Alter_Ego_
Stara legenda
- Poruka
- 93.438
Слобода за Курдистан!!!
-
- Popularno:
- Da li je ovo Srbija?
- „Рат блокадера“ на Правном факултету:...
- U kom periodu od sloma Jugoslavije si...
- Spavanje na podu
- U Nemačkoj protesti protiv AfD i...
- Кад ће сва деца Србије имати ваучере?
- Ozbiljno pitanje za žene
- Odbijanje od plate
- Kako da prepoznaš da je roman napisala...
- Petričić: Ideja da se napravi Ćacilend...
Sukobi u Iraku
- Začetnik teme _nobody_
- Datum pokretanja
hypnotoad
Elita
- Poruka
- 19.224
Koliko je zemalja napao i unistio radikalni islam?
shebronski
Poznat
- Poruka
- 7.501
Како је могуће да група од 10-20 хиљада теририста за 2 дана освоји готово цео Ирак?
Шта мислите шта следи?
Srborus
Poznat
- Poruka
- 8.219
Eto! A isti taj ISIS oni podržavaju u Siriji.
- Poruka
- 4.731
Realno, okupator je okupator bio on Rus ili Amerikanac. Kao sto je neko rekao, steta sto ovakve organizovanosti nije bilo jos dok su USA vojnici bili tamo, i u pravu je za to.
shebronski
Poznat
- Poruka
- 7.501
Нико нормалан неће подржати ове терористе...
Alter_Ego_
Stara legenda
- Poruka
- 93.438
Питање квалитета и квантитета зла је далеко, далеко сложеније од овог твог питања.
Debeli Sava
Veoma poznat
- Poruka
- 10.246
wut?
Sirijski pobunjenici su isti ovi koji biju amerikance
Vece je to licemerstvo sa americke strane. Kada njima ide u korist ti ljudi su pobunjenici a kada rade protiv njih su teroristi.
Jedino isto kod njih je to sto su Muslimani, ISIL se bori protiv Sirijskih pobunjenika i to su najzeshci sukobi u Siriji. Svi oni teriristi ISIL-a sa Balkana, Sribija, Bosna, Kosovo...su upravo poginuli boreci se protiv Sirijskih pobunjenika.
Poznavalac stvari
Legenda
- Poruka
- 60.338
Уствари ти си лицемеран.
Исламски фанатици су ти добри у Сирији, а кад газе американске сателите онда кме, кме, кме....
Наравно сад ће нафта да рипи у небеса и Цар ће да купи ЕУ за пола канистера исте.
wizardofOZ
Domaćin
- Poruka
- 4.171
Inace, ISIS (ISIL) je zamislio da kalifat (to je valjda drzava ?) bude u ovim granicama
Pogledajte prilog 332042
Kao sto vidite srbija je ukljucena.
To je slicno ovim granicama (srbija je isto bila ukljucena
Pogledajte prilog 332043
Ovo je zanimljiva analiza
Scenario 3.1.: An Islamic al-Sham?
If the victorious groups were Salafi-Jihadi, they would create a theocracy, a strict Sharia state. If we refer to Jabhat al-Nusra’s April declaration (Barber, 14 April 2013, Syria Comment), then they would seek to create the Islamic State of Al-Sham, i.e. a political entity covering the Levant. If we refer to Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the leader of Al-Qa’ida in Iraq, then their objective would be to create the Islamic State of Iraq and Al-Sham (ISIS) (Ibid). As explained by Aymenn Jawad Al-Tamimi (14 May 2013) and by Lund (22 May 2013, Syria Comment), who also reviews other related analyses, we are currently under a thick fog of war as to what is happening within the Al-Qa’ida factions in Syria: we do not know exactly if there is strife between various groups, how important it is, and which side, if any, will win.
