Can Anyone Stop Erdogan From Becoming Turkey’s Sultan?

Well we all knew it had to get to this point.  Turkey’s wanna be sultan Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has put forth a wide ranging bill backed by conservatives in Turkey’s parliament that would centralize power behind the office of president even more.  If the measure passes in the coming months it will head to a national referendum in order to amend the constitution. In the proposed amendment, Erdogan will be able to stay in power until 2029 making him a defacto dictator or in his parlance sultan.

ISIS is Not Going Anywhere

Erdogan has been identified as one of the main backers of ISIS.  He supplied them multiple avenues to smuggle weapons and fighters in Iraq and Syria and he and his family bought oil directly from ISIS.  All of this was a strategy that created chaos with the direct purpose of giving Turkey a reason to expand its holding in these areas.  Only Turkey has the resources and is in proximity to be able to stabilize the area. This is why Turkey is in northern Syria and Mosul.

Tensions with Israel Will Continue to be Strained

While its true Erdogan signed off on the rapprochement deal with Israel, an emboldened Erdogan will see things very differently. Expect the relationship to contnue to be rocky between Israel and Turkey as long as Erdogan is at the helm.  Of course the military and business sector may step in and force Erdogan to play nice with Israel’s government, but there is no guarantee they will have the leverage they need.

The Kurdish Uprising is Guaranteed

If the constitution is amended the 10 million Kurds inside Turkey will have no other recourse than to rebel.  After all it is the Turks that arrived late on the scene from the east, occupying what has been Kurdish land for thousands of years.  With Russian backing below the radar, the Kurds are set to make the new sultan’s life a living hell.

With all of the above on the line, it is no surprise why Erdogan demands changes to the UN.

“There are so many countries. There are five permanent members of the Security Council and one of those five permanent members can make a decision that binds the rest of the world. That is not fair, that is not just,” Erdogan said. “To achieve international peace and security, it’s going to be very difficult, and perhaps fail if the United Nations is not restructured”

Perhaps that is the only thing Israel and Turkey see eye to eye on.

[huge_it_share]

the-news-behind-the-news-ad

“We Are Coming Nineveh” Obama Must Win in Mosul or Donald Trump Will Do it For Him

Legacies are bitter weapons that plague outgoing presidents time and time again.  Barack Obama thought he had his legacy wrapped up, but then came the blue color workers and placed Donald Trump into office. With one election Obama’s legacy is in tatters and he knows it.  Despite all of that, there is one last battle Obama needs and wants to win to stave off a complete rejection of his so far disastrous foreign policy. This battle is the battle of Mosul, where ISIS is making there last stand as far as nation building is going.

Despite a bitter beginning of infighting between Shiite militias, Turkish troops, Kurdish Peshmerga, and Iraqi National forces, the operation according the Iraqi officials is beginning to move along. “We Are Coming Nineveh”  has a time limit though and that is Jan. 20th.  Right now Obama has kept the Russians out of the bombing campaign and wants to prove he doesn’t need them to finish the job.  If Mosul is not taken by inauguration day, Trump will surely bring the Russians in to crush ISIS once and for all.

Why does this matter?

Obama has staked his foreign policy at least in the waning years of his Presidency on holding off Russian expansion.  Of course Putin has bested him in Eastern Europe as well as Syria.  This means Obama must keep him out of Iraq or risk being seen as a total loser. With Mosul grinding on and 60 days until President-Elect Trump becomes President Trump, the odds are not great that the Iraqi forces will succeed.  Keep in mind ISIS could have been defeated a while ago, but each side fighting in Iraq has used the group as a pawn to offset what they see as a more mortal enemy.

This is why Trump’s approach is to ignore the game on the ground and get together with Putin and flatten ISIS and if need be others.

Jan. 20th is coming.  After that date Iraq and Operation “We Are Coming Nineveh”  are on the chopping block.

[huge_it_share]

What Will Replace ISIS?

Originally published on Sultan Knish.

Before long the same administration that declared the fighting in Iraq over several times will claim victory over ISIS. The timetable for its push against the Islamic State appears to have less do with the victimized Christians and Yazidis who have been prevented from coming here as refugees in favor of Syrian Muslims than with the Clinton presidential campaign. Like Obama’s declarations that the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq were over, the announcement that ISIS has been defeated will be premature.

