The areas where Daesh exists has been devastated by bombing runs. That is not minor damage in the picture below. It is easy to say they have been significantly degraded.
Daesh may still have large numbers of people that joined them since September, but, that doesn't mean they are stronger. We know they are using child soldiers. I would not call that an increase in military strength.
If Daesh has increased it's recruitment since September that doesn't mean anything except people are fighting for their lives within the Daesh territory. The pictures of Daesh troops show less than ten at a time walking to their assignments. That could mean something or not. That is the place of General Dempsey to answer.
The pictures with this article from The Independent shows complete devastation. The ability of Daesh to mount a significant attack is very limited. The USA and the Arab Coalition took away the most potentially dangerous military equipment Daesh had. So, they are most likely limited to small arms flowing in with volunteers most probably.
If there are two hundred thousand fighters, the reason the USA and Iraq are making advances is because the Iraqi fighters (I mean that in a generic sense, including the Kurds and Shia.) are better armed with air support.
November 16, 2015
By Patrick Cockburn
...Fuad Hussein, (click here) the chief of staff of the Kurdish President Massoud Barzani said in an exclusive interview with The Independent on Sunday that "I am talking about hundreds of thousands of fighters because they are able to mobilise Arab young men in the territory they have taken."
He
estimates that Isis rules a third of Iraq and a third of Syria with a
population of between 10 and 12 million living in an area of 250,000
square kilometres, the same size as Great Britain. This gives the
jihadis a large pool of potential recruits....
This pictures to the right shows Turkish units. If I am not mistaken it is only recently that Turkey began the offensive at the border; so the results still are unclear. But, the capacity of these units is significant.
During the Iraq War it was estimated by a few organizations seeking to understand the potential for civilian death to be at a ratio of 200 to one USA soldier. In other words, the American soldier in combat in Iraq had the equivalent power to kill 200 people for each soldier. Some of the estimates were in the hundreds of thousands, as much as 800,000 by one organization.
An estimate in The Independent state there are as many as 12 million people within Daesh's territory the size of Great Britain. No matter how I try to word these next statements, it won't sound good so why not just put it out there.
The Independent states the Daesh territory is approximately 250,000 square kilometers of which about 12 million are living there. That breaks down to about 48 people per square kilomter.
Syria is 186,475 square kilometers with a population in 2013 of about 22.85 million which leaves a little under 123 people per square kilometer.
There is far less people, about one third, living on that land under Daesh than before if The Independent is correct. That reality is most probably correct because the refugee status is ever increasing. Basically, where do you find the land to put an entire country into refugee camps?
This is from Jordan:
April 18, 2015
Now, I realize there is a portion of Iraq still under the influence of Daesh which would produce the additional land mass considered to be captured by Daesh. But, to state the people living on that land is greater than before the conflict started is really incorrect. Now the reason I state that is because estimates are so high regarding the potential number of troops recruited from within the land/cities Daesh is holding.
It is just that 200 thousand out of 12 million is a very small percentage of recruits. It amounts to about less than two percent of the people that might have been trapped with the fighting continuing. If there were people pressed into serving the Daesh military it may illustrate their desperate status.
General Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, arrived in Baghdad on Friday in a surprise visit. He said he wanted "to get a sense from our side about how our contribution is going". Earlier in the week, he told Congress that to defeat Isis an efficient army of 80,000 men would be necessary.
There were also reports on MSNBC 1000 recruits per month were entering Syria to join Daesh. Did that include women, too?
I haven't heard any type of official word from any of the militaries involved in this strategy, except General Dempsie quoted by The Independent.
The people within Daesh's territory are probably moving further and further from the bombings. That is my guess and might explain SOME of the widening involvement of land. But, is the fighting force expanding in number and tenacity? Sure to some extent. Will it continue to? Uncertain, but, countries are attempting to end the emigration into Syria, too.
Does the USA have to get involved? That is like opening Pandora's box. If the USA goes into Iraq and ultimately Syria, that will only increase the number of recruits coming into the area. That is proven, that isn't even a theory anymore.
The Kurds are holding their own. Turkey is just getting involved, the other countries in the region and in the coalition are not reporting border problems. The Shi'ites of southern Iraq are doing okay and they already have support from Iran.
The only countries I am worried about at this point is Saudi Arabia and Egypt. It is experiencing a few skirmishes at the border with Lebanon. Those skirmishes don't seem to worry the Kingdom that much. They have lost a few men, but, at the same time the Saudi are sending humanitarian aid into Yemen to reduce any hardship by the people.
What I worry about with Saudi Arabia is the inability of the Anbar Sunnis to protect and limit any movement of Daesh to the Saudi border with Iraq.
