ISIS Response to U.S. Aiding Kurds at Mosul Dam

Last night, ISIS posted a response to the U.S. airstrikes that helped the Kurds re-establish control over the Mosul dam. You can read the English translation here.

First, ISIS recounts its recent successes. Then, it says, as a result of their successes, the Kurds appealed to "the Black of Washington" to save them from the imminent loss of their capital, Irbil.

So the dog of the Romans thrusted his air force into a new dilemma; and entered into a military pact with the agents of yesterday, the Kurds, to commit the same stupidity that he has not awakened to, even until now!

And it seems that this submissive fool forgot or pretended to forget the quagmire of Iraq years ago, in which tens of thousands of crusaders were annihilated and tens of thousands of them were injured with permanent disabilities, not to mention the material losses and financial crises that nearly wiped the United States off the map; and it will disappear by the Permission of the One, the Only, soon at the hands of the Knights of the Khilafah.


ISIS denies being substantially affected by the strikes, calling reports to the contrary lies and deception on the part of the media, intended to boost the morale of the losing Kurdish soldiers.

It says it did not retreat, just made some strategic withdrawals in order to lure the Kurds into a trap and kill them (which did happen at Makhmur) and because it left booby-traps at the Dam (also true.)

Apart from some simple tactical withdrawals that were carried out by the mujahideen troops to drag the enemy into elaborate ambushes and annihilate them completely; as happened in the Battle of Makhmur, where the Peshmerga were besieged, and the hungry lions of the (Islamic} State wound around them, to kill around 50 and take several of them prisoner, and destroy a large number of their vehicles; and likewise, the pulling out of the mujahideen from Gwer and planting traps, and the (Peshmerga} rats did not dare enter due to the intensity of their panic.

Besides these two areas, the (Islamic) State did not withdraw a span's length by the Favour of Allah Alone.

It points out that during the battle for the dam, two of its suicide bombers killed tens of Peshmerga troops.

And in the Battle of Mosul Dam the enemy fled after the immersion of the two martyrdom-seeking brothers (Abu 'Ubaidah AI-Leebi (Libya) and Abu Tameem AI-Maghrebi (Morocco) with their two VBIED cars into the midst of Peshmerga gatherings, which led to the killing and injury of tens of them.

It talks about its victory in

As for the mujahideen support detachments, they bombarded tens of barracks and gatherings with various types of mortars and rockets, and the strikes were precise; we ask Allah to destroy (them) and (perfect our) aim.

ISIS says they've talked it out and decided they will fight to the death. They are all willing to die.

We emphasise that the soldiers of the Khilafah stationed on t he gaps (of the battlefields) of Wilaayat Nainawa have decided on the matter and are ready to die; and have pledged to Allah Almighty that the lands of the Muslims will not be defiled by a crusader infidel or a secular Kurd until they pass over their dead bodies.

Had Obama limited U.S. involvement to the humanitarian efforts to save the Yazidis, as he said in his August 8 statement, or to areas where the U.S. had facilities or personnel (like Irbil), I don't think ISIS would have reacted by threatening the U.S. ISIS isn't dumb, it knows there are no U.S. personnel or interests in Mosul.

For the U.S. to go to war with ISIS in Iraq is just crazy. ISIS is even stronger in Syria, now controlling about 90% of the Anbar province. It made big gains this week in the towns of Akhterin, Dabiq and Turkmen Bareh, which puts it in a good position to take Azaz, and from there, the Turkish border crossing of Bah a-Salama. Once it takes the border, it will cut off supply lines to the Syrian rebels fighting Assad. Game over for them (and the hopes of the U.S. that the so-called "moderate rebels" would succeed in fighting Assad.)

Also Monday, ISIS battled in Sawran and Marea. Marea is one of the strongholds of the Islamic Front. There's a major battle coming in Aleppo (which as I wrote yesterday, fits with reports that ISIS has dispatched commander Abu Wahib there.) The Islamic Front has confirmed this, telling Syria news that it is coordinating with Noor al-Din Zanki, Haraka Hazam and other opposition groups in northern Aleppo, to battle ISIS and the Syrian Army. The Syrian Army is also preparing, and launched major air strikes against ISIS in the Raqqa area the past few days.

Unless the U.S. is going to go to war against ISIS in Syria as well as well as Iraq (unlikely), the most we will accomplish by attacking ISIS in Iraq is the equivalent of cutting off an arm. If anyone can fight with one hand behind its back, it's ISIS.

Obama's strategy is both tepid and dangerous. He's smacking ISIS on the knuckles, and in doing so, put a great big target on our back, not just from ISIS, but now from Al Qaeda as well, which just put out a new issue of its magazine calling for stepped up attacks in the U.S.

