What next after Mosul and Raqqa?

[Vixen]

Ever since the so-called Islamic State (aka ISIL, ISIS, Da'esh) took over Mosul and declared a caliphate in Raqqa, with Baghdadi as its leader, in 2014, Iraqi forces, backed up by 400 US Army personnel with a further 1,000 reservists due to be deployed by the USA, have now taken back large parts of Mosul in recent months.

News in recent days say that troops are reclaiming the area street by street and the fall of ISIL is imminent, say the pundits.

The old town is still under fundamentalist control - and reports claim that the ISIL leader, Baghdadi has fled, as have the other leaders from Raqqa. It is difficult to ascertain how much of this is propaganda to unnerve the Da'esh, as they are called in the Arabic world, and how much is real intelligence, as fierce fighting and resistance continues, with up to 50K of the Raqqa and Mosul population evacuating the cities daily. With a population of 700K still left in Mosul, it is difficult not to foresee a major humanitarian crisis, as the Iraqi-US forces reach the core of the ISIL strongholds.

My question is, what happens next? The US won't get back Iran. Russia will have its interests in the area. Then there are the thousands of radicialised mostly 20-something Muslims hearing the Caliphate's call and making their way to fight for ISIL from all over Europe, no doubt with some kind of romantic vision of being some kind of heroic freedom fighters.

What will become of them?

Where is Baghdadi?

 

[Trebuchet]

Ever since the so-called Islamic State (aka ISIL, ISIS, Da'esh) took over Mosul and declared a caliphate in Raqqa, with Baghdadi as its leader, in 2014, Iraqi forces, backed up by 400 US Army personnel with a further 1,000 reservists due to be deployed by the USA, have now taken back large parts of Mosul in recent months.

News in recent days say that troops are reclaiming the area street by street and the fall of ISIL is imminent, say the pundits.

The old town is still under fundamentalist control - and reports claim that the ISIL leader, Baghdadi has fled, as have the other leaders from Raqqa. It is difficult to ascertain how much of this is propaganda to unnerve the Da'esh, as they are called in the Arabic world, and how much is real intelligence, as fierce fighting and resistance continues, with up to 50K of the Raqqa and Mosul population evacuating the cities daily. With a population of 700K still left in Mosul, it is difficult not to foresee a major humanitarian crisis, as the Iraqi-US forces reach the core of the ISIL strongholds.

My question is, what happens next? The US won't get back Iran. Russia will have its interests in the area. Then there are the thousands of radicialised mostly 20-something Muslims hearing the Caliphate's call and making their way to fight for ISIL from all over Europe, no doubt with some kind of romantic vision of being some kind of heroic freedom fighters.

What will become of them?

Where is Baghdadi?

My bold. Did you mean "Iraq"? Because Shiite Iran is pretty much the opposite of ISIS, in the Islamic world.

Raqqa is in Syria, so Russian interests there are obvious. For your other questions, I suppose Syria will retake Raqqa and Iraq Mosul, but the problems will go on for a long time. Baghdadi will probably be hiding out for about as long as Bin Laden.

 

[Vixen]

My bold. Did you mean "Iraq"? Because Shiite Iran is pretty much the opposite of ISIS, in the Islamic world.

Raqqa is in Syria, so Russian interests there are obvious. For your other questions, I suppose Syria will retake Raqqa and Iraq Mosul, but the problems will go on for a long time. Baghdadi will probably be hiding out for about as long as Bin Laden.

I did mean Iran. It was a reference to the US former interests in that region.

Yes, it will be interesting to see how the conservative Shiite nations deal with the radical Sunni fundamentalists in their midst. It's not something that's going to go away.

We now have Erdogan making noises about how the Kurds had better not join forces with the Iraqis in the Mosul offensive.

 

[Degeneve]

I did mean Iran. It was a reference to the US former interests in that region.

Yes, it will be interesting to see how the conservative Shiite nations deal with the radical Sunni fundamentalists in their midst. It's not something that's going to go away.

We now have Erdogan making noises about how the Kurds had better not join forces with the Iraqis in the Mosul offensive.

If we can believe this it seems that the US and Russia have explained to Erdogan he is not entitled to intervene...

