqi army was a joke. Only the militias have any real cohesion, that's why they're the ones fighting now.

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 2

The militias are just as bad, especially in afghan where they were far worse than the Taliban

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

i don't think anyone would have assumed that the iraq military would just hand over their gear, we expected them to run

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Also, ISIS is going to disolve as quickly as it appeared. They can't govern shit and will be gone within a couple years.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

They ran and dropped their weapons. It was stupid to expect otherwise. Especially given the sunni/shia tensions. 1/2

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

but by all reports they didn't actually run, they literally handed over their gear to isis

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

False. The Iraqi military that WE left was fairly decent. When we gave Al-Maliki the reins he replaced all of our carefully vetted, 1

10 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 2

Right, always someone elses fault.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 4

Non-sequitur. Come back when you have a point.

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

competent commanders with political allies that had little to no military experience. If the US commanders had been left in place ISIS 2

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

might exist but it would never have taken a major city, let alone entire regions. Last

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

I think every army in existence has killed civilians, not always on purpose but wars always have collateral damage.

10 years ago | Likes 64 Dislikes 4

Then war is a part of the problem that needs fixing.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Just the word collateral damage to explain innocent lives is a bit far fetched to accept. I do agree war has casualties.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

"I do agree war has casualties." - parparr, July 2015

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 2

I am aware. Still, I am actually applying for Finnish Rapid Deployment Forces, and I'm going to volunteer for Iraq as Peacekeeper. 1/2

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

Because I feel like I want to help people who have no choice in the shit that's happening at the moment. It's like 85% not their fault. 2/3

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Sure, military has to make sacrifices for the better good, but there are cases (Wikileaks) where they have just butchered for fun 3/3

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

I think that the purposeful killing of civilians is what crosses the moral line into 'you done fucked up' territory.

10 years ago | Likes 28 Dislikes 1

I think you over-value intent

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Then that's really going to include just about everyone in the current Syrian conflict at some point or another.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Sure, but in the good cases, those civilian deaths are due to the dudes you want to kill being too close to civvies.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

Nowadays yes, concerning Hiroshima or Nagasaki, not so much :/

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Good cases=Not intentionally killing civilians, if I did not make myself clear enough.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

pretty sure there were factories in those Cities as well as troop transport. Honestly The bombs were a better fate than a full invasion 1/2

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

I guess this is how war works tho, I meant the collateral damages were quite incredible

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

of japan considering they were preparing massive kamikaze attacks and arming civilians to fight, sometimes with just pointy sticks.it 2/2

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

I too would love some sources for all of this.

10 years ago | Likes 96 Dislikes 0

It's pretty obvious actually. We overthrew Saddam's regime, which was pro-Sunni. In his place, we put Nurik Al Maliki, who was pro-Shia. 1/?

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 2

Maliki's regime began facing opposition from the Sunni majority. When he asked the US how to handle it, they basically told him to do as 2/?

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 2

He pleased, so he did. The US invaded Iraq with the intention of destabilizing the country, creating a power vacuum amd inciting 3/?

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Sectarian violence. Iraq is the perfect country, namely because of the near 50/50 population split between Sunni and Shia. It was never 4/5

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

I was pretty annoyed because OP used that bait line "media doesn't cover this," despite the media covering this and OP excluding sources.

10 years ago | Likes 18 Dislikes 1

"Truthinmedia" doesn't sound that reliable..

10 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 2

What would sound reliable? Maybe that attitude is the problem. Didn't check the link, I'm speaking generally here

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 2

Which attitude?

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

It's not. The article is filled with errors.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

It's not. There is however a recent Article in the Atlantic that is much closer to correct, well cited and far more reasonable.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

There is no good source other than OPs opinion

10 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 3

The book state of defense explains alot about the war covered on this post. Also sites/tv channels like BBC, Aljazeera cover it.(1)

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

Also any non American news source has been covering parts of what is on this post. To many readers this is common knowledge

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Russia Today and The Guardian reports on this. I read some of this in the paper in Ontario.

