SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
How does the Islamic State, a ragtag band of jihadis who are supposedly at war with the combined military might of the US, Turkey, the Saudis, the Russians, the Iraqis, the Iranians and many others (including, of course, the Syrians) manage to fund and coordinate spectacular international terror attacks, including not only the Paris attack, but also (apparently) bombings in Turkey and Lebanon, and the take down of Russian airliners? How is it that governments can flag and track the "suspicious" financial transactions of anyone withdrawing or transferring over $10,000 from their own bank account, but can't seem to find a way to restrict cash flows, arms and munitions to a geographically isolated enemy who are dependent on oil sales for their financial survival?
Good question. Just don't ask the US State Department spokesman those questions, because he doesn't have the answers. When asked earlier this week by RT's Gayane Chichakyan "whether the US has sanctioned any banks suspected of carrying out transactions for ISIL," department spokesman Mark Toner responded with a resounding: "I'd have to look into that. I don't have the answer in front of me."
Apparently the question of how ISIS is financing its operations is of so little interest to the State Department that they haven't bothered to look into it. So in the interest of helping them out with their homework, let's connect a few dots, shall we?
[More after the break.]
Earlier this year it was revealed that French President François Hollande had authorized illegal shipments of arms to the Syrian terrorists in 2012. The deliveries–including cannons, machine guns, rocket launchers and anti-tank missiles–were in direct contravention of an EU embargo that was in place at the time.
In late 2012 it was revealed that one of the most prominent backers of the Syrian terrorists was the French government, who in addition to their illegal arms shipments were also delivering money directly to the terrorist opposition leaders.
Last year the French arms export industry enjoyed its best sales in 15 years, with revenues up 18%. The reason for the Merchant of Death bonanza? A spike in sales to Saudi Arabia and Qatar, two of the main funders and supporters of ISIS.
(Score: 4, Informative) by bob_super on Monday November 23 2015, @05:42PM
Yup, there's only one set of rebels against the Syrian regime.
Is the author working for Assad or Putin?
(Score: 3, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 23 2015, @05:59PM
Yup, there's only one set of rebels against the Syrian regime.
No, there is like 2 or 3, all pretty much the same as ISIL. Except maybe the Kurds - the actual sane party in that mess. But Kurds fighting ISIL are still terrorists group as per Turkey - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurdistan_Workers%27_Party [wikipedia.org]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syrian_opposition#/media/File:Syrian_civil_war.png [wikipedia.org]
http://cartoonistgroup.com/store/add.php?iid=116905 [cartoonistgroup.com]
(Score: 3, Informative) by zocalo on Monday November 23 2015, @06:15PM
UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
(Score: 4, Informative) by VLM on Monday November 23 2015, @06:16PM
The Turks are just spreading propaganda. About 1 in 4 people in Turkey are Kurds and the majority Turks hate the Kurds and would ethnically cleanse them if they could.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kurds_in_Turkey [wikipedia.org]
The situation is perfectly analogous to the Armenian Genocide where the same people in the same country are trying to get rid of minorities yet pretend they are not and anything that might have happened was all the victim's fault anyway and its none of the worlds business.
The Turks are basically genocidal bloodthirsty madmen, historically. Today, well, hard to say for sure. But I wouldn't trust anything they say about the Kurds.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 23 2015, @11:01PM
The relationship between the Turks and the Kurds is good bit more involved. For example, it was the Kurds who fought alongside the Turks to preserve what's left of Ottoman Empire into modern Turkey.
Do you know that it's the Kurds, Armenians' blood enemy since the ancient times, that mostly carried out the dirty work of exiling and killing the Armenians in the Ottoman Empire? It's notable that some Kurdish scholars openly concede it was a genocide against Armenians, acknowledging the Kurds' part in it.
You comment is ignorant, not informative. SN should consider adding "ignorant" moderation.
(Score: 2) by davester666 on Monday November 23 2015, @06:46PM
Wasn't there a story, maybe a two months ago or so, about how a bunch of US-trained "rebels" had finished their training, were handed a bunch of weaponry, came across an ISIS checkpoint, where they promptly handed over all the weapons in return for safe passage? So now the US is going to 'vet' new trainee's a little more?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 23 2015, @09:48PM
I don't know. Why don't you provide a citation so we can evaluate your conspiracy theory...er, I mean, your claim?
