Where did ISIS Come from Exactly?

[clickity click]

I am pretty dumb so please make it simple to understand.
I know they originate from IRAQ but when and how did they become known?

I remember the Al Qaeda crap and suddenly they have gone and been replaced with this ISIS lot.
Where did Al Qaeda go? are they one and the same under a different name?

Thanks.

[CaptainHowdy]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sicarii

[seeandsee]

they just made up them

[Rochard]

I thought that ISIS was one of the groups that came into being because of the civil war in Syria. However, if I understand correctly (and please feel free to correct me) ISIS started in Iraq after the end of the war with Iraq. They worked hand in hand with al qaeda, but both got beat down pretty badly after the troop surge in 2007. ISIS used to be foreigners from outside of Iraq, but after 2009 it was dominated by Iraqis. In 2011 ISIS was heavily operating in Syria, and recruiting from there as well.

The major problem with ISIS is that this is a world wide group. There are a lot of calls for using military forces to fight ISIS, and while this will help it will only be a partial solution. This is something that is largely embedded within their culture, and that is something military force cannot change. We need to go all in and completely dominate the entire area, which is never going to happen.

This will not change until other, peaceful Muslim countries get dragged into this mix. Once terrorist attacks start happening in other Muslim countries there will be no serious attempt to change their society.

I fail to understand the logic of ISIS. Attacking western countries is pointless. Bringing down a plan full of Russian tourists will only dramatically increase military activity by Russia. Attacking France - same thing. These countries can bitch smack ISIS around and they cannot even see us coming.

[Struggle4Bucks]

Originally Posted by clickity click

Where did ISIS Come from Exactly?

They come from cave-wombs because in their culture it's a sin to look at a cunt...

[ITraffic]

must read:

Islamic State Files Show*Structure of Islamist Terror Group - SPIEGEL ONLINE

[clickity click]

Originally Posted by Struggle4Bucks

They come from cave-wombs because in their culture it's a sin to look at a cunt...

Was looking for serious answers but thanks for input.

[Harmon]

They came from the same disgusting womb that vomited your dumb, cunt stinking ass from.

Use Google you fucking douche canoe.

[Rob]

When Obama needed a boost in his approval rating, he killed the original boogeyman, Bin Ladin. In order to maintain control, another boogeyman needed to be created. So ISIS was funded, trained, and then set free among the world.

[clickity click]

My ass doesn't stink of cunt.

First time I heard douche canoe. Thanks for that.

I love how you pretend you are something but you are nothing. You pretend you have friends using your fake nicks. Relic showed us the truth.

[clickity click]

Originally Posted by Rob

When Obama needed a boost in his approval rating, he killed the original boogeyman, Bin Ladin. In order to maintain control, another boogeyman needed to be created. So ISIS was funded, trained, and then set free among the world.

Ok, thanks, by who?

[jimmycooper]

Originally Posted by ITraffic

must read:

Islamic State Files ShowhaStructure of Islamist Terror Group - SPIEGEL ONLINE

Very interesting.

[crockett]

Originally Posted by Rochard

I thought that ISIS was one of the groups that came into being because of the civil war in Syria. However, if I understand correctly (and please feel free to correct me) ISIS started in Iraq after the end of the war with Iraq. They worked hand in hand with al qaeda, but both got beat down pretty badly after the troop surge in 2007. ISIS used to be foreigners from outside of Iraq, but after 2009 it was dominated by Iraqis. In 2011 ISIS was heavily operating in Syria, and recruiting from there as well.

The major problem with ISIS is that this is a world wide group. There are a lot of calls for using military forces to fight ISIS, and while this will help it will only be a partial solution. This is something that is largely embedded within their culture, and that is something military force cannot change. We need to go all in and completely dominate the entire area, which is never going to happen.

This will not change until other, peaceful Muslim countries get dragged into this mix. Once terrorist attacks start happening in other Muslim countries there will be no serious attempt to change their society.

I fail to understand the logic of ISIS. Attacking western countries is pointless. Bringing down a plan full of Russian tourists will only dramatically increase military activity by Russia. Attacking France - same thing. These countries can bitch smack ISIS around and they cannot even see us coming.

The logic of ISIS is nearly the same logic al Queda used. Bin Laden wanted to tie specifically the US into a long drawn out war that can never be won in order to bankrupt us like the US did the USSR.