10 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 2

Even US news media reports on much of this as well, but for some topics you have to go with foreign sources.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Unrelated:I was trying to find a US news source that covered the 45 billion the Pentagon "lost",but was unable to find any reputable sources

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

RT is so blatantly biased it's laughable. If we were measuring biased reporting fox would be an 8/10, CNN 6/10, RT would be [Redacted}.

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Most non American news agencies covered this I believe.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

You're right to ask, so for those interested I'll put some relatively good sources below, not all of which back up the above statements.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

On ISIS's oil money: tp://www.cnn.com/2014/10/06/world/meast/isis-funding/">http://www.cnn.com/2014/10/06/world/meast/isis-funding/ in contrast http://www.vox.com/2014/11/7/7173665/isis-oil-money

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Origin: http://truthinmedia.com/truth-in-media-the-origin-of-isis/">of-isis/">http://truthinmedia.com/truth-in-media-the-origin-of-isis/ http://www.vox.com/cards/things-about-isis-you-need-to-know/what-is-isis

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

My personal take on ISIS for those interested will be below this comment.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

ISIS would not exist without the invasion of Iraq in 2003. Al-Qaeda only gained a foothold in the country post-Sadam and it was this group1/

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

fighters come from Turkish border crossings and the Saudis have pushed Wahabism for decades. But that doesn't mean the US approves. 12/12

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

one man who could have had a force to stop them at the outset from winning, namely Bashar al-Assad. Keeping ISIS down would have meant 7/

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

lead to ISIS becoming so well armed. That being said, supporting the Syrian rebels did help ISIS more indirectly, namely by preventing the6/

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

But this is NOT because of some ISIS supporting agenda, but because Turkey, a NATO ally, would be extremely against this. The Turks have 9/

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

more difficult. Has Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar been giving ISIS some clandestine support? My guess is probably, the foreign ISIS 11/

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

weapons left behind weren't abandoned by the US, they were weapons meant to be used by the Iraqi army. It was Iraqi, not US, failures that5/

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

been dealing with a Kurdish independence movement for decades and giving them US weapons could make keeping that movement in check much 10/

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

supporting brutal, civilian killing dictators. The US has been very reluctant to actually arm the Kurds (the Kurds don't need training) 8/

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

divided and weak is a means of preventing coups, but also leaves a nation vulnerable to threats like well trained invaders. However, the 4/

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Iraqi leaders know that in Iraqi history a strong army lead to the coup that lead to the Ba'athist regime. Keeping the army incompetent 3/

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

which created the ISIS we know today. In addition the extreme incompetence of the Iraqi military is another result of the invasion as 2/

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

While there's some truth to this, and I'll agree 100% we kinda effed up bad the first few years in Iraq; there's way more to it than this.

10 years ago | Likes 2182 Dislikes 77

Kinda like OP is trying to ignore the Bush era influence....

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 2

He forgot about the Saudi's funding ISIS

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

The fact is the region is more unstable and ISIS now exists. McCain's pals sure brought stability, peace, and democracy eh?

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Wait... you mean there is more to current affairs in the middle east than a single article can summarise? BUT HOW????

10 years ago | Likes 46 Dislikes 6

Lol, right? OP is posting whats really going on (corruption), and everyone hates because they don't want to believe it.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 6

Indeed. For one, OP fucked up the group's origin: they began in 1999 (not 2006) and became al-Qaeda in Iraq in 2004, ending ties in 2014.

10 years ago | Likes 26 Dislikes 4

Nothing is mentioned about the huge amounts of foreign fighters(coughChechenscouch) that trained AQI, or funding from gulf states.

10 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 0

Not to mention that the Middle East has been nothing but hostilities since the Ottoman Empire imploded and a British general brew the lines.

10 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 1

There's an interesting parallel here to what happened in Cambodia after the US left Vietnam. People who wanted us to get out of 'Nam... 1/?

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

...essentially helped the Khmer Rouge into power. Once it became obvious what that meant, they began selling the idea that the rise... 2/?