Egypt is experiencing an uptick in violence. That tupically is not new. It is the same groups from the past, including the Muslim Brotherhood. The current President SiSi is worried about Egypt slipping back into chaos and anarchy. He has a current hand on stability for now, especially northern Sinai. But, he openly states he is worried if any economic insult comes to Egypt it will disturb things enough to send Egypt back into chaos.
One of the reasons General Dempsey made a trip to Iraq is because President Obama is meeting with the coalition again in May.
I know everyone believes the USA can lend a great deal of help to end the fighting with Daesh and stabilize the region. I am not so sure. Look, there are still blast walls around Baghdad. The USA wasn't 'all that.' Sure they are helpful, but, they aren't successful necessarily.
My concern is more or less the divided people of the Middle East. They are more and more dividing into sectarian groups. That creates it's own problems. Libya is a prime example.
The tribes of Libya have to define a governing body to stop the marauding and sectarian split. There is definitely an east and west Libya now. Without the oppression of the dictators, the people are deliberately acting to remove any central authority of their country as is the case in Libya. Libya has an occasion been governed by a central authority. Then after a time there are raids into government buildings where the parliament is meeting and the killing starts again.
And the thing is that all of North Africa is not necessarily in chaos. Tunisia and Algeria are not having governance problems. But, they are very strict to border crossings.
Tunisian Authorities have banned more than 12,000 Tunisians from travelling to tension spots in Iraq, Libya and Syria in the last two years.
April 18, 2015
In parliament, (click here) Tunisian interior minister Najem Gharsalli said that his ministry is still exerting efforts to dismantle the "sleeping nets of terrorists" which facilitates and liaises the travel of Tunisians to"tension spots like Syria and Iraq."
Gharsalli said that his ministry prevented "12,490 Tunisians from leaving Tunisian territory to travel to tension zones" in Iraq, Libya and Syria since March 2013.
As part of his ministry's efforts to restrict travelling to these three countries, he said that new intelligence equipment estimated to cost $27m is to be installed.
Regarding fears of human rights bodies that autocracy could return back to the country after the ratification of anti-terror bill, Gharsalli reinstated that "unlike the 2003 bill, this bill includes positive factors."...
The Tunisian government recognizes the unhappiness in the country under previous rulers. They are looking at the people differently and doing their level best to serve them without indulgences that would compromise their security.
Then there is Algeria who is acting as negotiator between Saudi Arabia and Iran.
Algeria over the last two weeks has relayed a number of messages between Saudi Arabia and Iran in hopes of averting regional war in Yemen.
April 17, 2015
Messages between the two sides, I(click here) he said, had contained both assurances and warnings, he told Anadolu Agency on condition of anonymity.
The source said one such message had contained assurances between the two countries that the Saudi navy would not fire on Iranian cargo ships traversing the Bab el-Mandeb Strait.
Another message contained assurances by the two countries that their respective navies would not clash in the same body of water, the source said.
He added that Saudi and Iranian officials were communicating via Algiers with a view to averting further military escalation in Yemen.
"Algeria believes mechanisms must be put in place to prevent the conflict from evolving into a regional war before a peaceful settlement can be found," the source said....
So, regardless of the nervousness of The West in regard to problems in the Middle East and Daesh appearing to be recruiting from within lands they occupy, does the USA have a vital role in the region? I think that is very skeptical and would cause more problems than it solves.
If the USA returns to the Middle East there is a chance it all could explode considering all the tensions in the region, perhaps best illustrated by Egypt.
And if the USA commits to the Middle East, what occurs to Europe and NATO? I think the USA has to be cautious in committing anywhere. The world is delicately balanced right now and I think the USA needs to consider a bigger picture to any involvement of war.
The one definite factor the USA can count on, is it's seismic presence and the reaction that will bring many groups in the region. The USA doesn't need to increase the military energy in the region and expect to achieve peace. The bombing of the USA embassy was a car bomb not an invading army.
The USA was in Iraq when the terrible bomb went off at the UN Embassy killing the UN Ambassador. Just because people think the USA will stabilize everything over night, that is a delusion.
Daesh may still have large numbers of people that joined them since September, but, that doesn't mean they are stronger. We know they are using child soldiers. I would not call that an increase in military strength.
If Daesh has increased it's recruitment since September that doesn't mean anything except people are fighting for their lives within the Daesh territory. The pictures of Daesh troops show less than ten at a time walking to their assignments. That could mean something or not. That is the place of General Dempsey to answer.
The pictures with this article from The Independent shows complete devastation. The ability of Daesh to mount a significant attack is very limited. The USA and the Arab Coalition took away the most potentially dangerous military equipment Daesh had. So, they are most likely limited to small arms flowing in with volunteers most probably.