ISIS was not our problem. It was a problem of the Middle East. We had no business doing anything after U.S. advisers determined our military assistance was not required to get the Yazedis off Sinjar mountain. The Mosul dam was none of our business. ISIS' recruiting efforts aimed at foreigners have all been requests for them to travel to the Middle East and fight with ISIS there. There are no official ISIS recruiting efforts asking foreigners to attack in the U.S. That may well change as a result of these ill-advised airstrikes.

ISIS may not seek direct action against the U.S. in the immediate future, since it has a pretty full plate right now, but that won't stop the U.S. from ramping up surveillance here in anticipation.In addition to getting a target on our back, we will all have to live with heightened security and more privacy intrusions. What a mess.

I bet most Americans don't care one whit more now whether Iraq is a democracy than they did in 2003. At some point, the U.S. should reject the Bush/Cheney doctrine of forcing democracy on the rest of the world. It didn't work for Vietnam, it was never going to work in Iraq. The only people benefiting are the manufacturers of all the military equipment we keep wasting our money on. We should be investing that money here at home, for infrastructure, health care, and education.

Added: Graphic at top is a screengrab from an ISIS video.

< Obama to Make Statement on Iraq and Ferguson at 4pm ET | Grand Jury to Begin Investigation of Michael Brown Killing >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    I'd say we owe the people of Iraq something (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by Babel 17 on Tue Aug 19, 2014 at 01:01:16 PM EST
    If using our air power can save them from ISIS, then we should use it. If the argument is that Iraq represents a trauma so nasty that we can't help that nation out, then I have to ask why we aren't prosecuting those who instigated our invasion.

    Our actions have consequences, we can't deny that, and we have to accept some responsibility. Iraq's current path is still largely a result of our efforts. We can't say the people of Iraq bear full responsibility for the incompetence of their government.

    Jeralyn, I disagree (5.00 / 0) (#18)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Aug 20, 2014 at 08:41:49 AM EST
    ISIS is dumb.  The stunts they are now pulling will finish them in their current form.  The UK is joining us now, intel collection on them has probably been doubly ramped and amped up.

    It won't be mission creep either, if and when the President changes the mission he'll just change it.  He has kept Congress in the loop, anything they won't let him do the UK will do or another one of our NATO allies will.  It will probably all be done Special Forces on the ground, but ISIS leadership signed their death warrant doing this stuff.

    ISIS IS DUMB.  They will be cut off at the knees.  Their leadership will be aggressively destroyed until the groups insanity ends.

    aren't you just a freakin' ray of sunshine! (none / 0) (#1)
    by cpinva on Tue Aug 19, 2014 at 05:37:25 AM EST
    ISIS/ISIL has been successful because they seemed to come out of nowhere, and conveniently attacked places/forces already engaged on other fronts. smart moves, shows someone in their leadership has some professional military background. their actions (massacres of "unbelievers", etc.) and their stated willingness to fight to the death, are strikingly reminiscent of the Japanese in wwII, and we know how that ended.

    one question I have, that I've yet to see an answer for, is their lines of supply; how are they getting resupplied, and who is doing the resupplying? figure that out, cut it off, and, like the Japanese on the islands, they die on the vine.

    yeah, no, we don't need American military personnel on the ground.

    I Think It is a Closer Call Than That (none / 0) (#2)
    by RickyJim on Tue Aug 19, 2014 at 08:05:37 AM EST
    The Kurds are for us, the good guys in Iraq.  The help we have given them is, relatively speaking, money well spent.  Aiding in recapturing the dam was apparently motivated by the fear that ISIS is crazy enough to cause a great humanitarian crisis by destroying it.  As long as our involvement doesn't creep to more than some selected operations, ISIS won't metastasize further.  Their grassroots support just isn't that large and all the official governments in the area hate them.

    I think you are a little over enamored with ISIS (none / 0) (#3)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Aug 19, 2014 at 09:21:02 AM EST
    If moderate Sunnis will become a part of a functioning secular Iraq, then what was feeding and empowering ISIS dries up.  They can't fight with one hand behind their back....they appeared that way because local Sunnis supported them in their anger  over disenfranchisement.  ISIS is not composed of supermen, they die just as easily as everyone else.  The ISIS fighters are soul dead bullies and murderers.  If there is a God, that God is not on their side.  It is time for Sunnis who would love their children and teach them life instead of death to come to the forefront of their communities.  

    Maybe (none / 0) (#4)
    by squeaky on Tue Aug 19, 2014 at 09:28:46 AM EST
    Or maybe that is a middle class fantasy, IOW if you are not living hand to mouth in poverty, you start thinking about your children and teach them about the future life not the future afterlife.

    It seems to me that the power of ISIS is to give hope to people who are living with out much hope in their lives. The appeal of being devout and gaining a place in gods eye, heart or wherever you gain a place in god, is tremendous. And this life is a shadow for the devout, as the real life starts after martyrdom.

    Hard to beat that kind of thinking when you are seriously oppressed and living in poverty.


    Agree (none / 0) (#5)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Aug 19, 2014 at 09:38:44 AM EST
    The Kurds have a fabulous economy though, and are secular..they have Sunnis among them.  Why not follow that lead?

