F* these motherf*rs. That is all. http://www.news.com.au/world/middle...s-child-recruits/story-fnh81ifq-1227592670098 A LITTLE boy hacks the head off a teddy bear and holds up his knife proudly to the camera. A class of youngsters chants: “Here, here, here comes the state of Islam ... If they call me a terrorist, I will consider it an honour.” Then the most shocking scenes unfold. A child not much older beheads a Syrian officer, and another executes two Russian spies by cutting their throats. The videos made by the Islamic State are as sickeningly violent as ever, but this time, the terrorists have gone one better: these bloodthirsty soldiers are children. IS is building its army for the next generation, moulding recruits before they are old enough to know anything else, and creating the perfect jihadists. It now controls tens of thousands of children in Syria and Iraq. In June, a video showed 25 children unflinchingly shooting 25 captured Syrian soldiers in the head, while others practised chopping the heads off dolls with swords at training camps. Boys are hit by combat trainers, encouraged to punch each other, and taught to shoot from close range. The line between fantasy and reality becomes ever thinner. Those who resist radicalisation find themselves running for their lives. Omar, 14, was tortured for a month and a half and publicly mutilated for refusing to join the extremists. “They put my hand on a wooden block and cut off my hand with a butcher’s knife,” he told Dateline from Turkey,days after fleeing Syria. “Then they cut off my foot and put them both in front of me for me to see.” Tonight’s Dateline: IS Child Recruits on SBS meets teenagers who have escaped the militants, and discovers how the terrorists spread their message of hatred and fear to the innocent. Children are met at mosques and offered food, money and toys,” journalist Evan Williams told news.com.au. “They’re gradually brought into IS thinking. “It starts with physical training. They wake early for morning prayers, they’re taught to withstand temperatures where they’re submerged in freezing cold water, they walk for miles, they are physically toughened. They are taught all the time, ‘listen and obey.’ They come out effectively brainwashed. Those who get out are heavily traumatised.” These “Cubs of the caliphate” are taken from their families, gathered from orphanages and rounded up in public squares. It’s not just boys — girls are forced to marry IS members, or are recruited as suicide bombers themselves. They are indoctrinated in jihadist ideology, trained in military operations and forced to watch executions on big screens and in person. Once they become numb to the violence, they are ready to be killing machines. “It’s a form of brutalisation, it’s dehumanising,” says Williams. “They’re creating soldiers, a new army that could potentially change the face of the Middle East.” The kids learn to see sacrifice as a great honour. “I gave everything I had for Islamic State’s victory,” says escapee Abu Ibrahim*, revealing that the youngest suicide bomber he met was just eight years old. Children are now used as weapons with alarming frequency in the Middle East. Recent video from Shaam Network showed kids being transported in metal cages on the backs of trucks through Syria’s streets by rebels. Footage has shown children as young as five training for killing, while In March, a 10-year-old “young lion of the Khilafah” was seen pointing a gun at Arab-Israeli captive Muhammad Musallam, although it was unclear if he had pulled the trigger. Australian jihadist Khaled Sharrouf achieved infamy last year after he posted a photo online of his young son holding up a severed head, and further images showed them holding assault rifles and submachine-guns. Meanwhile, IS is planning even further ahead by pushing a “jihadi baby boom.” Former recruits face a long road to recovering from their ordeal. Even once they get out of Syria, they are not safe, with IS extending its influence over border towns day by day, hunting down “nonbelievers.” Most of the teenagers escape with the help of family members, but everyone is terrified, and two men known to the filmmakers were killed in Turkey last week. “It’s very dangerous,” says Williams. “The Islamic State is not a group of ragtag rebels. They’re not here, in their minds, for just a couple of weeks. They’re building up for the future.”