(Score: 4, Informative) by davester666 on Tuesday November 24 2015, @02:04AM
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/syria/11882195/US-trained-Division-30-rebels-betrayed-US-and-hand-weapons-over-to-al-Qaedas-affiliate-in-Syria.html [telegraph.co.uk]
(Score: 4, Informative) by n1 on Monday November 23 2015, @07:15PM
I try to make sure the journalists I read are working for one of the 5 American corporations that have an a stranglehold hold on the mainstream press across print and broadcasting, because you know they're impartial and have no vested interests.
In all seriousness though. James Corbett can be controversial, and he has published his work on GlobalResearch, which does appear to be very friendly with the Russian establishment. Following his work, I do not believe James Corbett is actively engaged in that. He also contributes to BoilingFrogsPost [boilingfrogspost.com]. That outlet was founded by Sibel Edmonds [wikipedia.org], an FBI whistleblower.
The point I was trying to make with submitting this article is, things to not happen in a vacuum. Blowback doesn't exist just for the Russians. The narrative for Syria is impossible to follow, there are so many factions and moving parts. To make it easier we just focus on one, and if people listen carefully, the main focus is on "removing Asaad" primarily and "fighting ISIS" is second. They're not even pretending they can beat ISIS, just bring the fight to them and contain them.
There is a lot of damning information out there about the west's role in training, sending arms and support to the 'opposition' and then being surprised that "the so-called Islamic State" suddenly has lots of equipment, weapons and now knows military tactics.
Michael Flynn, former DIA chief [rt.com]:
This is an extremely complex topic and TFA does not do it justice, but it's a more interesting and insightful analysis than "ooo arn't these angry muslims scary, what can we do?!" .. "we never saw this coming" despite evidence to the contrary.
Another point i'd like to make is, it's all good whilst we're talking about this, because at least we're not talking about Yemen. That's one whole country of rebels we definitely can't support in any way, or talk about at all. Their dictator is one of our guys and the Saudis are busy finally making use out of all that military hardware the west 'sold' them.
Anyway, we should probably getting back to fighting "the so-called Islamic State" in Syria using the same failed strategies of military escalation and funding 'the opposition' that has worked so well to stabilize Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya in recent years...
[ I use "the so-called Islamic State" as that's the preferred term used by the BBC. ]
(Score: 5, Insightful) by bob_super on Monday November 23 2015, @08:11PM
Agreed.
I prefer to refer to "the so-called Islamic State" as "the de-facto government of the Sunni areas" which is more accurate context, especially in when trying to address potential "solutions" to the "problem". And the last two sets of quotes are needed when one considers our allies of the Terror-sponsoring Sunni Islamic Dictatorship based in Riyadh.
Fun list:
- The locals support whoever doesn't behead of blows them up. Typically that means the same "tribe". Trusting others comes with decades of bad publicity.
- Russia supports Assad because of his strategic location.
- Iran (and therefore Baghdad) supports Assad and anyone bugging the Sunnis.
- China supports whoever lets Oil flow.
- Saudi Arabia supports the Sunnis, especially the crazy ones, but only as long as they don't get dangerously crazy.
- The West doesn't support Assad because of the others who do, but doesn't support the crazies either. The west claims to support the Sunni moderates, but by definitions they are the first ones getting blown up by pretty much everyone else.
- Turkey supports anyone preventing the Kurds from pointing out the reality of their autonomy, which means supporting the Sunnis, even the crazy ones.
- Nobody wants to give up an inch of land to try to make the borders match the realities of the people actually willing to live together.
I'm pretty sure we've started official world wars for less than that.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by PartTimeZombie on Tuesday November 24 2015, @02:14AM
Thanks Bob_Super. That's a nice, easy(ish) to follow post which explains things well.
I always get a bit confused over who supports Sunnis or Shia, and what the difference is. Then I remember that they're both a bunch of crazy, vicious killers, and there's no point in learning much more than that.
This whole situation looks even worse than Northern Ireland in the 1960's.