Frontline: The Rise of ISIS

[UglyCasanova]

See here for the full show from PBS Frontline, it is well worth watching.

Also here is a New York Times review of the documentary.

It goes into much more depth on the formation of ISIS than what you generally pick up in the news and I recommend watching it if you have interest in the subject.

 

[sportage]

I started a thread in OFF TOPIC "On TV Tonight (worth recording)', and the comparison between another special playing on CNN about the Jimmy Carter hostage crisis back in the 70's.

Also adding in my own 2 cents worth, naturally.

The only threat ISIS may be for America is ISIS sole purpose and sole determination of ridding the region of every hint of American influence.
If American's believe that America no longer having any influence in that area of the world is a threat to America, then yes ISIS is a threat to America.
No longer having influence. No more McDonald's signs. No more Pepsi signs. No more Coca Cola signs. Nada. Nothing.
And maybe that is how it should be?
Yes, that is exactly how it it should be.

Tell president Obama that this is no time to backstep.
Anti-war Obama was right all along with wanting to get the hell out of Helena.
Once and for all.

Pull all American influence, all press, all media, all American business.
Leave the middle east to ISIS.

GW believed he could woo the middle east into loving us.
They did not.
John McCain believes we can bomb the middle east into loving us.
They will not.
Pull our influence.
Then, just wait and see how long they survive with no American oil money.

Leave them to ISIS, and let them have at it.
And if there were ever a time for true American commitment for energy independence, that time is now.
I don't see what the problem is.

Let American's know as little about the happenings over in the middle east as American's know about America's Black poor.
Which isn't much.
.
.

 

[IamDavid]

I started a thread in OFF TOPIC "On TV Tonight (worth recording)', and the comparison between another special playing on CNN about the Jimmy Carter hostage crisis back in the 70's.

Also adding in my own 2 cents worth, naturally.

The only threat ISIS may be for America is ISIS sole purpose and sole determination of ridding the region of every hint of American influence.
If American's believe that America no longer having any influence in that area of the world is a threat to America, then yes ISIS is a threat to America.
No longer having influence. No more McDonald's signs. No more Pepsi signs. No more Coca Cola signs. Nada. Nothing.
And maybe that is how it should be?
Yes, that is exactly how it it should be.

Tell president Obama that this is no time to backstep.
Anti-war Obama was right all along with wanting to get the hell out of Helena.
Once and for all.

Pull all American influence, all press, all media, all American business.
Leave the middle east to ISIS.

GW believed he could woo the middle east into loving us.
They did not.
John McCain believes we can bomb the middle east into loving us.
They will not.
Pull our influence.
Then, just wait and see how long they survive with no American oil money.

Leave them to ISIS, and let them have at it.
And if there were ever a time for true American commitment for energy independence, that time is now.
I don't see what the problem is.

Let American's know as little about the happenings over in the middle east as American's know about America's Black poor.
Which isn't much.
.
.

Wow. Have you ever left your front yard? ISIS and other extremist are NOT what the Middle East is made up of so allowing them to take over is pure insanity.

 

[hal2kilo]

See here for the full show from PBS Frontline, it is well worth watching.

Also here is a New York Times review of the documentary.

It goes into much more depth on the formation of ISIS than what you generally pick up in the news and I recommend watching it if you have interest in the subject.

Saw the first part. Looking forward to this one. A must see if you want to have a clue.

 

[soulcougher73]

Wow. Have you ever left your front yard? ISIS and other extremist are NOT what the Middle East is made up of so allowing them to take over is pure insanity.

So if they are not made up of ISIS than how can they take over? If the people dont want them than they can fight them themselves. Not our problem. Sick of being world police.

 

[William Gaatjes]

That was a very interesting documentary. Thanks for posting.

 

[Dari]

Thanks.

 

[CZroe]

So if they are not made up of ISIS than how can they take over? If the people dont want them than they can fight them themselves. Not our problem. Sick of being world police.

They are lining up dissenters and executing them. "Convert or die."

 

[Blain]

They are lining up dissenters and executing them. "Convert or die."

History is replete with similar atrocities.

 

[Jaskalas]

History is replete with similar atrocities.

Yes, but those are "in the past". The world is "better" today! Humanity is enlightened!!

Or rather... we're still just a bunch of animals capable of the worst atrocities. Imagine for a moment, how easy it would be for a civil society to breakdown and similar crimes started happening in your country. No one is far removed from the human nature of tribalism and bloodshed.

The worst of humanity is always just an empty store shelf away.

 

[Double Trouble]

Yes, but those are "in the past". The world is "better" today! Humanity is enlightened!!

Or rather... we're still just a bunch of animals capable of the worst atrocities. Imagine for a moment, how easy it would be for a civil society to breakdown and similar crimes started happening in your country. No one is far removed from the human nature of tribalism and bloodshed.

The worst of humanity is always just an empty store shelf away.

Definitely this. People always seem to underestimate just how relatively little it would take to make people do things they would generally consider heinous.