The reason ISIS uses the same logic, is because they were part of al Qaeda and had very simular goals.

Attacking the West is cheap compared to the cost for the West to fight back. It's also a great recruiting tool.

[bronco67]

ISIS is the Saleen Twin Turbo version of Al Queda.

[The Porn Nerd]

I don't know but why isn't classic pornstar isis Nile pictures posted more often in threads like this?

Let's fix that:

[Rochard]

Originally Posted by crockett

The logic of ISIS is nearly the same logic al Queda used. Bin Laden wanted to tie specifically the US into a long drawn out war that can never be won in order to bankrupt us like the US did the USSR.

The reason ISIS uses the same logic, is because they were part of al Qaeda and had very simular goals.

Attacking the West is cheap compared to the cost for the West to fight back. It's also a great recruiting tool.

Yes, but fighting "the west" only awakens the tiger (as Japan learned) and while it costs us money, it helps to fuel our economy. The more money our government spends on bombs and what not, the more money that is funneled back into the economy.

[Relic]

Originally Posted by Harmon

They came from the same disgusting womb that vomited your dumb, cunt stinking ass from.

Use Google you fucking douche canoe.

Big words harmonstesy

[just a punk]

The same roots as Al Qaeda: just 3 letters: C, I and A.

[CaptainHowdy]

Originally Posted by The Porn Nerd

I don't know but why isn't classic pornstar isis Nile pictures posted more often in threads like this?

Let's fix that:

Will fap to her later ...

[SuckOnThis]

Originally Posted by Rob

When Obama needed a boost in his approval rating, he killed the original boogeyman, Bin Ladin. In order to maintain control, another boogeyman needed to be created. So ISIS was funded, trained, and then set free among the world.

And this is how you Limbaugh listeners become delusional.
Rush Limbaugh: Liberals can?t ?blame George W. Bush? ISIS didn?t exist when Bush left office?


According to the National Counterterrorism Center, the group al Qaeda in Iraq (AQI) was established in 2004 and later renamed to Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL), which is also commonly known as ISIS.

No war with Iraq and there is no ISIS. Thanks again Republicans.

[Sarn]

Originally Posted by SuckOnThis

No war with Iraq and there is no ISIS. Thanks again Republicans.

[michael.kickass]

Just look at this, it's in Spanish but you can enable English subtitles.

[Black All Through]

From Bin Laden's ass, I'd presume.

[patadeperro]

This may helo you to understand.

[blinki bill]

IS then ISIL was formed in Iraq by some of Sadam's generals, when US and the allies invaded a lot of his top generals went deep underground and later some of them wanted to be reincorporated into the new Iraqi forces, US denied that request which in turn resulted in them forming ISIL. Later when the war broke off in Syria they saw the opportunity to use the instability and go there as well, which started the Syrian chapter.
In Iraq they were mostly dormant and preparing for the moment when the US troops will leave, this is why the shit hit the fan then.

Historically it's the same old scheme, the west wants to exploit some country so they, invade, topple the government or install a puppet dictator which pretty much always ends up backfiring, but hey learning from your past mistakes is for suckers! This same thing happened over and over again during the last century, this is how Idi Amin came to be in Uganda, why there is rampant corruption in central african countries or why Iran is the way it is (and the entire middle east as well), look up the history of the 19th century omitting the world wars and focusing on everything else that have happened and you'll see what I'm talking about.

[Matt-ADX]

Originally Posted by clickity click

I am pretty dumb so please make it simple to understand.
I know they originate from IRAQ but when and how did they become known?

I remember the Al Qaeda crap and suddenly they have gone and been replaced with this ISIS lot.
Where did Al Qaeda go? are they one and the same under a different name?

Thanks.

Read this the other day. Seems to sum up pretty well.

President Assad (who is bad ) is a nasty guy who got so nasty his people rebelled and the Rebels ( who are good ) started winning ( Hurrah!).

But then some of the rebels turned a bit nasty and are now called Islamic State ( who are definitely bad!) and some continued to support democracy ( who are still good.)

So the Americans (who are good ) started bombing Islamic State (who are bad) and giving arms to the Syrian Rebels (who are good) so they could fight Assad (who is still bad) which was good.