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

...of the Khmer Rouge was all the fault of the US effort to fight communism in Southeast Asia. See how that works? 3/4

10 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

Heads I win. Tails you lose.

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

While this has truths, this post is riddled with inaccuracies and opinions.

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Part of the problem is also that Syrian Free Army wasn't one faction, it was made out of many different factions with different agendas.

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Yea I watched a documentary that said ISIS was so militarily competent because their commanders are former Baathist commanders.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

If i remember correctly there is a PBS (so a reliable documentary) one on ISIS that talks about this.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

The documentary I saw was aired by my college and I had to write about it. It wasn't the PBS one(watched it as a refresher) but was similar

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Also, some countries (including my beloved Turkey, ruled by a crazy dictator in disguise) have secretly helped the Rebel army and ISIS.

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

You can say that really about anything, when it comes down to it, we should not have gone into the middle east

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

What options did we have? If we'd stood by after 9/11, there would have been revolt in the streets. People wanted blood, not politics.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

We've fucked up the past 25 years in the Middle East.

10 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 4

More like the last 70 years

10 years ago | Likes 11 Dislikes 3

Remember, Sadam OR ISIS are both bad ideas... pick your poison.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Yup.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Way more you say? Fuck reading all that shit.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

First few? Our pull out game must be terrible, too, if we're leaving bread crumbs. I mean loaves of bread.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Way more you say? Fuck reading all that shit.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Don't forget that Russia forced the west to not intervene in Syria on the side of moderate rebels until isis showed up

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

No shit. Not a SINGLE mention of Nouri al-Maliki? This is an entirely incomplete take of the situation. ISIS is going to self-destruct.

10 years ago | Likes 29 Dislikes 2

Isis will self destruct? Please explain or point me somewhere.

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 2

It consists of half former Baathist commandos and religious extremists- as they achieve more, their goals can only conflict.

10 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 1

Agreed, I would say it's a safe bet most of ISIS leadership doesn't give a shiz about Islam, just a tool for control.

10 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

I'm curious about how you know they're going to self-destruct. Is there some kind of internal conflict in the group?

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

They are a terrorist group that has no real plan to govern. It's easy to take territory, but harder to run it, especially with the U.S 1/2

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

and allies dropping bombs on anyone who pokes their head out in public. 2/2

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

no... no they won't

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

An article that explains some things that OP didn't: https://medium.com/war-is-boring/i-went-on-the-worlds-deadliest-road-trip-2ac357788292

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Suddam needed to go. Everyone but him agreed. The problem was no one really knew what a "government" was there and we did jack shit to teach

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

Yes waaaaay more, like fictitional wmd's that were not being made. The only weapons they had were supplied by??? Yes Ronald Wilson Reagan.

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 2

saddam was pretty bad in his own right. the whole murdering his citizens with chemical weapons thing.

10 years ago | Likes 40 Dislikes 3

As far as middle eastern dictators go, Saddam could've been a lot worse.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 2

yes but much less of an international threat than ISIS, if you're looking at it in that light

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Honestly with Saddam's historical abuse and disdain for non Sunnis; ISIS would probably find a secret ally in the Republican guard.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

No real source to support that; other than spending almost four years in Iraq in various places; talking to people from all walks of life.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 2

And aloooooooootttt of studying Iraqi demgraphics, history, current events and other happenings.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 2

Though I don't think anything justifies 500,000 dead Iraqis, Saddam was an awful man and I am glad that he is dead.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 4

It's not that Saddam wasn't bad. He was. It's just that the US invaded and deposed him without having a political leader to replace him with

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 1

He never said saddam was a good guy, just that freeing a country is just the first part, it s happening right now in libya too 1/2

10 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 2

From what i remember the power is split between different armed milita 2/2

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Didn't say he did, pointed out that the US knew what kind of man they were backing.

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

okay, my bad then

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Yeah....And the US totally didn't help put him in power....

10 years ago | Likes 10 Dislikes 9

Or the chemical weapons he used...

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

The funny part is I didn't say anything to the contrary of that and yet you still decided to give me some tude.