Seriously, f Daesh scum. And f the Islamist ruling party of Turkey, whose been tacitly helping Daesh-- even going so far in the last week as to fire on the secular, democratic, feminist and libertarian socialist Syrian Kurdish forces, who have been doing more than any other group to roll back Daesh gains. And f the Obama administration for not doing more to pressure their NATO ally Turkey to stop looking the other way as Daesh crosses their border, and as Turkey attacks forces directly involved in fighting Daesh. And f the Iraqi forces that abandoned their position without a fight in the face of Daesh, which is how Daesh obtained the heavy U.S. weaponry which largely enabled them to conquer such a swath of territory. And f the Bush administration for lying to the American people in order to justify an invasion of Iraq, and then focusing more on scoring political points and having corporations like Haliburton rake in massive profits than actually understanding the intricacies and the different sects and races in the region.
Turkey is a member of NATO and have been fighting the Kurds in their own territory for years. Nothing new. Lots of competing interests.
Yeah, but these Kurds aren't in their territory. They are in Syria. And, my point is, if the people of the U.S. are really serious about being opposed to Daesh, then they need to hold their elected officials and government accountable for not holding Turkey accountable for assisting Daesh. Basically, people and governments need to either get off their high horse and admit they care more about realpolitik and projection of U.S. power than actually combatting Daesh, or they need to start acting like getting rid of Daesh and militant Islamists is really a primary priority. And doing the latter includes putting pressure on Turkey to change their behavior in the region. So, if you want to make excuses for Turkey, that is your prerogative -- just don't, in different conversations, act as though combating Daesh and militant Islamists is a top priority (not to say that you do this -- but my f's are done from the perspective of someone who does think that should be the U.S.'s top priority in the region).
From my point of view, I don't think getting rid of Islamists is necessarily a primary priority. You kind of have to ignore what they say in their speeches. This is a giant Shia/Sunni proxy battle. Everything that goes on in the middle east can be boiled down to Sunni v Shia and their quest for regional/cultural hegemony. And to this end, Turkey isn't the biggest Sunni offender (despite being very secular in the past, islamic hardliners have been creeping into their government) it's actually Saudi Arabia, our best friends. I wouldn't be surprised if the Saudis and the other Gulf states are feeding arms to ISIL, to counter Iran's growing influence in Iraq and Syria. It's plainly obvious to me. ISIL in Iraq and Syria are counter-weights to Iran-friendly governments. The most ****ed up part about it all is. We're playing both sides. 1. We help the Saudis kill the Iran Backed, Shia Rebels in Yemen. 2. We help the Iran backed Shia government in Iraq fight Sunni ISIL. The media just plays ISIL as the villains, and the populace eats it up, but the truth is, there are no good sides, and the reason regime change has been so unsuccessful there.
How is the YPG/J ( the secular, feminist, democratic, libertarian socialist Kurdish militias I mentioned above) not a "good side"? They are not a proxy for Shia or Sunni powers, and they have been pretty successfully bringing their policy of religious, ethnic and gender tolerance to regions in Syria they have been taking from Daesh. To me a group like that is exactly who the U.S. and international community should be supporting. And if Turkey sees them as a threat and decides to attack them while still supporting al Qaeda and assisting Daesh, then I think we should cease counting Turkey as an ally. The YPG/J is struggling exactly against this Shia Sunni dichotomy that has contributed so much to the turmoil of the region. Instead of accepting that rivalry as an inevitability, if we care about stability and democracy in the middle east as we claim to do, then we need to support groups like these Kurds, and not groups like Turkey and Saudi Arabia.
The only ones there who are not crazy are - surprise - the non-Islamists (Shia or Sunni), namely the Kurds, who might also be majority Muslim on paper, but who really are a lot more secular. There is a direct correlation (and causation) between degree of intensity of religious belief and craziness/evil. The ones that are least religious and most secular - and respect women's rights the most - the Kurds - are the only ones who should be our allies. Instead, Obama's administration sold them out.
Backstabbing them and letting them die would be a better way of saying it. Nixon and Kissinger did it as well. It's early so I might be jumbling up my history. Edit... My brain is working right http://www.revcom.us/a/1226/lvexcerpt.htm I have no idea how Kissinger still has any respect. I don't even know how he's avoided being assassinated or being charged with war crimes. He's a piece of trash that ruined American foreign policy.
