Recent reports out of ISIS territory are declaring the region a “failed state,” with shortages of medicine and rising food prices. The major city of Mosul has run out of chlorine, making its drinking water dangerous.
The ISIS capital of Raqqa isn’t much better, with electricity available only a few hours a day, and ISIS struggling to provide food aid to the many people in need.
Though being spun as a failure of leadership by ISIS, such sights are pretty common in war zones, and all of ISIS territory is undergoing regular bombardment by the US and its allies, while US sanctions aim to prevent commerce from the oil-rich Syrian territory ISIS holds.
ISIS is attempting to managing this abroad with propaganda videos claiming the situation inside its territory is much better than it actually is. This, far from being a sign of a “failed state,” is pretty standard for governments in the region, especially when times are tough.
Perhaps the bigger concern for the US and other nations at war with ISIS is how little territory they’ve managed to wrest from them in the past few months of attacks. ISIS has lost some villages and seized others, but it seems more durable than anyone expected.
So quick to battle all those war hardened and die a martyr warriors — Does NATO have a brain?
Think about it, for if the Islamic State is legitimate, not being funded and controlled by Western powers, then it will take a NATO invasion force greater then the Iraq War of 2003 just to commence such a super stupidity. And then when most every able-bodied Muslim on earth with the means to join the battle comes flying in to save their brothers, not even NATO and all of it’s military power could stand the onslaught.
Your comment lacks logic, but is rather contrived by fear. The only thing ISIS has in its favor is the fact that they have been able to shock us with their brutal tactics. As a fighting force, even with swollen numbers, which I doubt will even happen, they are naught.
What good is conquered territory if there is no good governance?
Also, success isn't about "governing" vast swaths of empty semi desert territory. Controlling the few cities and smaller population centers is what will matter, along with whatever economic resources there are. Not much.
No serious effort has been made — other than by some Kurdish forces – to really control the mostly empty spaces. A reasonable and perhaps deliberate strategy is to let this wound fester for a while, since the populace will quickly sour on ISIS and their supposed government. People in this region are pragmatic. While they honor their version of religion, they need to eat, drink and enjoy life. ISIS isn't likely to provide a sustainable basis for that. Also, the mostly foreign fighters there will realize that like all such interlopers, they are not really welcome and have been sold a bogus bill of goods.
These failures will grow and fester. Eventually the looted wealth and ammo will run short. Then the trapped ISIS foreigners will get a strong taste of their own medicine. Captured mercenaries (however motivated) do not fare well. Heads will again roll…
ISIS has managed not only to cast fear in the Arab world, but in the West too. Amazing really when you consider their gains were made against a corrupt, and pretty worthless Iraqi army. A well planned, and executed attack by the U.S, or NATO would without a doubt push this group back into a fringe organization. But the West is now lacking the right leadership to handle this. You certainly won't find it in this Administration. It would be a big mistake though to think mainstream America has lost its courage, while the few liberals making the press have done so. Let's first contain this menace, and then push it back. Maybe we should take a note of the Kurds, and their courage.
your link to the Independent is actually an edited version of a WaPo article (Independent credits WaPo at bottom of article), which goes on to claim:
Much of the assistance that is being provided comes from Western aid agencies, which discreetly continue to help areas of Syria under Islamic State control…
To some, better than Assad
Meanwhile, crime has plunged, and for many residents the order is a welcome alternative to the lawlessness that prevailed when more moderate Syrian rebels were in charge. Syrians who lived for decades under the regime of President Bashar al-Assad are accustomed to obeying orders, and many have adapted to the new rules, said a government employee in the former tax department who collects his salary from the government, even though he is no longer working.
“Daesh are not as cruel as the regime was,” he said, using an Arabic name for the militants. With the Islamic State in charge, “if you don’t do anything wrong — according to their standards, not ours — they will not bother you.”… http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_east/t…
in other words, another anti-assad propaganda piece.