The Russians Will Decimate ISIS. Russians Will Take No Prisoners.

[TheMastersNemesis]

One thing sure is that ISIS would wish they were fighting us. The Russians will be much more brutal than we would.

[bobalew]

1. But not until they've wiped out Assad's Enemies, first:

Then They MIGHT go after ISIS...

[Rex]

2. The Russians will kill all the groups there that are not pro-Assad.

Not just ISIS. They are on a mission to prop up their regional dictator in charge.

[randome]

3. Yay for brutality!

[hr][font color="blue"][center]Precision and concision. That's the game.[/center][/font][hr]

[6chars]

18. Brutal to ISIS isn't so bad

They are like one giant Hannibal Lecter.

[randome]

24. Agree.

[hr][font color="blue"][center]All things in moderation, including moderation.[/center][/font][hr]

[ellisonz]

28. What the fuck is this shit?

[stevenleser]

40. No, I believe that person is sick at your attempts to make a brutal dictator look cuddly

Most dictators and genocidal criminals had at least someone who thought they were cuddly and nice. That doesn't make them any less the monsters that they were.

[ellisonz]

78. Yes - I am glad that mess was cleaned up before my return.

[geek tragedy]

44. Library Girl or Go West Young Man or Hannah Bell? nt

[NuclearDem]

50. Hannah Bell.

This is too dumb to be GWYM, yet too smart to be LG.

[geek tragedy]

56. And now his watch is ended. nt

[CanonRay]

31. ISIS deserves whatever they get, from whoever can do it.

No mercy, just like they showed their victims. Hunted to the ends of the earth. They have continuously shown an utter lack of humanity.

[840high]

48. ....x10+

[Jesus Malverde]

61. If Putin were really serious he'd drone the financial backers as well...nt

[Jesus Malverde]

69. We will follow them to the gates of hell.

https://m.

[randome]

96. I agree. I just won't celebrate Putin's part in it. He's in this to restore the USSR.

He is not to be commended for invading another country any more than we should be.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]All things in moderation, including moderation.[/center][/font][hr]

[NOLALady]

4. A group of terrorists

worse than ISIS will probably emerge after the decimation.

And The Beat Goes On.

[stevenleser]

5. I agree they will be brutal, I disagree they will be particularly effective against ISIS.

They were not particularly effective against the mujahideen for instance.

[cwydro]

7. Excellent point.

Thank you for that.

[killbotfactory]

15. The mujahideen were funded and trained by the west and gulf states

Specifically to get russia bogged down in a quamire. The situation with Isis is completely different, right?

...right?

[stevenleser]

20. Yes and no. Yes the west are not funding them, but no because ISIS is cash rich.

They looted all the banks in the cities they took over in Iraq and Syria. They got millions in ransom for captives. They managed to sell massive amounts of oil from the oil fields they took over.

They can self fund. They are not poor like the mujahedeen were.

[stevenleser]

41. We've done more than that. We worked with the UN to pass resolutions to make anyone

Who does so a criminal according to international law. Assuming we can all catch them and prove it.

You ought to do the research. There is a small library of resolutions that have been passed that criminalize working with or abetting ISIS/ISIL in any way.

That's the easy part. Now, catch them and prove it. From what has been written about it, it is essentially black marketers who have bought the oil.

[leveymg]

55. IS was never more than 40 percent self-funded. KSA & GCC"

provide the major part of their finance as they did Al-Qaeda before. It will be interesting to see if the Russians do something about derailing the Saudi money train - something the west never had the will to do. Not even after 9/11.

[stevenleser]

58. None of that is really true.

Here is the truth: http://www.businessinsider.com/theory-that-saudi-arabia-funds-isis-2014-6

[leveymg]

79. Every word is based in documented facts and reliable sources. I'll leave "the truth" to you and Fox

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026192755

Proposed UN Sanctions Do Not Go To Most ISIS Funding from Wealthy Donors

There is broad agreement that "substantial" funds are still reaching ISIS from wealthy elites in Saudi Arabia, Qatar and other Gulf states. As the Pentagon announced yesterday, oil exports now do not account for most of ISIS finances. ISIS is instead depending on donations, “a lot of donations,” according to Rear Admiral John Kirby, spokesman for the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Further sanctions do not threaten the primary source of finance for the so-called Islamic State (IS), reported to be in excess of $2 billion last year. On Thursday, a UN measure was proposed by Russia that would sanction the trade in oil and stolen antiquities that partially funds ISIS funders. However, according to the NYT, it does not add to the existing list of individuals named for sanctions. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/07/world/middleeast/un-prepares-resolution-to-confront-islamic-state-on-oil-and-antiquities.html?_r=0

This spares the US and NATO the difficult task of having to immediately punish most of the same Sunni states with which it has been previously cooperating in prosecuting the war in Syria. The measure discussed on Friday would, however, specifically sanction parties engaged in smuggling oil from ISIS controlled areas, paying ransom, and the sale of stolen antiquities, the latter valued at $35 million last year.