Whatever the reality that will emerge, and for the sake of this scenario, thus assuming that the victorious groups are Salafi-jihadi, the current territorial Syria (with or without the Syrian Kurdistan, according to the way the war would be waged on that part of the territory and won or lost there) would most probably be seen as the heart from which the war to conquer the rest of the Levant (with or without Iraq according to case) could be waged. The new Al Sham would thus be expansionist and carrying the Salafi-Jihadi aim that “seek to establish an islamic caliphate that would encompass the entire Umma, or Muslim community” (O’Bagy, September 2012:17) through all means, from overt war to supporting terrorist networks and individual jihad abroad.
The caliphate or Khilafa is explained in and defined with different terms according to authors, yet similarities remain, notably expansion:
“The most famous exposition of the Islamic theory of State was by the scholar al-Mawardi, who claimed that the establishment of the Caliphate was an Islamic obligation agreed upon by the scholars. His treatise al-Ahkam al-Sultaniyya (the rules of governance) remains one of the major classical references for Islamic political theory. In it, he explains that the ruler is either elected by the peoples’ representatives or through being nominated by the previous Caliph. The Caliph’s responsibilities include implementing the hudood (punishments explicitly proscribed in Islam for acts such as theft, rebellion, public acts of extra-marital intercourse), collecting and distributing the taxes according to the Sharia prescriptions, and to protect and expand the borders of the Islamic State.” Dr. Reza Pankhurst, political scientist and historian, specializing in the Middle East and Islamic movements, “Understanding Calls to a Caliphate,” 22 August 2011, Foreign Policy Journal.
“Khilafa (caliphate) for Islamists is the idea that they are duty bound to establish “Islamic states” – described by vague, theoretical, idealistic platitudes – that would then be united in a global, pan-Islamic state or ‘new caliphate’.” Quilliam Foundation researcher Dr Usama Hasan for BBC News, 24 May 2013
“Both historically and doctrinally, the caliphate’s function is to wage jihad, whenever and wherever possible, to bring the infidel world under Islamic dominion and enforce sharia. In fact, most of what is today called the “Muslim world”—from Morocco to Pakistan—was conquered, bit by bit, by a caliphate that began in Arabia in 632.
A jihad-waging, sharia-enforcing caliphate represents a permanent, existentialist enemy—not a temporal foe that can be bought or pacified through diplomacy or concessions. Such a caliphate is precisely what Islamists around the world are feverishly seeking to establish.” Raymond Ibrahim, associate director of the Middle East Forum, 8 March 2011, Gatestone Institute.
Despite the necessity for expansion, aggressive actions might also be delayed, or slowed, to allow first for consolidation at home.
However, if the rivalry between Salafi-Jihadi groups were to re-appear after a victory on the Syrian territory, then the chance for consolidating peace at home would be reduced because of internecine struggle, following, in essence on those that would be taking place currently. In the meantime, the potential for aggressive jihadi actions would be enhanced, as all groups would want to assert their Jihadi credentials and use them to ideologically motivate fighters, while probably also alienating part of the population, which would again contribute to lower the odds to fully stabilize the situation domestically.
The states directly threatened by an aggressive Al-Sham – and other similar regional entities – would have no other choice than to retaliate. The prospects for a regional and global conflagration would be heightened. Peace in Syria would have been short.
https://www.redanalysis.org/2013/05/27/strategic-intelligence-assessment-for-syria-7-scenario-3-1-a-real-victory-in-syria-an-islamic-al-sham/
Povijesno gledano to bi bili ovi kalifati
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abbasid_Caliphate
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umayyad_Caliphate
Pogledajte prilog 332042
Kao sto vidite srbija je ukljucena.
To je slicno ovim granicama (srbija je isto bila ukljucena
Pogledajte prilog 332043
Ovo je zanimljiva analiza
Scenario 3.1.: An Islamic al-Sham?
If the victorious groups were Salafi-Jihadi, they would create a theocracy, a strict Sharia state. If we refer to Jabhat al-Nusra’s April declaration (Barber, 14 April 2013, Syria Comment), then they would seek to create the Islamic State of Al-Sham, i.e. a political entity covering the Levant. If we refer to Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the leader of Al-Qa’ida in Iraq, then their objective would be to create the Islamic State of Iraq and Al-Sham (ISIS) (Ibid). As explained by Aymenn Jawad Al-Tamimi (14 May 2013) and by Lund (22 May 2013, Syria Comment), who also reviews other related analyses, we are currently under a thick fog of war as to what is happening within the Al-Qa’ida factions in Syria: we do not know exactly if there is strife between various groups, how important it is, and which side, if any, will win.
