ISIS has held large portions on the Anbar Province since January, but in recent weeks has been pushing their advantage, drawing ever nearer to Baghdad and also seizing valuable towns along the way.
The losses in Anbar, which has seen major Iraqi army bases overrun, have reached the point where ISIS is on the cusp of controlling it outright, with the remaining outposts of Iraqi central government rule falling at an alarming rate.
Locals are complaining that the Iraqi military hasn’t shown itself to have an answer to the ISIS gains, and are complaining the provincial police force seems to be the only one fighting ISIS on the ground.
Whatever the reason, the loss of what remains of Anbar would be a huge psychological blow to Iraq, as the province makes up roughly a third of Iraq’s overall area. Between that and ISIS’ holdings in Nineveh, Diyala, and Salahuddin, they have cobbled together a large, contiguous territory in Iraq, and one which borders its similarly large territory in Syria.
Ain't it funny how ISIS nears complete control of Anbar province but the US military with all their satellites fighter jets, tanks! predictor drones! computers, aircraft carriers, submarines, night vision goggles and special OP forces struggled for a decade with all their Surges and nonsense to accomplish what a bunch of guys with Toyota Pick Up trucks and long knives just roll into town and everyone flees in utter panic for their lives. Town after town after town fall to them like dominoes? This was a group no one ever heard of until several months ago? If you want to make the argument that these are exactly the same people we have been arming in Syria to fight Assad (and I do!) how is it they never were able to bring down Assad yet?
Does any if this make any sense? When things don't appear to make sense, perhaps they do make sense, just in some other way?
if you are implying that ISIS (and the others) is a creation of DC,then why would it upset its entire middle eastern position by putting Arabia and Israel within touching difference?
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=X606kNCfEHY
We'll that is a good question, and it certainly is complicated. There are those that would argue that in arming the Sunni rebels in Syria against Assad we have created a Frankenstein in the process. The same argument was made regarding Al Qaeda. Can it really be that we keep making the same mistake over and over? This is the Blowback theory and it is certainly plausible if you fail to look at all the evidence that it is not blowback but rather Geostrategy.
Iran is Shite, the Malaki government in Iraq before he stepped down was Shite. Malaki and Iran were therefore rather chummy chummy. We did not like that and certainly Israel did not like that. Assad is an Alwalite which as Wikipedia explains:
The Alawites, also known as Alawis (ʿAlawīyyah Arabic: علوية), are a prominent religious group, centred in Syria, who follow a branch of the Twelver school of Shia Islam but with syncretistic elements.
So too is the Assad regime a branch of Shia Islam and therefore aligned with Iran.
ISIS are Sunnis as are Saudi Arabia, at also Al Qaeda. ISIS is the counterbalance to Iran, and all it's allies. The Neocons had been proposing for years breaking up all these countries along sectarian lines which is what is exactly happening.
I can assure you that nothing is as it appears or is being presented. One thing you can be certain of is that the amount of black bag covert operations going on under the table is intense.