Nobody seems to want to put a finger on exactly how much cash is still flowing to ISIS from wealthy ISIS funders, and who exactly they are. But, everyone agrees that support from the Saudis and Gulf elites continues to be substantial. See, http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/isis-terror/whos-funding-isis-wealthy-gulf-angel-investors-officials-say-n208006

In 2014, Saudi Arabia publicly agreed to clamp down on some donations from its citizens and religious foundations. As a result, most private funding now goes through Qatar. The UN Security Council Resolution 2170 passed last August 15 named only six individual ISIS leaders for direct sanctions. The new measure does not expand that list, but calls for a committee to nominate others for violation of existing UN resolutions.

The effects of the additional sanctions on oil exports proposed would have its primary impact on crude oil smuggling in and out of Turkey. The majority of ISIS oil revenues are derived through the black market in that country. Last June, at its height, a Turkish opposition MP and other sources estimated the annual oil revenues at $800 million. http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/221272-report-isis-oil-production-worth-800m-per-year

If accurate, oil sales was about 40% of the total ISIS operating budget as stated by the group. However, even at its height, petroleum accounted for only a fraction of ISIS funding. Some western estimates placed the IS annual total budget as high as $3 billion. See, http://thehill.com/policy/defense/228465-isis-puts-payments-to-poor-disabled-in-2-billion-budget; http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/isis-news-caliphate-unveils-first-annual-budget-2bn-250m-surplus-war-chest-1481931

The $800 million figure is actually at the top end of the estimates. US sources quoted by CNN last October stated that ISIS oil income was more likely half that figure: http://www.cnn.com/2014/10/06/world/meast/isis-funding/

The U.S. Treasury Department does not have hard figures that it can make public on the group's wealth but says it believes ISIS takes in millions of dollars a month.

Sources familiar with the subject say that ISIS' "burn' rate" -- how much the group spends -- is huge, including salaries, weapons and other expenses. For ISIS' oil sales, sources told CNN, the group probably makes between $1 million and $2 million per day, but probably on the lower end.

Along with everyone else, the returns on ISIS oil are probably a fraction of what they were at the height of world oil prices a year ago. Plus, the US and allies are bombing the group's oil platforms and vehicles. That has cut production and export to the point where US commanders now acknowledged that oil sales aren't the source of most ISIS funds, and that they are coming from donations, "a lot of donations":

The Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) is no longer relying on oil as its main source of revenue to fund its terrorist activity, according to the Pentagon.

“We know that oil revenue is no longer the lead source of their income in dollars,” Pentagon spokesperson Rear Admiral John Kirby told reporters during a press briefing on Tuesday.

ISIS’ loss of income is compounded by its losses on the battlefield as the group has “lost literally hundreds and hundreds of vehicles that they can’t replace,” Kirby said.

“They’ve got to steal whatever they want to get, and there’s a finite number.”

ISIS is instead depending on “a lot of donations” as one of the main sources of income. “They also have a significant black market program going on,” Kirby said.

http://english.alarabiya.net/en/News/middle-east/2015/02/05/Pentagon-oil-is-no-longer-ISIS-main-source-of-income-.html

That leaves a big hole in the Caliphate's budget - that gets filled by someone.

Imposition of expanded UN sanctions would entail difficulties and costs for the US, particularly with Saudi Arabia. Therefore, it should not come as a surprise that the Security Counsel measure is limited, and does not yet show if the world is truly serious about eradicating ISIS.

[stevenleser]

84. As are mine. There are many more links that back up the businessweek version. Nt

[leveymg]

86. On this, the Joint Chiefs have more crediblity than a Saudi apologist working for a neocon thinktank

And, that's BusinessInsider, not Businessweek you linked to, Steve.

[TheKentuckian]

49. We've been their longer supposedly fighting a weaker foe so rah fucking rah.

[Jesus Malverde]

62. Let's see...

Syria is not Afghanistan.

[stevenleser]

64. It pretty much is at this point. It's a mess of competing rebel groups and religious groups

and a weak government. And the most powerful of all the groups is the most whack job fundamentalist Islamic. Yes, it's very much like Afghanistan at this point.