 

[positivedoppler]

Excellent documentary. Basically since the 2nd Invasion of Iraq, there has never been a clear cut easy decision.

Perhaps the only method for lasting peace there is to have the different sides settle their differences and let borders be redrawn.

 

[soulcougher73]

They are lining up dissenters and executing them. "Convert or die."

Then maybe they should fight back instead of being easy targets to be slaughtered.

I'd rather go down fighting throwing rocks if I had to than just being gunned down in a line without fighting back.

 

[BonzaiDuck]

We're still mopping up the detritus of the Cold War.

The Israel-Palestinian problem just confounds and complicates any problem-solving, the notion that this is entirely about a backwards religion and its extremist elements is an over-simplification.

The Iranians hate us for the Mossadegh coup in the early '50s with the installation of the Shah and Savak. Why did we do that? Ostensibly, because Mossadegh was a "socialist," but we were really shoring up the disintegrating British Empire to assure UK of cheap oil without paying royalties to Iran.

The Korean War and the first Gulf War seem to have developed from diplomatic errors of unforgiveable proportions: Dean Acheson mis-spoke when he said that South Korea wasn't in USA's defense periphery, while the first Kim Great Leader pestered both Stalin and Mao for support, and neither of the latter two were eager for it.

Bush 41's Ambassador to Iraq, April Glespie, gave similar mistaken signals to Saddam about Kuwait. So it is quite possible billions were spent, tens of thousands of American lives were lost -- just for poor diplomacy.

It was the neo-cons of the early 90s who "wanted to finish the job" with Iraq, and their motivation -- promoted by the prime contributors to GOP -- was the third largest oil reserve in the world. Leaving it under a sociopathic family such as Saddam's was an unpleasant alternative. Failure to see the cultural and ethnic underpinnings of Iraq led Junior Bush and his Halliburton cronies to open the Pandora's Box of the latest Iraq War.

Now the hawks are at it again, blaming Obama for the troop withdrawals and sounding the alarm about ISIS.

If we find it useful to conduct foreign policy and military intervention over the world price of strategic minerals, then we should introduce business concepts, such as "sunk cost." Sunk cost is the amount invested in a failed business venture which cannot be recouped. It is a temptation to continue throwing good money into a sewer of a failed business with the expectation that the sunk cost can eventually be recovered. Astute businessmen will choose to walk away from the failure, recovering salvage value.

The trap of sunk cost is more troublesome with military adventures: not only was there an expenditure of a trillion-plus in Iraq, but military adventures have casualties. Tell the parents of a fallen soldier that he/she died for nothing.

Politicians should be held accountable for such mistakes, because those mistakes cheapen the contribution of our warriors. Dubya Bush was so full of bluster that he wanted to demonstrate to the world that we could conduct warfare on two simultaneous fronts. While it was prudent that Eisenhower set a standard for defense spending that would make it feasible to do just that, it was a disaster for our economy that Obama's predecessor took us down that path.

Meanwhile, as criminally insane as we perceive ISIS, it is an outgrowth of Sunni Baathists who were sidelined by the Maliki regime. Maliki himself is responsible for degrading the Iraqi military. But ultimately, the leaders of ISIS really don't have a "vision for the future." Do they really think establishing a Caliphate will win allies or acceptance by the world community? Their vision is unsustainable. So our current approach to coalition-building with support for the Kurdish Peshmurga and Syrian Kurds, and greater participation by other regional players -- is the wisest approach.

But it also shows just how f***ed up the entire region really is. The Turks see the Kurds as terrorists. The Kurds are a culture and people without a homeland. The entire mess traces back to WWI and the Balfour Declarations -- all determined by the emerging world market for oil and British imperialism.

Here in America, we're a bunch of sissies. Chicken-Little sounds the alarm that ISIS wants to kill our poodle Fluffie, as if there is imminent risk and "clear and present danger." It may even be the case that the Carlisle Group is hungry for more defense profit-taking.

We can do best by building a consensus about energy. It would be prudent to make Big Oil obsolete for anything but chemicals -- pharmaceuticals and plastics. Big Oil will resist being driven to obsolescence. They've resisted it all along.

 

[Whiskey16]

Interesting aspects of history that you post ignored. For the most part, it was decent, all except for providing a cleansed revisionism and glossed over version of US responsibility:

It was the neo-cons of the early 90s who "wanted to finish the job" with Iraq, and their motivation -- promoted by the prime contributors to GOP -- was the third largest oil reserve in the world. Leaving it under a sociopathic family such as Saddam's was an unpleasant alternative. Failure to see the cultural and ethnic underpinnings of Iraq led Junior Bush and his Halliburton cronies to open the Pandora's Box of the latest Iraq War.

Meanwhile, as criminally insane as we perceive ISIS, it is an outgrowth of Sunni Baathists who were sidelined by the Maliki regime. Maliki himself is responsible for degrading the Iraqi military.

Maliki is of prime responsibility? That's the crux of the issue?