10 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 2

In the context of this debate your statement was a tacit defence of US intervention in Iraq... hence @KittyArcher made a relevant rebuttal.

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

No, I was pointing out that the US knew they were backing another psycho (again) but he would do what they want for a bit so who cares.

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 2

The world isn't perfect. You don't always get to chose between good and evil. This shit ain't a movie. We don't have time machines yet.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

seems to be a common theme. Same thing happening in Ukraine now, too

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

If you want to see the real backstory, I suggest watching the documentary No End In Sight http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nyfm75jmkbI

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

hey dont say im a american

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

thats funny +1

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

It would probably had been better if the war on Iraq wouldn't have occurred. It's difficult to get a country from dictatorship to democracy.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

I'm more inclined to say that he is 99% correct. The war in Iraq created a vacuum that invited sectarian conflict its not an opinion.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

We kinda effed up big time back during the Cold War with regards to the Middle East.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Covert origins of Isis: http://youtu.be/oMjXbuj7BPI

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

U.S. pull-out game: weak since 1945.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Watch Generation Kill dude

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

What about the last few years? Those weren't exactly silky smooth

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

A part of that is because the Iraqi government collapsed so quickly that we were completely unprepared to rebuild it. It only took 6 weeks.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

As somebody who's generally critical of the US: blaming the entirety of ISIS on Americas actions is plain ignorant.

10 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

One thing everyone needs to remember is that most of the world is developing and becoming much better, and it's becoming much harder..

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

.. for extremely conservative mindsets to go unchallenged. They are losing to the development of the entire world and using ..

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

..violence because what else do they have? They don't have education and pesky questions shake the core of their values.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Of course Malala gets a bullet in the head. A _muslim_girl_ having the gall to claim that alls girls should be able to get educated?

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

(ofc there's education. But I'm talking about the comparison with many developed countries.)

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Way to play it safe

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Not just ISIS. Even Afghanistan was the fault of the U.S. It's as if current foreign policy will have no impact on the future is their motto

10 years ago | Likes 9 Dislikes 7

Pretty sure 9/11 caused the invasion of Afghanistan not the US Bin Laden was there he had just directed an attack that killed thousands 1/?

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 2

Afghanistan is a country. al-qaeda is not

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 2

Right and al queda was in Afghanistan and the government there was openly harboring them

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

OMG ZE AMERICA IS OPENLY HARBORING THE KKK. TOLERANT PPL OF THE WORLD UNITE AGAINST THIS THREAT. What a shitty fucking excuse.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

And supporting the mujahideen (rebels) who were anti-USSR. It's well documented with legitimate sources. If you get in bed with the (1/?)

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

The policy regarding Afghanistan was disturbingly similar to the one in Iraq and Syria and U.S. created a monster unintentionally.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

enemy of your enemy & can't control them, it will come back to haunt you like it did the U.S. with 9/11. It was another casualty of Cold War

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

if 9/11 hadn't happened I doubt the US would give a crap about the Taliban or AL Queda Afghanistan was 100% the right move to do Iraq is

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

another issue entirely and is far more controversial

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

In all sincerity, please do me a favour and read up on the Afghan Revolution/ Soviet War and the involvement of the U.S. in arming (1/?)

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Yeah. You can't talk about cause and effect in the Middle East without mentioning Iran or Sadi Arabia. Their hands are on everything too

10 years ago | Likes 110 Dislikes 2

+ Israel , lol

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Some Saudi princes are covertly supporting ISIS. Iran supports Assad & Iraq. It's a giant clusterfuck for sure. It would get tl;dr fast.

10 years ago | Likes 30 Dislikes 0

in which both Iran and Saudi Arabia stand as leader for each side.

10 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

True, though Iran is on the "better' side this time. Suni and chiites all over again. It's a muslim civil/religious war (1)

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 1

The Middle East countries are a**holes.They have the money but refused to help.And now their people flocking my country treated 1/2

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

2/2 like shit.They just do whatever they want and refused to respect our local cultures.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

Iran literally has NOTHING to do with this... ISIS hates Iran buddy

10 years ago | Likes 17 Dislikes 15

I was under the impression ISIS hated everyone ...