Whatever the reality that will emerge, and for the sake of this scenario, thus assuming that the victorious groups are Salafi-jihadi, the current territorial Syria (with or without the Syrian Kurdistan, according to the way the war would be waged on that part of the territory and won or lost there) would most probably be seen as the heart from which the war to conquer the rest of the Levant (with or without Iraq according to case) could be waged. The new Al Sham would thus be expansionist and carrying the Salafi-Jihadi aim that “seek
The caliphate or Khilafa is explained in and defined with different terms according to authors, yet similarities remain, notably expansion:
“The most famous exposition of the Islamic theory of State was by the scholar al-Mawardi, who claimed that the establishment of the Caliphate was an Islamic obligation agreed upon by the scholars. His treatise al-Ahkam al-Sultaniyya (the rules of governance) remains one of the major classical references for Islamic political theory. In it, he explains that the ruler is either elected by the peoples’ representatives or through being nominated by the previous Caliph. The Caliph’s responsibilities include implementing the hudood (punishments explicitly proscribed in Islam for acts such as theft, rebellion, public acts of extra-marital intercourse), collecting and distributing the taxes according to the Sharia prescriptions, and to protect and expand the borders of the Islamic State.” Dr. Reza Pankhurst, political scientist and historian, specializing in the Middle East and Islamic movements, “Understanding Calls to a Caliphate,” 22 August 2011, Foreign Policy Journal.
“Khilafa (caliphate) for Islamists is the idea that they are duty bound to establish “Islamic states” – described by vague, theoretical, idealistic platitudes – that would then be united in a global, pan-Islamic state or ‘new caliphate’.” Quilliam Foundation researcher Dr Usama Hasan for BBC News, 24 May 2013
“Both historically and doctrinally, the caliphate’s function is to wage jihad, whenever and wherever possible, to bring the infidel world under Islamic dominion and enforce sharia. In fact, most of what is today called the “Muslim world”—from Morocco to Pakistan—was conquered, bit by bit, by a caliphate that began in Arabia in 632.
A jihad-waging, sharia-enforcing caliphate represents a permanent, existentialist enemy—not a temporal foe that can be bought or pacified through diplomacy or concessions. Such a caliphate is precisely what Islamists around the world are feverishly seeking to establish.” Raymond Ibrahim, associate director of the Middle East Forum, 8 March 2011, Gatestone Institute.
Despite the necessity for expansion, aggressive actions might also be delayed, or slowed, to allow first for consolidation at home.
However, if the rivalry between Salafi-Jihadi groups were to re-appear after a victory on the Syrian territory, then the chance for consolidating peace at home would be reduced because of internecine struggle, following, in essence on those that would be taking place currently. In the meantime, the potential for aggressive jihadi actions would be enhanced, as all groups would want to assert their Jihadi credentials and use them to ideologically motivate fighters, while probably also alienating part of the population, which would again contribute to lower the odds to fully stabilize the situation domestically.
The states directly threatened by an aggressive Al-Sham – and other similar regional entities – would have no other choice than to retaliate. The prospects for a regional and global conflagration would be heightened. Peace in Syria would have been short.
https://www.redanalysis.org/2013/05/27/strategic-intelligence-assessment-for-syria-7-scenario-3-1-a-real-victory-in-syria-an-islamic-al-sham/
Povijesno gledano to bi bili ovi kalifati
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abbasid_Caliphate
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umayyad_Caliphate
shebronski
Poznat
- Poruka
- 7.501
Како тврде, они подржавају устанике(Ал-нусра фронт) који се боре против ''ISIS''... Тако да сада могу да се перу...