Certainly the strong removal of Sunni elements and of that governments (often with the USA's backing or blind-eye) denigration of non Shia-h Iraqi elements increased partisan divides, but it was FIRST the USA that chose the infinitely stupid fully disbanding of the nearly 300,000 strong Iraqi military and police, the full on de-Ba'athification of the Iraqi state, onto doing its utmost to err and provide the extreme groundwork of the Iraqi civil war. Certainly elements of the Sunni population found a route for revenge with the likes of ISIS, on to a portion of that maligned population found cause for rally between justified disenfranchisement and remembrance of the various atrocious Falluja campaigns.

Much easier to rewrite history for faults than recognise the USA's own gross incompetence and high crimes of aggression for committing to a needless war and the destruction of Iraq. The consequences of which are well present right now. Maliki's route for governance became a side-line and a symptom of US violence and idiocy.

 

[sportage]

I just had to re-watch this PBS special again.
This is text book example of how a country, our country the USA, can cause total and complete disaster under the wrong leadership i.e. GW Bush, and more so Dick Cheney.
The instability we caused in the region is never ending and will last for generations to come.
We broke it and obviously we now own it.
All because of some shit kicking hick of a American president deciding the middle east would just love some old fashion American influence.

As I watched this PBS special one thing was clear and the theme repeated over and over. How America had caused this hodgepodge of insanity and instability over in this entire region.
And truth be told, Obama or any future president should not share or carry any of the blame what so ever for the deliberate acts of one incompetent president.
For whatever happens now and forever more in that region, the fallout of the actions of two Bush administrations, no other president can be blamed.

There should be justice and accountability for any American president, the sole cause of this the great American tragedy.
How dare anyone blame Obama or any future president whom ever he or she might be for the total incompetence and stupidity with foreign policy that shall cause grave consequences for generations to come.

This is all Bush. Plain and simple. No other shares this blame. Only one. The Bush family both daddy Bush and son.
What the two have done to America is shameful and a disgrace of immeasurable proportion.

 

[Blanky]

I just had to re-watch this PBS special again.
This is text book example of how a country, our country the USA, can cause total and complete disaster under the wrong leadership i.e. GW Bush, and more so Dick Cheney.
The instability we caused in the region is never ending and will last for generations to come.
We broke it and obviously we now own it.
All because of some shit kicking hick of a American president deciding the middle east would just love some old fashion American influence.

I've not watched it yet, but I do share this sentiment.

 

[Auric]

If we find it useful to conduct foreign policy and military intervention over the world price of strategic minerals, then we should introduce business concepts, such as "sunk cost."

The trap of sunk cost is more troublesome with military adventures: not only was there an expenditure of a trillion-plus in Iraq, but military adventures have casualties. Tell the parents of a fallen soldier that he/she died for nothing.

However, as alluded to with "hungry for more defense profit-taking", foreign policy is not strictly a matter of national interest (in the way we would like to imagine) but rather elite/oligarchical interests. The consequences are practically irrelevant to the process (of wealth transfer by assuming public debt destroying and then rebuilding/rearming). It is exactly the ease with which casualties are justified (and civilians' ignored) which makes it possible -especially with such deflectionary platitudes as "support our troops".

Meanwhile, as criminally insane as we perceive ISIS, it is an outgrowth of Sunni Baathists who were sidelined by the Maliki regime. Maliki himself is responsible for degrading the Iraqi military.

As Whiskey16 says, it was the US which disbanded the army and was complicit in systematic terrorizing/torture/murder of Sunnis -making Abu Ghraib look like Summer camp (see other Frontline doc).

The entire mess traces back to WWI and the Balfour Declarations -- all determined by the emerging world market for oil and British imperialism.

Yes, not just the market but the necessity to secure supply for the navy to secure the Empire. WWI itself was caused by a naval arms race made possible with the development of iron warships (first burning coal then oil).

 

[TechBoyJK]

Watched last night.

Damn, that was good.

It seems like everyone thinks they are doing the right thing. US, Iraq, ISIS... they all think they are the good guys. Nouri al-Maliki was simply paranoid as fuck. And rightfully so. But his paranoia caused his worst nightmare to manifest by behaving in a way that reinforced his enemies perceptions.

 

[soulcougher73]

Watched last night.

Damn, that was good.

It seems like everyone thinks they are doing the right thing. US, Iraq, ISIS... they all think they are the good guys. Nouri al-Maliki was simply paranoid as fuck. And rightfully so. But his paranoia caused his worst nightmare to manifest by behaving in a way that reinforced his enemies perceptions.

Yeah it was good. But this is basically just tribal warfare where each side wants to kill the other side even though they believe in the same religion/god. I say let them. Eventually a victor will arise and wipe out the other tribe and claim the country as theirs. Almost every issue arises from us intervening over there and claiming "interests". Just leave and let them fight it out is my answer. They are barbaric people that grow up with death and destruction all around them. Taking a life to them is nothing.