 

[imodium]

I did mean Iran. It was a reference to the US former interests in that region.

Yes, it will be interesting to see how the conservative Shiite nations deal with the radical Sunni fundamentalists in their midst. It's not something that's going to go away.

We now have Erdogan making noises about how the Kurds had better not join forces with the Iraqis in the Mosul offensive.

America's only interests in the area were the shah they installed in Iran and a dictator they propped up in Iraq to attack Iran for usurping their installed shah.
The only interests now would be the spoils of war trump talked of, namely oil.

 

[crescent]

America's only interests in the area were the shah they installed in Iran and a dictator they propped up in Iraq to attack Iran for usurping their installed shah.
The only interests now would be the spoils of war trump talked of, namely oil.

America does not buy much oil from Iran or Iraq. These day we don't get all that much from the Mideast at all.

Where Does The U.S. Get Its Oil?

Mind you, that article only shows where the imports come from, we get more than half domestically and we are a net hydrocarbon exporter.

I suppose American companies make money of the oil over there, but the Persian Gulf is meaningless to the U.S. energy picture and Saudi Arabia is well on its way to irrelevance as well.

 

[McHrozni]

My question is, what happens next? The US won't get back Iran. Russia will have its interests in the area. Then there are the thousands of radicialised mostly 20-something Muslims hearing the Caliphate's call and making their way to fight for ISIL from all over Europe, no doubt with some kind of romantic vision of being some kind of heroic freedom fighters.

What will become of them?

Some of them will create another ISIS elsewhere in the world, there are already charters in Libya, Pakistan and elsewhere. ISIS is a symptom of a much larger problem of Islam and Islamic radicalization, and that problem can't be solved by bombing a few radicals into oblivion. You either need to bomb all of them or reform the religion to have a shot at a lasting solution.

Until we focus all our efforts at reforming their religion - and this includes open debates about all that is bad in Islam and should be changed - all long-term scenarios are grim indeed.

Cue in apologists, who will redouble their efforts to shoot down any debate about ills of Islam and then call me a Nazi when I explain to them what the future will be like if they keep having their way.

McHrozni

 

[McHrozni]

America does not buy much oil from Iran or Iraq. These day we don't get all that much from the Mideast at all.

Where Does The U.S. Get Its Oil?

Mind you, that article only shows where the imports come from, we get more than half domestically and we are a net hydrocarbon exporter.

I suppose American companies make money of the oil over there, but the Persian Gulf is meaningless to the U.S. energy picture and Saudi Arabia is well on its way to irrelevance as well.

It doesn't matter in the slightest whether US is importing oil from ME or not. US firms buy and sell oil on the global market, and events in ME have a major impact on the price of oil. If Saudi production were to disappear tomorrow, US firms, consumers and others would have to dish out much greater sums overnight to purchase their daily crude. So would everyone else, of course.

Domestic production only matters if oil is used as a weapon, as during the 1973 oil embargo, and even these often backfire, or in a major war where supply lines are disrupted and consumption by the military skyrockets (WW2). The only issue which comes up in normal circumstances is transport costs, which is not high enough to cause major upheaval. Most of the time it doesn't matter much where the production is located, as long as the resource is available for purchase.

McHrozni

 

[dudalb]

It's not just the Kurds;Turkey has had designs on the Mosul Oil Fields since Modern Turkey came into existence after World War One.

 

[dudalb]

America does not buy much oil from Iran or Iraq. These day we don't get all that much from the Mideast at all.

Where Does The U.S. Get Its Oil?

Mind you, that article only shows where the imports come from, we get more than half domestically and we are a net hydrocarbon exporter.

I suppose American companies make money of the oil over there, but the Persian Gulf is meaningless to the U.S. energy picture and Saudi Arabia is well on its way to irrelevance as well.

True, but Europe is heavily dependent on the imports, and a cutoff of Mideast oil would still send the world's economy into freefall.

 

[Vixen]

Some of them will create another ISIS elsewhere in the world, there are already charters in Libya, Pakistan and elsewhere. ISIS is a symptom of a much larger problem of Islam and Islamic radicalization, and that problem can't be solved by bombing a few radicals into oblivion. You either need to bomb all of them or reform the religion to have a shot at a lasting solution.