    I don't know how impoverished Sunnis are right now.  It wasn't swell for many even when Saddam was running things.  My husband said that he used to fly over a mansion near the Syrian border that had a driveway made of marble and also a three story marble fountain, it was outside a town made of mud houses.

    My husband said if he found himself living in the mud town, he'd be having words with the mansion people at the very least.  A few years later he went looking for that mansion, but it had been deconstructed and was gone.

    It hasn't been so long ago that Iraq Sunnis don't remember the prosperity possible in secular life.  They aren't generations entrenched in a new definition of Jihad.  Many Iraqis had advanced educations before we invaded them, I have to believe something survived.  ISIS isn't the answer.


    One bright light (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by NYShooter on Wed Aug 20, 2014 at 02:39:30 AM EST
    coming out of Iraq, and, it portends a better future for its people, is the little known fact that:

     "more than 50 percent of Iraqi women have some degree of higher education, and, female literacy is high. Iraqi women have moved ahead in fields like medicine, education, and engineering."

    While Saddam was using the husbands as cannon fodder for his many violent adventures, those smart chicks took advantage of, "when the fox (husband) is away, the chickadees will play (getting that sheepskin.)

    Way to go, Ladies!


    "The Black in Washington"... (none / 0) (#6)
    by kdog on Tue Aug 19, 2014 at 09:43:43 AM EST
    Are you sure that's ISIS and not the Ferguson PD? ;)

    Not much difference when it comes (none / 0) (#7)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Aug 19, 2014 at 09:49:21 AM EST
    To human rights for me but not for thee :). Sunni extremists are racist :)

    I hear that... (5.00 / 1) (#8)
    by kdog on Tue Aug 19, 2014 at 10:15:34 AM EST
    hatred makes strange bedfellows...ISIS & Tea Party united!

    I saw "the dog of the Romans" (none / 0) (#14)
    by Mr Natural on Tue Aug 19, 2014 at 07:18:13 PM EST
    Those guys are really living in the past.

    Very good and well thought out thread post (none / 0) (#9)
    by Green26 on Tue Aug 19, 2014 at 10:22:16 AM EST
    Very interesting. However, I don't believe that ISIS was never going to turn to the US/West if the US hadn't starting attacking ISIS. ISIS is a major threat to the Middle East, and will turn towards the US/West sooner or later, if they remain strong and expand, in my view. I believe the US has to help certain groups, even allies like the Kurds, fight off ISIS.

    I agree that Obama's response is tepid. He believes he can't and shouldn't introduce troops, for political and other reasons. He would rather not expand in Syria. He probably isn't even comfortable having to do what he is doing now. However, I assume he realizes and is being advised that the ISIS problem is only going to get worse and become more of a direct problem for the US/West if the US doesn't take action now.

    Your first couple of sentences (none / 0) (#16)
    by NYShooter on Wed Aug 20, 2014 at 02:46:41 AM EST
    are pretty bungled up. What, exactly, are you trying to say?

    Will ISIS attack the West, or, not?

    "I don't believe that ISIS was never (is this supposed to be "ever?") going to turn to the US/West"

    followed by:

    "ISIS......will turn towards the US/West sooner or later"

    Which is it?


    It's just what I said, and what you quoted (none / 0) (#20)
    by Green26 on Thu Aug 21, 2014 at 06:52:43 PM EST
    I don't believe that ISIS was never going to attack the US/West. (I don't believe it was ever accurate to say that ISIS would never attak the US/West.) ISIS was always going to turn to US/West sooner or later. Couldn't be clearer. Ha.

    And you are one to talk about lack of clarify.


    Double negatives are (none / 0) (#21)
    by fishcamp on Sat Aug 23, 2014 at 07:49:38 AM EST
    difficult to understand sometimes.

    I wonder what this (none / 0) (#11)
    by jimakaPPJ on Tue Aug 19, 2014 at 02:55:47 PM EST
    So the dog of the Romans

    actually means or comes from?? Are they connecting all the way back to the days of Rome??

    Now that would be a world record for holding a grudge.

    What they're talking about (5.00 / 1) (#12)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Tue Aug 19, 2014 at 03:32:44 PM EST
    Not even close (none / 0) (#13)
    by woodchuck64 on Tue Aug 19, 2014 at 03:42:18 PM EST
    That whole Jew -vs- Arab thing is still not over and it got started back in 5th century BCE when Abraham played favorites with his sons Ishmael and Isaac (allegedly).

    I think you meant (none / 0) (#17)
    by Mordiggian 88 on Wed Aug 20, 2014 at 06:59:19 AM EST
    the 15th Century BCE, or your a Tea Partier.

    Yes (none / 0) (#19)
    by woodchuck64 on Wed Aug 20, 2014 at 01:12:24 PM EST
    15-20 BCE, not sure where I got 5.