GolubBabic
Domaćin
- Poruka
- 3.759
Ti si nesto propustio.Pobuna protiv Amerianaca i njihovih domacih slugu u Iraku traje od njihove okupacije
Dovolno je da odes na zvanicni sajt o Americkim gubicima u Iraku,a koje priznaju pa da vidis po godinama gubitke
http://icasualties.org/
Debeli Sava
Veoma poznat
- Poruka
- 10.246
To jednostavno nije istina, cak naprotiv, pomazu sve one koji se bore protiv ISIS-a.
GolubBabic
Domaćin
- Poruka
- 3.759
2007 najgora godina po Amere u Iraku ,priznali su 904 poginula pripadnika US armije
http://icasualties.org/Iraq/index.aspx
http://icasualties.org/Iraq/index.aspx
shebronski
Poznat
- Poruka
- 7.501
Морам да потврдим ово. Мада нема поузданих информација да Ал-нусра поступа човечније од Асадових...
hypnotoad
Elita
- Poruka
- 19.224
Ja tebe znam kao korisnika koji se pojavi kada treba siriti prozapadnu propagandu. ALi ne mozes da ocekujes da ce ti ljudi poverovati na ovakve gluposti.
Legitimna Sirijska vlada se bori protiv pobunjenika sastavljenih od Al kaide, ISIS i ostalih teroristickih grupacija koje ameri podrzavaju. To sto su se u medjuvremenu pobili sami izmedju sebe je komedija, ali ne siri ovde svoje lazi.
Debeli Sava
Veoma poznat
- Poruka
- 10.246
Nikada nisam napisao da su mi ISIL dobri, naprotiv. To su glavni neprijatelji sirijskih pobunjenika, dok u isto vreme Asad ima neutralan stav prema njima.
hypnotoad
Elita
- Poruka
- 19.224
Pazi mozes ti filozofirati do sutra, radikalni islam ne moze proci kod iole obrazovane nacije. Dok americka sila i propaganda lako porobljava sve slabije drzave.
U prevodu, lako cemo za islamiste, ameri su rak planete.
GolubBabic
Domaćin
- Poruka
- 3.759
http://sr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Битка_за_Фалуџу
Bitka za Faludzu 2006..izgleda da su mnogi zaboravili kako je Iracki narod otjerao okupatore i njihove sluge iz ovog grada a onda su Ameri izvrsili masakar i koristeci bojne otrove povratili kontrolu nad ovim gradom grad,predhodno ga sravnili sa zemljom
Bitka za Faludzu 2006..izgleda da su mnogi zaboravili kako je Iracki narod otjerao okupatore i njihove sluge iz ovog grada a onda su Ameri izvrsili masakar i koristeci bojne otrove povratili kontrolu nad ovim gradom grad,predhodno ga sravnili sa zemljom
shebronski
Poznat
- Poruka
- 7.501
Ушли су јуче у град и стрељали све на кога су наишли. Наравно да су Амери најгори од свих, убили су вишеструко више недужних.
Могу само да замислим шта би ови радили да могу...
wizardofOZ
Domaćin
- Poruka
- 4.171
Po ovom clanku saudijska arabija financira ISIS
Iraq crisis: Sunni caliphate has been bankrolled by Saudi Arabia
Bush and Blair said Iraq was a war on Islamic fascism. They lost
So after the grotesquerie of the Taliban and Osama bin Laden and 15 of the 19 suicide killers of 9/11, meet Saudi Arabia’s latest monstrous contribution to world history: the Islamist Sunni caliphate of Iraq and the Levant, conquerors of Mosul and Tikrit – and Raqqa in Syria – and possibly Baghdad, and the ultimate humiliators of Bush and Obama.
From Aleppo in northern Syria almost to the Iraqi-Iranian border, the jihadists of Isis and sundry other groupuscules paid by the Saudi Wahhabis – and by Kuwaiti oligarchs – now rule thousands of square miles.