If there are two hundred thousand fighters, the reason the USA and Iraq are making advances is because the Iraqi fighters (I mean that in a generic sense, including the Kurds and Shia.) are better armed with air support. November 16, 2015
By Patrick Cockburn
...Fuad Hussein, (click here) the chief of staff of the Kurdish President Massoud Barzani said in an exclusive interview with The Independent on Sunday that "I am talking about hundreds of thousands of fighters because they are able to mobilise Arab young men in the territory they have taken."
He
estimates that Isis rules a third of Iraq and a third of Syria with a
population of between 10 and 12 million living in an area of 250,000
square kilometres, the same size as Great Britain. This gives the
jihadis a large pool of potential recruits....This pictures to the right shows Turkish units. If I am not mistaken it is only recently that Turkey began the offensive at the border; so the results still are unclear. But, the capacity of these units is significant.
During the Iraq War it was estimated by a few organizations seeking to understand the potential for civilian death to be at a ratio of 200 to one USA soldier. In other words, the American soldier in combat in Iraq had the equivalent power to kill 200 people for each soldier. Some of the estimates were in the hundreds of thousands, as much as 800,000 by one organization.
An estimate in The Independent state there are as many as 12 million people within Daesh's territory the size of Great Britain. No matter how I try to word these next statements, it won't sound good so why not just put it out there.
The Independent states the Daesh territory is approximately 250,000 square kilometers of which about 12 million are living there. That breaks down to about 48 people per square kilomter.
Syria is 186,475 square kilometers with a population in 2013 of about 22.85 million which leaves a little under 123 people per square kilometer.
There is far less people, about one third, living on that land under Daesh than before if The Independent is correct. That reality is most probably correct because the refugee status is ever increasing. Basically, where do you find the land to put an entire country into refugee camps?
This is from Jordan:
April 18, 2015
AMMAN — HRH Prince Hassan (click here) has called for building a mutual partnership between
Jordanians and those living in the Kingdom as refugees.
During a recent meeting with
representatives of the industrial and commercial sectors, as well as
Jordanian, Arab and foreign investors in Irbid Governorate, the prince
said, “It is time to rethink the form of relationship between Jordanians
and the refugees in the country in light of the inadequate
international support to refugee-burdened Jordan.” Prince Hassan said
this relationship should rest on the concepts of productivity and
complementary partnerships in the fields of training, rehabilitation and
expertise exchange.
He added that among every five
Jordanians there is a Syrian and that the value of the international
assistance to Jordan does not exceed 20 per cent of the actual cost of
the refugee crisis....
and there is this report:
April 18, 2015
BAGHDAD — Iraqi forces (click here) retook most of the country's
largest refinery from Daesh on Saturday, officials said, reversing gains
by the militants who seized parts of the sprawling complex in northern
Iraq last week.
A spokesman for the US-led coalition
fighting Daesh said troops had recaptured all of Baiji refinery at 11:30
GMT, but officials in Salahuddin, the province where it is located,
said there was still fighting around some facilities.
The insurgents attacked the refinery a
week ago by blasting through the security perimeter around it and taking
over several installations, including storage tanks, a technical
institute and a distribution point.
The Baiji refinery produced around
175,000 barrels per day before it shut in June when Daesh militants
seized it at the same time as the city of Mosul. Iraqi forces retook it
from militants in November but subsequently lost control again.
A source in the military command for
Salahuddin province said clashes continued on Saturday, with insurgents
fighting the army's elite Golden Division and paramilitaries in southern
and western parts of the refinery complex.... Now, I realize there is a portion of Iraq still under the influence of Daesh which would produce the additional land mass considered to be captured by Daesh. But, to state the people living on that land is greater than before the conflict started is really incorrect. Now the reason I state that is because estimates are so high regarding the potential number of troops recruited from within the land/cities Daesh is holding.
It is just that 200 thousand out of 12 million is a very small percentage of recruits. It amounts to about less than two percent of the people that might have been trapped with the fighting continuing. If there were people pressed into serving the Daesh military it may illustrate their desperate status.
General Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, arrived in Baghdad on Friday in a surprise visit. He said he wanted "to get a sense from our side about how our contribution is going". Earlier in the week, he told Congress that to defeat Isis an efficient army of 80,000 men would be necessary.
There were also reports on MSNBC 1000 recruits per month were entering Syria to join Daesh. Did that include women, too?
I haven't heard any type of official word from any of the militaries involved in this strategy, except General Dempsie quoted by The Independent.
The people within Daesh's territory are probably moving further and further from the bombings. That is my guess and might explain SOME of the widening involvement of land. But, is the fighting force expanding in number and tenacity? Sure to some extent. Will it continue to? Uncertain, but, countries are attempting to end the emigration into Syria, too.