Until we focus all our efforts at reforming their religion - and this includes open debates about all that is bad in Islam and should be changed - all long-term scenarios are grim indeed.

Cue in apologists, who will redouble their efforts to shoot down any debate about ills of Islam and then call me a Nazi when I explain to them what the future will be like if they keep having their way.

McHrozni

But isn't reform what ISIL attempts to do? A good analogy would be the fundamentalist protestants breaking off from the perceived corruption of the Catholic church in C16, with much violence and upheaval.

From what I understand of Islam, is that if someone calls a 'caliphate', all Muslims are supposed to make their way to the 'caliphate'. Baghdadi has declared this, choosing Raqqa as its capital, supposedly in accordance with apocalpytic prophecy. In other words, they want Russia et al to join in the battle, to bring about the end times, as they see it.

Well, it's reported Baghdadi has fled the scene, but it's difficult to know what is true and what is misinformation, designed to demoralise the 'enemy'.

Uncertain times for sure.

 

[McHrozni]

But isn't reform what ISIL attempts to do?

Yes, it is. It is doing precisely what Protestants in early 16th century Europe did, returning to the scripture and early practices of religion. Not all reforms are good, and Islam needs a different kind of reform altogether.

McHrozni

 

[dudalb]

Yes, it is. It is doing precisely what Protestants in early 16th century Europe did, returning to the scripture and early practices of religion. Not all reforms are good, and Islam needs a different kind of reform altogether.

McHrozni

Or so ISIL says. A lot of Muslims would strongly disagree.

 

[McHrozni]

Or so ISIL says. A lot of Muslims would strongly disagree.

They, like you, are free to use Islamic holy texts to prove the claim wrong.

Good luck!

McHrozni

 

[Darth Rotor]

My last news feed did not report Mosul having been taken from ISIS. Did I miss a memo?

You can't talk about "after" Mosul until you actually have gotten ISIS out of there. They are tenacious.

 

[A'isha]

They, like you, are free to use Islamic holy texts to prove the claim wrong.

Good luck!

They're way ahead of you.

Note that the number of scholars who signed this fatwa (which is far from the only one) is anywhere from two to three times the number of ISIS fighters.

EDIT: And the reason ISIS is trying to "reform Islam" and is engaged in a battle with pretty much the entire rest of the Islamic world is because most Muslims do not believe the same way ISIS does.

 

[A'isha]

My last news feed did not report Mosul having been taken from ISIS. Did I miss a memo?

You can't talk about "after" Mosul until you actually have gotten ISIS out of there. They are tenacious.

Yes, tenacious enough to keep Mosul's from having been retaking completely so far, but they're still losing.

https://www.google.com/amp/www.wsj....reasingly-isolated-in-mosul-battle-1489676887

 

[McHrozni]

They're way ahead of you.

Note that the number of scholars who signed this fatwa (which is far from the only one) is anywhere from two to three times the number of ISIS fighters.

EDIT: And the reason ISIS is trying to "reform Islam" and is engaged in a battle with pretty much the entire rest of the Islamic world is because most Muslims do not believe the same way ISIS does.

ISIS is claiming they're returning Islam to it's roots, away from corrupt misinterpretations imposed on it by so-calles scholars. In light of that a claim a group of scholars asserting they're wrong proves their point.

Better luck next time, I guess.

McHrozni

 

[A'isha]

ISIS is claiming they're returning Islam to it's roots, away from corrupt misinterpretations imposed on it by so-calles scholars. In light of that a claim a group of scholars asserting they're wrong proves their point.

Only if you favor ISIS' interpretation as the "correct" one.

 

[McHrozni]

My last news feed did not report Mosul having been taken from ISIS. Did I miss a memo?

You can't talk about "after" Mosul until you actually have gotten ISIS out of there. They are tenacious.

Most of it is liberated, thankfully without the levels of destruction seen in Aleppo. It should fall within a few weeks. Debating what happens after that is warranted, I think. A major reversal by ISIS is just too unlikely at this point.

McHrozni