Apart from Saudi Arabia’s role in this catastrophe, what other stories are to be hidden from us in the coming days and weeks?
n The story of Iraq and the story of Syria are the same – politically, militarily and journalistically: two leaders, one Shia, the other Alawite, fighting for the existence of their regimes against the power of a growing Sunni Muslim international army.
n While the Americans support the wretched Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki and his elected Shia government in Iraq, the same Americans still demand the overthrow of Bashar al-Assad of Syria and his regime, even though both leaders are now brothers-in-arms against the victors of Mosul and Tikrit.
n The Croesus-like wealth of Qatar may soon be redirected away from the Muslim rebels of Syria and Iraq to the Assad regime, out of fear and deep hatred for its Sunni brothers in Saudi Arabia (which may invade Qatar if it becomes very angry).
n We all know of the “deep concern” of Washington and London at the territorial victories of the Islamists – and the utter destruction of all that America and Britain bled and died for in Iraq. No one, however, will feel as much of this “deep concern” as Shia Iran and Assad of Syria and Maliki of Iraq, who must regard the news from Mosul and Tikrit as a political and military disaster. Just when Syrian military forces were winning the war for Assad, tens of thousands of Iraqi-based militants may now turn on the Damascus government, before or after they choose to advance on Baghdad.
n No one will care now how many hundreds of thousands of Iraqis have been slaughtered since 2003 because of the fantasies of Bush and Blair. These two men destroyed Saddam’s regime to make the world safe and declared that Iraq was part of a titanic battle against “Islamofascism”. Well, they lost. Remember that the Americans captured and recaptured Mosul to crush the power of Islamist fighters. They fought for Fallujah twice. And both cities have now been lost again to the Islamists. The armies of Bush and Blair have long gone home, declaring victory.
n Under Obama, Saudi Arabia will continue to be treated as a friendly “moderate” in the Arab world, even though its royal family is founded upon the Wahhabist convictions of the Sunni Islamists in Syria and Iraq – and even though millions of its dollars are arming those same fighters. Thus does Saudi power both feed the monster in the deserts of Syria and Iraq and cosy up to the Western powers that protect it.
n We should also remember that Maliki’s military attempts to retake Mosul are likely to be ferocious and bloody, just as Assad’s battles to retake cities have proved to be. The refugees fleeing Mosul are more frightened of Shia government revenge than they are of the Sunni jihadists who have captured their city.
n We will all be told to regard the new armed “caliphate” as a “terror nation”. Abu Mohamed al-Adnani, the Isis spokesman, is intelligent, warning against arrogance, talking of an advance on Baghdad when he may be thinking of Damascus. Isis is largely leaving the civilians of Mosul unharmed.
n Finally, we will be invited to regard the future as a sectarian war when it will be a war between Muslim sectarians and Muslim non-sectarians. The “terror” bit will be provided by the arms we send to all sides.
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/iraq-crisis-sunni-caliphate-has-been-bankrolled-by-saudi-arabia-9533396.html
Iraq crisis: Sunni caliphate has been bankrolled by Saudi Arabia
Bush and Blair said Iraq was a war on Islamic fascism. They lost
So after the grotesquerie of the Taliban and Osama bin Laden and 15 of the 19 suicide killers of 9/11, meet Saudi Arabia’s latest monstrous contribution to world history: the Islamist Sunni caliphate of Iraq and the Levant, conquerors of Mosul and Tikrit – and Raqqa in Syria – and possibly Baghdad, and the ultimate humiliators of Bush and Obama.
From Aleppo in northern Syria almost to the Iraqi-Iranian border, the jihadists of Isis and sundry other groupuscules paid by the Saudi Wahhabis – and by Kuwaiti oligarchs – now rule thousands of square miles.
Apart from Saudi Arabia’s role in this catastrophe, what other stories are to be hidden from us in the coming days and weeks?
n The story of Iraq and the story of Syria are the same – politically, militarily and journalistically: two leaders, one Shia, the other Alawite, fighting for the existence of their regimes against the power of a growing Sunni Muslim international army.
n While the Americans support the wretched Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki and his elected Shia government in Iraq, the same Americans still demand the overthrow of Bashar al-Assad of Syria and his regime, even though both leaders are now brothers-in-arms against the victors of Mosul and Tikrit.