It is based on a profound misunderstanding and misreading of Islamic terrorism.

Long before its current string of defeats, ISIS had begun evolving into another Al Qaeda; a multinational alliance of Jihadists scattered around the world. Bombing Mosul isn’t hard, but try bombing Marseille, Brussels or London. There is no doubt that the ability of ISIS to temporarily establish a caliphate allowed it to build a network that could carry out terror attacks from New York to Miami to Nice to Munich. But it would be dangerous to assume that losing Iraq and Syria will stop ISIS.

ISIS doesn’t matter. The idea of ISIS does. And the idea of ISIS is Islamic supremacism.

The organization we think of ISIS has transformed and rebranded countless times. Even now our leaders vacillate between calling it ISIS, ISIL or, more childishly, Daesh, while it dubs itself the Islamic State. We have been fighting it in one form or another for over a decade. It would be unrealistically optimistic to assume that the war will end just as this old enemy has shown its ability to strike deep in our own cities.

The bigger error though is to think that we are fighting an organization. We are fighting an idea. That is not to contend, as Obama does, that we can debate it to death. It is not the sort of idea that argues with words, but with bullets, bombs and swords. But neither does it just go away if you seize a city.

Al Qaeda in Iraq not only survived the death of Zarqawi, but it became even more dangerous under Baghdadi. It would be risky to assume that ISIS will die with him. Instead it may very well grow into a new phase of Al Qaeda, one that ties together some of the world’s deadliest Islamic terror groups into a network that is decentralized enough that it will not suffer from Al Qaeda’s leadership fatigue.

The rise of Islamic terrorism has been an incremental process in which new groups learn from the mistakes of the old and supersede them. If ISIS does recede into a localized oblivion, reemerging only on occasion to suicide bomb something or someone in Baghdad, then a deadlier and even more effective group is likely to take its place. Each group will move one step closer to realizing the caliphate.

To break the cycle, we must confront the idea of the caliphate at the heart of Islamic terrorism.

ISIS is not un-Islamic. It is ruthlessly and uncompromisingly Islamic in that, unlike its predecessors in the Muslim Brotherhood and Al Qaeda, it makes the fewest compromises to civilizational sensibilities. Its goals are the same as those of every Islamic political organization, including those dubbed moderate. It seeks to restore and enforce an Islamic system in every part of the Muslim world before moving on to conquer and subjugate the non-Muslim world. If this were merely some fringe belief held by a tiny minority of extremists, then it could be bombed to pieces in some Syrian or Iraqi backwater.

But it’s the driving force of Islam. That’s why it won’t go away. No amount of appeasement will banish it.

Taking in more Muslim settlers, pressuring Israel and letting the Muslim Brotherhood colonize our foreign policy won’t do it. We’ve tried it and it actually makes Islamic terrorism much worse.

When the announcement is made, the usual suspects will pat themselves on the back for having defeated ISIS by mobilizing a Muslim coalition. But it wasn’t Obama who mobilized a Muslim coalition. The coalition, such as it was, mobilized them. Obama provided useful support to Islamic state sponsors of terror, such as Iran and Turkey, assorted Islamic Jihadists on the ground, some blatantly associated with Sunni and Shiite terror groups in their internal Jihadist conflict with ISIS over who will fight us.

The “allies” we are aiding today will be the ones bombing us tomorrow.

And that is why claiming credit for beating ISIS accomplishes nothing. ISIS is an expression of an Islamic impulse encoded in the Koran. Islamic groups differ in the tactical expression of that impulse. ISIS was nastier and uglier than most of the Islamic terror groups we had dealt with before this. Though even it found its Boko Haram affiliate in Nigeria occasionally a little too much to stomach.

If ISIS vanishes from the world stage, Islamic terrorism will be easier to dismiss. Or so the thinking goes. The Islamic State was better at viral videos than the media that tried to whitewash Islamic terror. It was hard to ignore. But a scattering of Islamic terror groups around the world will be forgotten by the public.

History suggests that’s wishful thinking.

Islamic terrorism has shown no signs of receding. Growing Muslim populations, both at home and in Muslim settlements in the West, and the increase in travel and communications, the infrastructure of globalism, spread it from the most backward to the most advanced parts of the world. Wealthy and unstable Muslim countries, rich in oil but poor in power, finance its spread through mosques and guns.