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

If anything we should be working with Iran, but we have this crazy notion they're going to blow up the world & Israel

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 3

yea but Iran supports Assad so Syria gets support from them making the rebels severely outgunned which made the US step in and arm them

10 years ago | Likes 16 Dislikes 1

Iran was not the reason the US stepped in by any stretch of the imagination.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 2

The whole point of this post was saying that we should not have gone into Syria though...

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 3

Hindsight is 20/20 but saying Iran has nothing to do with Syria is just wrong

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

Also hindsight a bitch. if the league of nations knew punishing Germany would lead to some really bad juju.. pretty sure that wouldn't have

10 years ago | Likes 574 Dislikes 13

Punishing a country after a fucking world war is something different than invading a country and overthow the goverment.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 2

Apparently not.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Factually speaking a lot of leaders were fully aware that it was a 'truce for twenty years', as I believe Foch described it.

10 years ago | Likes 141 Dislikes 2

Foch thought the treaty was too lenient though, not too harsh. Most of the French military was firmly in favor of dismantling Germany fully.

10 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

True enough, but it was generally agreed that it was too middle ground.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

In the UK we had the biggest ever demonstration in our history against invading Iraq. People knew we were going in for the wrong reasons.

10 years ago | Likes 22 Dislikes 0

You can say hindsight a bitch, but the US has been doing this "supply out favourite rebels" for literally decades. And it blew up every time

10 years ago | Likes 16 Dislikes 0

It's a little more nuanced than that, even if Versailles never happened, the Germans were utterly convinced by the stabbed in the back myth.

10 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 0

You're right on that, a lot of Hitler's propaganda that wasn't directed at Versailles focused on the November Revolution and Kiel Mutiny.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

League of Nations never existed, it fell apart because America didn't join. The Treaty of Versailles did that to Germany.

10 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 1

It was patently clear that the Iraq War would leave a massive power vacuum to just about anyone who cared about facts.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Sure, but if you mess up in the same exact way for 70 years, at some point you just need to learn to stay the fuck out.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

And Carthage regrets crossing rome

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I believe, John Keyes was one that complained "the Treaty" did nothing to turn enemy into neighbor. Obvs they didn't listen.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

+1 for solid use of Bad Juju

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

It did lead to some really bad German jewjew.

10 years ago | Likes 98 Dislikes 2

Lol

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 2

10 years ago | Likes 26 Dislikes 1

A lot of people saw that coming, just like a lot of people predicted invading Iraq was stupid.

10 years ago | Likes 26 Dislikes 1

Not the right people, sadly...

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

"A lot" is how many exactly? Were they giving intelligent arguments for their positions or just making arbitrary predictions?

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 3

against the invasion.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Of Particular note was General Newbold, who predicted there would be an insurgency which would require massive troop numbers to suppress.

10 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 0

And what was his alternative? Should we have done nothing and just waited to see what happened?

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 3

A lot is most of the CIA and a substantial portion of the United States military's Officer Corps. Several Generals were fired for counseling

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 0

He was told that he was "the product of everything that was wrong with the military" and his objections were dismissed.

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

A lot is millions of us who marched because we knew that there were no WMDs and that a war would destabilize the region, which it did.

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 1

Basically every General that wasnt trying to advance their career. Shinseki got sacked for voicing what the brass had been thinking for year

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

the entire was was planned by morons who never served and when actually soldiers tried to enlighten them they were replaced.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Agreed, though I still upvoted the dudes post for awareness. HOWEVER, he simplified this way too much. You can't put a blame on a single

10 years ago | Likes 131 Dislikes 9

Donald Rumsfeld and the DOD explicitly outlined their aim to destabilise the region and create "a key state that supports terrorism". 1/2

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 2

He also leaves out information that would ruin his thesis, such as the captured weapons were left behind for the Iraqi Army to use.