[Jesus Malverde]

67. The terrain, the governments and the people's are completely different.

Unlike the mujaheddin the majority of the rebels in Syria are foreigners and mercinaries. They are not fighting for Syria but another state, califate or otherwise.

[geek tragedy]

6. Not without tens of thousands of boots on the ground they won't nt

[cigsandcoffee]

14. 150K enough?

http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/609757/Putin-ISIS-Islamic-State-Syria-Raqqa-troops-soldiers-air-strike-jets-military

[stevenleser]

21. Possibly. Depends how ISIS reacts. If they melt into the various cities they took and

mount an insurgent campaign against the Russian troops, they could make this drag on to the point where the Russians want to leave.

[Caretha]

51. Just exactly who are you for?

ISIS vs Assad?
ISIS vs US?
ISIS vs Russia?
ISIS vs Nato?


*for clarification insert Al Queda for ISIS

[stevenleser]

63. Tactical analysis has nothing to do with "Who I'm for"

My analysis is based on watching similar insurgent groups against the US and Russia and the former Soviet Union over the last 40 years.

Stopping ISIS/ISIL will be extremely difficult for anyone and nearly impossible for a lone outside power.

As far as who I am "for" I am for the US, against Russia, against ISIS/ISIL and against Assad.
But I would much rather Russia be mired in another Middle East quagmire than us. Vladimir Vladimirovich can have it with my complements and I think Obama should say and do exactly that.

[Jesus Malverde]

74. It's clear..nt

[Jesus Malverde]

68. "Melt into various cities"

They will be melting as high explosives rain down on their asses.

It's not like the foreign snak bars can hide behind the local population. Most of these jihadists are spray and pray foreigners who stick out with their Chechen red hair, lack of the local language and strange to Syria religious beliefs. The security apparatus of the Syrian and Russian troops are well versed in the ugly business of counter insurgency.

[stevenleser]

70. High explosives have been "raining down on their asses" for the past 2-3 months

They have already adapted to operating under heavy air strikes.

And no, neither Syria nor Russia have shown an ability to perform counter insurgency with any competence.

[Jesus Malverde]

72. You are aware that 75% of the "coalition" flights weren't dropping their bombs.

They haven't seen anything yet.

[stevenleser]

85. Which is typical during a bombing campaign against non state insurgents

The Russians will have the same experience.

I'm former USAF, any other former or current Air Force veteran of any country will tell you the same thing.

[Ex Lurker]

29. They are way, way off

That 150K is the regular intake of conscripts. It takes place twice a year, every year. They serve a two year term of enlistment then it's back to civilian life. . It's not 150k new troops to fight in Syria, and even if it was, they wouldn't be ready in time to do anything in this campaign. It would take at least a year to train them up into an effective force. That's one of many problems with Russia's military. By the time the new enlistees know the ropes and are starting to be of some use, they're out the door and back on the street.

Both the left and right have this idea of Russia as ten feet tall. In point of fact, Russia's military is a mess, and will struggle to fullfill its operational goals in Syria over the medium and long term.

[geek tragedy]

43. sure, if they're actually on the ground.

I doubt that's happening any time soon

[oberliner]

82. The Daily Express?

You are using this as your source?

[workinclasszero]

8. Good wipe ISIS off the face of the earth

They are as bad as the nazis and imperial japan

[MineralMan]

9. Yah, well, their record of success in such things isn't so hot.

Remember Afghanistan? They had to bail out of that in absolute failure mode. There's no good way to interfere in the Middle East. That trick never works. We should learn that lesson, too.

[MissB]

30. [insert Princess Bride quote here] nt

[SidDithers]

37. Never go in against a Sicilian when death is on the line?...

Best movie ever.

Sid

[Xithras]

66. ISIS in Syria is a very different beast than the mujiahadeen in Afghanistan.

Last I checked, the Taliban still control large chunks of that country, so even the U.S. was unable to defeat the local hostiles. Afghanistan is simply a very hard place to control, because its terrain makes it ideal for guerrilla warfare. Forests, canyons, steep cliffs, sympathetic locals, no real road network, poor communication systems, easy supply lines to sympathetic neighbors across the border.

A better comparison would probably be Iraq and the United States. Iraq was flat and open, which allowed the U.S. to quickly capture vast swaths of the country. The terrain made it very difficult for rebels to operate without detection, so they largely vanished into the cities or operated in areas with large populations sympathetic to their goals. In areas of southern Iraq and Kurdistan where sympathy for the rebel groups was lower, the nation was largely secure and under control and the U.S. had far less difficulty establishing permanent supremacy.