By the way, there is a breakaway state in the north run by the Kurds who want to fight IS (which is a good thing) but the Turkish authorities think they are bad, so we have to say they are bad whilst secretly thinking they're good and giving them guns to fight IS (which is good) but that is another matter.

Getting back to Syria.

So President Putin (who is bad, cos he invaded Crimea and the Ukraine and killed lots of folks including that nice Russian man in London with polonium poisoned sushi) has decided to back Assad (who is still bad) by attacking IS (who are also bad) which is sort of a good thing?

But Putin (still bad ) thinks the Syrian Rebels (who are good ) are also bad, and so he bombs them too, much to the annoyance of the Americans (who are good) who are busy backing and arming the rebels (who are also good).

Now Iran (who used to be bad, but now they have agreed not to build any nuclear weapons and bomb Israel are now good) are going to provide ground troops to support Assad (still bad) as are the Russians (bad) who now have ground troops and aircraft in Syria.

So a Coalition of Assad (still bad) Putin (extra bad) and the Iranians (good, but in a bad sort of way) are going to attack IS (who are bad) which is a good thing, but also the Syrian Rebels (who are good) which is bad.

Now the British (obviously good, except that nice Mr Corbyn in the corduroy jacket, who is probably bad) and the Americans (also good) cannot attack Assad (still bad) for fear of upsetting Putin (bad) and Iran (good / bad) and now they have to accept that Assad might not be that bad after all compared to IS (who are super bad).

So Assad (bad) is now probably good, being better than IS (but let?s face it, drinking your own wee is better than IS so no real choice there) and since Putin and Iran are also fighting IS that may now make them Good. America (still Good) will find it hard to arm a group of rebels being attacked by the Russians for fear of upsetting Mr Putin (now good) and that nice mad Ayatollah in Iran (also Good) and so they may be forced to say that the Rebels are now Bad, or at the very least abandon them to their fate. This will lead most of them to flee to Turkey and on to Europe or join IS (still the only constantly bad group).

To Sunni Muslims, an attack by Shia Muslims (Assad and Iran) backed by Russians will be seen as something of a Holy War, and the ranks of IS will now be seen by the Sunnis as the only Jihadis fighting in the Holy War and hence many Muslims will now see IS as Good (Doh!.)

Sunni Muslims will also see the lack of action by Britain and America in support of their Sunni rebel brothers as something of a betrayal (mmm. might have a point) and hence we will be seen as Bad.

So now we have America (now bad) and Britain (also bad) providing limited support to Sunni Rebels (bad) many of whom are looking to IS (Good / bad) for support against Assad (now good) who, along with Iran (also Good) and Putin (also, now, unbelievably, Good) are attempting to retake the country Assad used to run before all this started?

So, now you fully understand everything, all your questions are answered!!!!

[directfiesta]

Originally Posted by Matt-ADX

Read this the other day. Seems to sum up pretty well.

President Assad (who is bad ) is a nasty guy who got so nasty his people rebelled and the Rebels ( who are good ) started winning ( Hurrah!).

But then some of the rebels turned a bit nasty and are now called Islamic State ( who are definitely bad!) and some continued to support democracy ( who are still good.)

So the Americans (who are good ) started bombing Islamic State (who are bad) and giving arms to the Syrian Rebels (who are good) so they could fight Assad (who is still bad) which was good.

By the way, there is a breakaway state in the north run by the Kurds who want to fight IS (which is a good thing) but the Turkish authorities think they are bad, so we have to say they are bad whilst secretly thinking they're good and giving them guns to fight IS (which is good) but that is another matter.

Getting back to Syria.

So President Putin (who is bad, cos he invaded Crimea and the Ukraine and killed lots of folks including that nice Russian man in London with polonium poisoned sushi) has decided to back Assad (who is still bad) by attacking IS (who are also bad) which is sort of a good thing?

But Putin (still bad ) thinks the Syrian Rebels (who are good ) are also bad, and so he bombs them too, much to the annoyance of the Americans (who are good) who are busy backing and arming the rebels (who are also good).

Now Iran (who used to be bad, but now they have agreed not to build any nuclear weapons and bomb Israel are now good) are going to provide ground troops to support Assad (still bad) as are the Russians (bad) who now have ground troops and aircraft in Syria.