10 years ago | Likes 7 Dislikes 0

And regardless of whose fault it is that they exist or if they are the byproduct of mistakes, they are still asshats that need a beating.

10 years ago | Likes 17 Dislikes 1

that goes without saying. at least by assessing what happened and how they formed we can learn for the future

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Agreed. You simplify things too much, a good portion of the information gets lost.

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 0

2/2 BUT HEY, cant put blame on a single action of just one group, no matter how successful it is.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 1

Of course he simplified it. This is imgur not an academic journal

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

Without the US invasion there would be no ISIS. That is a stone cold fact.

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 7

You might as well say then that without Hussein then there would be no ISIS. that's the problem with this post and especially your

10 years ago | Likes 8 Dislikes 2

Completely generalized opinion. It's way to generalized.

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 1

Without Hussein there may well have been something like ISIS years earlier. As horrible as he was he held off the extremists. 1/2

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 5

By committing genocide. YOUR OPINIONS AND LACK OF KNOWLEDGE IS SHOWING

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

One of bin Laden's gripes was that the US fought the first gulf war and Mujihadeen forces.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 5

Again, your opinion is showing. The key term used is "western powers"

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 1

Not even close to the same thing. The US came in and destroyed the infrastructure and civil society and ISIS rose because of it.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 5

You're completely ignoring the fact that we spent years and billions of dollars building shit and training the Iraq military...

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 1

Whatever helps you sleep better at night.

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 2

Whatever helps you sleep better at night.

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 2

I agree that he should have mentioned how saudi arabia and iran were involved as well.

10 years ago | Likes 12 Dislikes 0

Action of just one group

10 years ago | Likes 60 Dislikes 3

I think using "north" country or nato could be better, a lot of them have their own part in this problem. Sorry for bad english

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 1

a lot of south and east countries does too

10 years ago | Likes 3 Dislikes 0

ok, everyone who is not ISIS then :D

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

He blamed it on a bunch of actions actually. You're over-simplifying OP's post.

10 years ago | Likes 23 Dislikes 8

he is oversimplifying everything to the point he just jump to the conclusion he wanted first. Blaming his government.

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 2

You're assuming he did that, also he's not alone on his beliefs. I find it doubtul many people randomly came to the same conclusion

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

"ISIS is entirely a creation of the United States’ behavior in Iraq."-OP Pretty sure he just blamed it on one group.

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 3

I didn't say he didn't.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Not enough actions

10 years ago | Likes 5 Dislikes 2

It's a fairly long post, it seems reasonable to not expect OP to cover absolutely everything.

10 years ago | Likes 4 Dislikes 1

Not enough actions

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

The only problem with this is the radical groups have done stuff like this regardless of reason. Pretending this is all U.S. based is a joke

10 years ago | Likes 83 Dislikes 18

well yeah, but the point is that Iraq war was what allowed them to get into power. (actually it was pulling out of Iraq prematurely,

10 years ago | Likes 21 Dislikes 2

2) something that the military had advised Obama would be a bad idea FOR THIS VERY REASON) but nobody wants to admit that they indirectly

10 years ago | Likes 16 Dislikes 1

3) caused ISIS by voting to get out of Iraq.

10 years ago | Likes 14 Dislikes 2

Caused. Isis by never having voted to get into Iraq. Good thing we got all those WMDs

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

Iraq had PLENTY of them. Iraq had a history of using them, and sure enough we found them. Ever heard of the Halabja gas attack?

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

I said good thing.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

wasn't sure if you were being sarcastic or not sorry

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

That and the heavy handed anti sunni raq government that was elected. Notice Obama didn't authorize strikess until that gov was replaced

10 years ago | Likes 2 Dislikes 0

Shhh you hurting the pro- liberal agenda. Don't logic that whole thing

10 years ago | Likes 6 Dislikes 1

More anti-war, isolationist conservatives were part of it as well. It's not all a party thing.

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

stop fucking making it about parties, it's pathetic. both have blood on their hands

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0

it's not about the blood, it's about the agenda behind it and whether it was worth something or not

10 years ago | Likes 1 Dislikes 0