In theory, Russia should be able to duplicate our invasion of Iraq when they push through Syria. A very large ground force with modern weapons and air support could overrun most ISIS held territory in short order. The real unknown is how the locals will react. If ISIS takes a page from the Iraq resistance, they will try to move their fighters into the cities because they offer the only real cover. However, they're missing one advantage that the Iraqi's had. Where the Iraqi rebels were locals, ISIS is mostly comprised of foreign fighters. They will be easily recognizable to the local Syrian population. If the Syrian population sides with ISIS and offers them shelter, ISIS could conceivably maintain a guerrilla war in the cities for years. If the Syrian population sides with Russia and Assad, ISIS will have a very difficult time hiding itself among the local population because so many of its fighters have foreign accents that will quickly identify them as non-Syrian. This could allow them to be flushed out fairly quickly.

So, the real question is: What do the locals think of ISIS? Given the choice between Assad and ISIS, where does their loyalty lay?

[NightWatcher]

10. What, were we handing out teddy bears and lollies to the fighters?

We just shelled a damn hospital. I don't think our brutality is under suspicion.

[davidn3600]

11. Well they have to target ISIS first

From all reports so far, they haven't.

[TwilightGardener]

12. Depends on how it goes. Lots of civilian losses and destruction tend to harden

citizens against whomever is dropping the bombs, whether it's us or anybody else. Creates and strengthens opposition or insurgency.

[HereSince1628]

13. They proved that in Afghanistan, right?

Nothing says survival like a man with a will to survive in the hole he dug.

Light infantry is damned hard to wipe out. Damned hard.

[yellowcanine]

16. Yes, just as the Soviets did to the Mujahideen.

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

[yeoman6987]

76. Different leadership

Putin won't back down no matter what. Totally different scenario. They are going to have to fight and ignore the naysayers. Putin will probably tell those who are negative to get their butts fighting if they don't like the way he is doing it. That might be a good strategy. It's going to be interesting that's for sure.

[yellowcanine]

94. Not so much really. Putin is a Kremlin retro.

Cut his teeth on the KGB, he is from the same mold as Brezhnev.

[mike_c]

17. like they whipped the Afghans into submission?

[Egnever]

19. Beat me to it

Their record of beating countries into submission isn't exactly stunning.

[BillZBubb]

22. Yes, Russia was SO successful in Afghanistan!

They really know how to defeat those Muslim fighters!

[NickB79]

23. Brutality in a guerrilla war is usually a recipe for defeat (of the Russians, in this case)

Because what inevitably happens is that the assaulting force (the Russians) will brutalize the local civilian population in an attempt to destroy ISIS.

And this will give ISIS a massive recruiting tool throughout the Arab world.

The last time the Russians waged a substantial battle against a guerrilla force was in Chechnya, and it stretched out for a decade and took the lives of 5,000-10,000 Russian soldiers. Civilian losses were upwards of 50,000.

Hooray brutality

[snagglepuss]

59. Recruits won't just be coming from the Arab states but from all Islamic countries

especially now the Russian Orthodox church has apparently called for a Holy war. Also what happens if ISIS crosses into Syria or Turkey? Will the Russians invade those countries in pursuit?

[Jesus Malverde]

71. Would Turkey a member of nato support terrorist?

Say it ain't so...

[killbotfactory]

73. Someone's has to buy ISIS oil. nt

[snagglepuss]

89. The Turks have gone after the Kurds not ISIS they also have

done nothing to strengthen their borders which have allowed ISIS free movement in and out of Turkey.

[ellisonz]

26. That worked so well for them in Afghanistan. n/t

[Maedhros]

27. I wouldn't make the mistake of assuming the Russian army is any more or less brutal than ours.

Blowing up weddings with Hellfire missiles is pretty damned brutal.

[arely staircase]

32. They are more than welcome to the quagmire nt

[AngryAmish]

34. Well, which is it?

[louis-t]

35. I agree. They don't mess around.

Too bad the collateral damage will be so horrible. I remember one time terrorists kidnapped a Soviet military person, or something like that. The Soviets went and captured one of the terrorists. They were sending pieces of the guy back to wherever the terrorists were from. Can't remember the details.