So a Coalition of Assad (still bad) Putin (extra bad) and the Iranians (good, but in a bad sort of way) are going to attack IS (who are bad) which is a good thing, but also the Syrian Rebels (who are good) which is bad.

Now the British (obviously good, except that nice Mr Corbyn in the corduroy jacket, who is probably bad) and the Americans (also good) cannot attack Assad (still bad) for fear of upsetting Putin (bad) and Iran (good / bad) and now they have to accept that Assad might not be that bad after all compared to IS (who are super bad).

So Assad (bad) is now probably good, being better than IS (but let?s face it, drinking your own wee is better than IS so no real choice there) and since Putin and Iran are also fighting IS that may now make them Good. America (still Good) will find it hard to arm a group of rebels being attacked by the Russians for fear of upsetting Mr Putin (now good) and that nice mad Ayatollah in Iran (also Good) and so they may be forced to say that the Rebels are now Bad, or at the very least abandon them to their fate. This will lead most of them to flee to Turkey and on to Europe or join IS (still the only constantly bad group).

To Sunni Muslims, an attack by Shia Muslims (Assad and Iran) backed by Russians will be seen as something of a Holy War, and the ranks of IS will now be seen by the Sunnis as the only Jihadis fighting in the Holy War and hence many Muslims will now see IS as Good (Doh!.)

Sunni Muslims will also see the lack of action by Britain and America in support of their Sunni rebel brothers as something of a betrayal (mmm. might have a point) and hence we will be seen as Bad.

So now we have America (now bad) and Britain (also bad) providing limited support to Sunni Rebels (bad) many of whom are looking to IS (Good / bad) for support against Assad (now good) who, along with Iran (also Good) and Putin (also, now, unbelievably, Good) are attempting to retake the country Assad used to run before all this started?

So, now you fully understand everything, all your questions are answered!!!!

that is a BAD ass post ... in the GOOD way

[Sarn]

Originally Posted by Matt-ADX

Read this the other day.
...
So, now you fully understand everything, all your questions are answered!!!!

what you suggest? for solved this))

[Matt-ADX]

Originally Posted by Sarn

what you suggest? for solved this))

Buy all of their oil via paypal and do a chargeback!!!

No clue, seems like a tough spot. Putin capitalized on weakness from the west's end.

[Best-In-BC]

The effects of American behavior and there people from being to stupid to understand basic and simple science, like cause and effect, it is a problem that most bigots and cowards show when fear enters there week ego.

[PR_Glen]

Originally Posted by Best-In-BC

The effects of American behavior and there people from being to stupid to understand basic and simple science, like cause and effect, it is a problem that most bigots and cowards show when fear enters there week ego.

big·ot
ˈbiɡət/
noun
a person who is intolerant toward those holding different opinions.

cow·ard
ˈkou(ə)rd/
noun
1.
a person who lacks the courage to do or endure dangerous or unpleasant things.

[kkkkkk]

Nigeria.

[LBBV]

This is very eye opening

https://www.facebook.com/ezraklein/v...0/?pnref=story

-- Bill

[Mutt]

You can't win in the Middle East, the guy who wrote the funny 'good' 'bad' analysis is right, there are no 'good' guys, today's good guys are bad guys tomorrow. The sad thing is there are millions of moderate Arabs in the ME but voices of reason stand no chance of being listened to, the lunatics run the Arab asylum. No doubt our intrusions into their business has exacerbated things but in no way are we the cause of their dysfunction.

So we should step away, let the Russians take their turn wasting billions and Russian lives.

Nobody will explain to me why we have to be there, they need us as buyers of their oil more than we need them and we are much less dependent on foreign oil now than ever before and will only become less and less dependent in the future. Other than oil there's nothing in the ME other than some shitty fruit and historical and religious sites for tourists.

When Al-Qaeda thinks you're too crazy and extreme you know you're dealing with evil incarnate in ISIS.

It would be nice if we could send them all the principals office, the UN as a stand in for that, have everybody air their grievances, a thousand years old as some of them are, and come up with a plan that everybody could and would live by.

Just like Al-Qaeda begetting ISIS, ISIS will have offspring - we cannot win. So don't play the game.

[galleryseek]

[cosis]

Abu Musab al-Zarqawi is the founder. He was killed in 2006 when the US dropped bombs.