n The Croesus-like wealth of Qatar may soon be redirected away from the Muslim rebels of Syria and Iraq to the Assad regime, out of fear and deep hatred for its Sunni brothers in Saudi Arabia (which may invade Qatar if it becomes very angry).
n We all know of the “deep concern” of Washington and London at the territorial victories of the Islamists – and the utter destruction of all that America and Britain bled and died for in Iraq. No one, however, will feel as much of this “deep concern” as Shia Iran and Assad of Syria and Maliki of Iraq, who must regard the news from Mosul and Tikrit as a political and military disaster. Just when Syrian military forces were winning the war for Assad, tens of thousands of Iraqi-based militants may now turn on the Damascus government, before or after they choose to advance on Baghdad.
n No one will care now how many hundreds of thousands of Iraqis have been slaughtered since 2003 because of the fantasies of Bush and Blair. These two men destroyed Saddam’s regime to make the world safe and declared that Iraq was part of a titanic battle against “Islamofascism”. Well, they lost. Remember that the Americans captured and recaptured Mosul to crush the power of Islamist fighters. They fought for Fallujah twice. And both cities have now been lost again to the Islamists. The armies of Bush and Blair have long gone home, declaring victory.
n Under Obama, Saudi Arabia will continue to be treated as a friendly “moderate” in the Arab world, even though its royal family is founded upon the Wahhabist convictions of the Sunni Islamists in Syria and Iraq – and even though millions of its dollars are arming those same fighters. Thus does Saudi power both feed the monster in the deserts of Syria and Iraq and cosy up to the Western powers that protect it.
n We should also remember that Maliki’s military attempts to retake Mosul are likely to be ferocious and bloody, just as Assad’s battles to retake cities have proved to be. The refugees fleeing Mosul are more frightened of Shia government revenge than they are of the Sunni jihadists who have captured their city.
n We will all be told to regard the new armed “caliphate” as a “terror nation”. Abu Mohamed al-Adnani, the Isis spokesman, is intelligent, warning against arrogance, talking of an advance on Baghdad when he may be thinking of Damascus. Isis is largely leaving the civilians of Mosul unharmed.
n Finally, we will be invited to regard the future as a sectarian war when it will be a war between Muslim sectarians and Muslim non-sectarians. The “terror” bit will be provided by the arms we send to all sides.
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/iraq-crisis-sunni-caliphate-has-been-bankrolled-by-saudi-arabia-9533396.html
Debeli Sava
Veoma poznat
- Poruka
- 10.246
Na primer pustili su one zarobljne monahinje iz Malaule, dok bi ih ISIS zive razapeli na krst. Ne kazem ni da su Al Nusra cvecke, niti ih podrzavam. Ali od ISIL nema gore, i svakog ko se bori protiv njih treba podrzati.
wizardofOZ
Domaćin
- Poruka
- 4.171
Amerikanci podrzavaju i financiraju ISIS. Saudijska arabija ih isto podrzava i financira. Barem su ih podrzavali i financirali dok nije doslo do prekida odnosa sa AL qaidom jer ISIS nije htio stati pod njihovo zapovjednistvo.
U svakom slucaju, dobijali su oruzje i opremu i od amerikanaca i saudijaca.
ja mislim da je cak bilo i hrvatske opreme
Hrvatska trgovala preko Jordana: Siriji prodano oružje vrijedno 200 milijuna kuna
Poslednja izmena:
hypnotoad
Elita
- Poruka
- 19.224
Ljudi nisu pristupili tom ISIS zato sto im je bilo dosadno u zivotu. Strana sila ih je napala, unistila drzavu i vratila ih u srednji vek...
Siromastvo, frustracije, ocaj, manjak obrazovanja + verski fanatizam i imas teroristicku organizaciju koja ubija ljude kao zivotinje.
wizardofOZ
Domaćin
- Poruka
- 4.171
To nije istina. Assad se bori protiv njih i ISIS se bori protiv assada. Stovise, sad im je uspio unistiti konvoj sa naoruzanjem koji su prebacivali iz iraka u siriju.
Cinjenicno stanje je da ISIS ratuje u siriji protiv assada.