[TheMastersNemesis]

87. It Was During The Iran Crisis. The Iranians Took A Russian National ( A Diplomat I Think)

Anyway it was some Russian official. Well the Russians looked the family of one of the Iranian militant leaders. The family member ended up on the doorstep of this leader with one part of his body dissected and put in another part of his body. It was quite gruesome. The Iranians never messed with any Russian again

Now I don't condone such a heinous thing. Other cultures have other ways of doing things. ISIS fighters and leaders deserve all he brutality they can't handle. The problem is that a lot of innocents will die because the Russians may not care about collateral damage.

[jack_krass]

36. All I can say is:

GO RUSSIA!

[stevenleser]

42. Nope, no one is rooting for the terrorists. I have said publicly we should

Take this opportunity to pull out, publicly say good luck to Putin and that the Syrian civil war and ISIS are Russia's responsibility per their express request.

[NuclearDem]

46. Oh, go pound sand.

Pointing out the reality about the last time Russia tried this isn't rooting for the damned terrorists.

The only person rooting for any terrorist is you with your Assad fanboying up thread.

[hrmjustin]

53. I have to admit i was naive in my thinking on this. I thought Putin was going

to do the right thing but it is clear he will not.

[ColesCountyDem]

80. Welcome back, Justin!

You've been missed!

[former9thward]

54. Did they decimate the Mujahideen in Afghanistan?

I didn't think so.....

[rafeh1]

57. Russians decimated Afghanistan

And they had a reliable land based supply line. Yet still lost the war. The groups fighting back excluding the criminal isis have resilience and plenty of recruits. Bombing for peace didnt work for bush and it won't work for comrade putin

[KG]

60. russians got their asses handed to them in Chechnya. their military isn't any better now.

there is no good solution to ISIS. it's cultural movement as much as a military force

[Jesus Malverde]

65. Here is the alternate approach

Barack Obama says fight against Isis will be 'generational struggle'

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/jul/06/barack-obama-isis-generational-struggle-pentagon

Generations of Americans will be paying for the toys to fight this enemy who will be defeated in what's a generation, 10- 20- 30 years?

We've been at war for 14 years what's another 30. 75% of anti Isis missions were coming home without attacking the enemy. Meanwhile brave analysts have accused intelligence leaders of cooking the intelligence on the fight.

All out war on terrorists in Syria is attractive given our multigenerational approach.

[underpants]

75. Putin is protecting the Naval bases and trying to get the sanctions eased

But dry hump your computer device all you want. Enjoy.

[DustyJoe]

77. differences

They at least will have an ROE that allows their forces to eliminate the enemy

All the while our once capable Army is throwing out soldiers that merely push an afghan officer to the ground to protect against the rape of a young boy. The soldier should of just shot the perverted raping allah-snackbar pedo.

Big difference is what a proud capable Army once was compared to what it is today. At least the ISIS big heads will find out how deadly the new kid on the block is.

[achsadu]

81. about Russia vs. Isis

It's a good thing to let the Russians deal with the extremists; their attempts to support Assad are really secondary here since they have plenty to worry about Isis and their own chechan (and other) rebels in their part of the world. Obama should sit back and "enjoy" the Russian intervention - they are doing what he failed to accomplish that far in the skies of Syria.

Achsa.

[egduj]

83. Russia may take out ISIS, but if there are any doctors in the area, that's our specialty.

[Act_of_Reparation]

97. Yeah, the Russians are much more respectful of non-combatants.

As I am sure the people of Grozny can attest. Oh, wait...

[roamer65]

88. Syria is where WW3 will begin.

Get ready for a flood of high tech anti-aircraft weapons to flood in from Saudi Arabia and Qatar. Thats when the real party will begin.

[YoungDemCA]

90. I don't think fighting ISIS is actually a big priority of Russia's

I think propping up Assad is, however.

[renegade000]

91. DU makes my head spin sometimes...

I remember back when the ISIS situation started there was a noticeable contingent here on DU that seemed very skeptical that ISIS and all the resulting crises weren't just some creation of US propaganda used to justify more militarism in the Middle East. "Why do we suddenly care about Yazidis? Who the hell are these people anyway?" Etc. Etc. There was a great bemoaning about how Obama was starting up the Iraq war again by bombing ISIS targets and sending over military advisers--what a warmonger! Why did we even vote for him, if not to extricate ourselves from Iraq? We should just accept the situation as a terrible consequence of our misguided interventionist policies.

Now that Russia is in on the action, well that's just great! Surely now this grave and serious problem will be solved with the appropriate use of extreme military intervention!

[YoungDemCA]

92. Some Americans would rather live in Putin's Russia

Just like Snowden.

[dilby]

93. Like they decimated the mujahideen in the 80s?

Yep, that worked out well for the world.