Does the USA have to get involved? That is like opening Pandora's box. If the USA goes into Iraq and ultimately Syria, that will only increase the number of recruits coming into the area. That is proven, that isn't even a theory anymore.
The Kurds are holding their own. Turkey is just getting involved, the other countries in the region and in the coalition are not reporting border problems. The Shi'ites of southern Iraq are doing okay and they already have support from Iran.
The only countries I am worried about at this point is Saudi Arabia and Egypt. It is experiencing a few skirmishes at the border with Lebanon. Those skirmishes don't seem to worry the Kingdom that much. They have lost a few men, but, at the same time the Saudi are sending humanitarian aid into Yemen to reduce any hardship by the people.
What I worry about with Saudi Arabia is the inability of the Anbar Sunnis to protect and limit any movement of Daesh to the Saudi border with Iraq.
Egypt is experiencing an uptick in violence. That tupically is not new. It is the same groups from the past, including the Muslim Brotherhood. The current President SiSi is worried about Egypt slipping back into chaos and anarchy. He has a current hand on stability for now, especially northern Sinai. But, he openly states he is worried if any economic insult comes to Egypt it will disturb things enough to send Egypt back into chaos.
One of the reasons General Dempsey made a trip to Iraq is because President Obama is meeting with the coalition again in May.
I know everyone believes the USA can lend a great deal of help to end the fighting with Daesh and stabilize the region. I am not so sure. Look, there are still blast walls around Baghdad. The USA wasn't 'all that.' Sure they are helpful, but, they aren't successful necessarily.
My concern is more or less the divided people of the Middle East. They are more and more dividing into sectarian groups. That creates it's own problems. Libya is a prime example.
The tribes of Libya have to define a governing body to stop the marauding and sectarian split. There is definitely an east and west Libya now. Without the oppression of the dictators, the people are deliberately acting to remove any central authority of their country as is the case in Libya. Libya has an occasion been governed by a central authority. Then after a time there are raids into government buildings where the parliament is meeting and the killing starts again.
And the thing is that all of North Africa is not necessarily in chaos. Tunisia and Algeria are not having governance problems. But, they are very strict to border crossings.
Tunisian Authorities have banned more than 12,000 Tunisians from travelling to tension spots in Iraq, Libya and Syria in the last two years.
April 18, 2015
In parliament, (click here) Tunisian interior minister Najem Gharsalli said that his ministry is still exerting efforts to dismantle the "sleeping nets of terrorists" which facilitates and liaises the travel of Tunisians to"tension spots like Syria and Iraq."
Gharsalli said that his ministry prevented "12,490 Tunisians from leaving Tunisian territory to travel to tension zones" in Iraq, Libya and Syria since March 2013.
As part of his ministry's efforts to restrict travelling to these three countries, he said that new intelligence equipment estimated to cost $27m is to be installed.
Regarding fears of human rights bodies that autocracy could return back to the country after the ratification of anti-terror bill, Gharsalli reinstated that "unlike the 2003 bill, this bill includes positive factors."...
The Tunisian government recognizes the unhappiness in the country under previous rulers. They are looking at the people differently and doing their level best to serve them without indulgences that would compromise their security.
Then there is Algeria who is acting as negotiator between Saudi Arabia and Iran.
Algeria over the last two weeks has relayed a number of messages between Saudi Arabia and Iran in hopes of averting regional war in Yemen.
April 17, 2015
Messages between the two sides, I(click here) he said, had contained both assurances and warnings, he told Anadolu Agency on condition of anonymity.
The source said one such message had contained assurances between the two countries that the Saudi navy would not fire on Iranian cargo ships traversing the Bab el-Mandeb Strait.
Another message contained assurances by the two countries that their respective navies would not clash in the same body of water, the source said.
He added that Saudi and Iranian officials were communicating via Algiers with a view to averting further military escalation in Yemen.
"Algeria believes mechanisms must be put in place to prevent the conflict from evolving into a regional war before a peaceful settlement can be found," the source said....
If the USA returns to the Middle East there is a chance it all could explode considering all the tensions in the region, perhaps best illustrated by Egypt.
And if the USA commits to the Middle East, what occurs to Europe and NATO? I think the USA has to be cautious in committing anywhere. The world is delicately balanced right now and I think the USA needs to consider a bigger picture to any involvement of war.
The one definite factor the USA can count on, is it's seismic presence and the reaction that will bring many groups in the region. The USA doesn't need to increase the military energy in the region and expect to achieve peace. The bombing of the USA embassy was a car bomb not an invading army.
The USA was in Iraq when the terrible bomb went off at the UN Embassy killing the UN Ambassador. Just because people think the USA will stabilize everything over night, that is a delusion.