These are the ingredients that give us ISIS or any other combination or letters that stands for Islamic terror. To do anything meaningful about it, we would have to reverse the decline of the West.

Islam originally spread into a vacuum created by civilizational decline. Civilizational decline is why it is rising once again. An obscure local terror group eventually turned into ISIS by filling a power vacuum. Even as Obama performs another touchdown dance, some other group will be making that same journey. Its mission will be the familiar one of replacing our civilization with its own.

Until we come to terms with this civilizational struggle, we will go on fighting endless wars in the sand and coping with endless terror attacks in our own cities because we have failed to recognize the nature of the enemy. We are not fighting an acronym, whether it’s ISIS or ISIL; we are fighting an Islamic State.

This is a war to determine whether the future will belong to the West or to Islam.

[huge_it_share]

lev-haolam-international-pressure

Conquering Mosul…Does it Matter?

If there was a ever a wag the tail event or at least some twisted version of it, the Mosul offensive would be it.  An impressive array of US, Iraqi, Turkish, and Kurdish forces have now begun the invasion of Mosul, the Iraqi capital of ISIS. Some say 80,000 troops have been arrayed for the campaign.

Yet, with announcements made about the operation in public one wonders whether a successful retaking of Mosul would even matter as most of ISIS’s leadership fled the city a few months ago.

So what is the point of the operation?

Politics…

Sputnik News points out the following:

“In any case, liberating the city will be a major foreign policy victory for the White House, and may give an edge to Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton, who President Barack Obama sees as his preferred successor. Clinton’s Republican opponent Donald Trump has repeatedly criticized President Obama for not doing enough to fight Daesh, and for working against Russia rather than with it to root out and defeat the terrorist group.”

So we have a lame duck president openly invading another city in order to ensure a Clinton victory.

The world has gone mad and 800,000 residents in Mosul will feel the heat just so Obama can ensure his legacy is repaired.

[huge_it_share]

 

 

Jund al-Aqsa: What is America Hiding in Syria?

With the American military claiming the recent attack on the Syrian Arab Army a mistake, evidence seems to indicate that other forces are at play indicating that this attack was far from a mistake.  The attack on the Syrian Arab Army comes at a time when the fragile cease fire hammered out between the Americans and Russians appears to be unravelling already. 

Given the fact that the Americans have been operating in Eastern Syria for a while, how could they possibly make a mistake like this?  Afterall they know the Deir Ez-Zor  area far better than the other players, even Russia.

deir-ez-zor

Something that will shed light on the attack is the group the Syrian Arab Army was fighting. Their name is Jund al-Aqsa and despite their affiliation to radical salafist ideology the US only named them a terrorist entity 3 days ago.  In fact they were funded by the US and given sophisticated weaponry in their fight against the Syrian Army.

Salman Rafi Sheikh of the New Eastern Outlook says the following:

A look at the pattern of how the US-led coalition has been striking in the region would further reveal that the last strike, which killed more than 60 Syrian soldiers, was not simply a mistake. ISIS and the Syrian army have been fighting in the region, in Deir ez-Zor, for a long time. How come it be that the US led coalition never struck ISIS when it was rather successfully moving westward, for example, when it took Palmyra last year? Consistent with its current narrative, the US officials might like to put on this question another mask of “coincidence” and deep “regret.”

 

Since the “mistaken” American strike Jund al-Aqsa has been on a role in other areas, most notably Hama farther to te West and near Aleppo.  In those areas they have pushed back the Syrian Army and gained considerable ground.

The American air strike seems more like a supporting mission that was uncovered by the Russians.  But there is more.  The ceasefire was opposed by Ashton Carter the American Secretary of Defense and most of the Defense establishment who are hell-bent on removing Assad from power by any means necessary. They have been using ISIS style terror entities as proxies for a while and until the Russians entered the fray it worked.

Now with the Russia and the Syrian Army pushing back most of the gains the US proxies made over the last few years, the US defense establishment is taking one last chance by using ISIS off shoots like Jund al-Aqsa to push back against the Syrian Army.  By declaring the air strikes a mistake the US hopes to cover he fact that ISIS as we know it is really the Frankenstein of the Department of Defense led by Ashton Carter.

This Frankenstein has gone mad.

[huge_it_share]

a-angels-ad