Unfortunately, Turkey is a part of NATO, which complicates everything honestly. The calculus is pretty simple for them. If Kurdistan were established in parts of Syria and Iraq, eventually they will also want parts of Turkey. It would definitely be interesting to Russia if NATO fell apart.
You were credible until you said this. Lol. People's hate for the man are so unfounded, I'm always surprised.
Two things regarding your post: 1) While I think the Obama administration deserves a lot of criticism for their policy in Syria and the middle east (as you may have noticed from my "f the Obama administration" comment), it would be incorrect to say that they sold the Kurds out (so far anyway). In fact, in the last few weeks, the Obama administration has elevated their support for the Kurds and their Arab allies to the central piece of their Syrian/anti-Daesh policy. Now, they don't deserve too much credit for this, since they only made this move out of desperation once all of their other stratagems for combating Daesh failed miserably -- and I am indeed afraid that the U.S. will eventually end up selling out the Kurds again -- but, for now, it is inaccurate to say Obama sold out the Kurds. 2) I agree completely that combating militant Islamists should be a primary objective if the U.S. really wants a stable and democratic Middle East, and that, if that is their goal, they have to abandon allies like Saudi Arabia and Turkey (who are actively supporting Islamists) in order to better support the interests of secular groups like the YPG/J. However, I think it is a mistake and counterproductive to downplay what a large extent the people involved in the pro-secular YPG/J are in fact Muslims. I don't know how to embed a video at a time stamp, but check out this link to what a pro-YPG/J Imam in the Syrian Kurdish region has to say: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UQGqI5m11ys&feature=youtu.be&t=2m33s What these Kurds are demonstrating is that you can construct a secular society in a Muslim society, just as the U.S. has constructed a secular society in a Christian society. So, while we have to combat Islamists, it will have to be tolerant Muslims like these Kurds who will be leading that charge and transforming their society. The best role of the West, if we really care about the region as our governments pretend to, is to fully empower and support those Muslims putting their lives on the line to lead that transformation. I know, right? History is not going to forget the work of Kissinger, and it will not be kind to him for it either. I fear that the people of the United States will be paying for the decisions of men like Kissinger for several more generations. I agree with your facts completely -- my only point is that it is hypocritical for the U.S. government or people looking at the region to act as if stopping Daesh is their top priority if they are unwilling to disown those allies actively supporting Daesh and fighting against those groups who are fighting Daesh.
Turkey has been a long-standing strategic and crucial NATO ally that's pretty much the gateway for any sustained middle east operation. The U.S. Will choose them over the Kurds any place any time.
I don't disagree that you are almost certainly correct in this statement -- but what that means is that we care more about projecting U.S. power into the middle east than we care about creating a stable and democratic middle east or defeating Daesh -- since our ally Turkey is actively working against the latter goal.
I suppose the rationalization for the past 60 or so years is that if we can better project our power, then we can better promote democratic interests. Rarely has been the case where democratic interests come at the expense of our status in the ME. Ironically or pathetically, you could promote the 00s neoCon boondoggles as the best effort to serve as counterexample as there were many of their leaders promoting a democratic "domino effect" that, like its Cold War era inspiration, never came to be. Not to say that it some callous or exploitive mindset. Consider a policy holder is thinking near to midterm (5-20) years (if even that if they're elected). Forming a new democracy is like opening up a new restaurant in a street with established competition. then think about the immediate power threats coming from Russia, Iran, and their unofficial proxies. Also consider that if the country is oil or mineral rich, then that government doesn't have to be well run as long as they're able to make money elsewhere. I guess what I'm saying is that forming and promoting democracies takes sustained work and effort by everyone. The neoclassical driven economic doctrine of Shock Therapy did not and has not worked on its client nations for the same reasons because the culture, rights and living preferences we feel are innate has to be taught, lived and grown over time. Bloodless transitions of power is not a natural occurrence in human history. Nor is living by the rule of law instead of the decrees of a strongman. What I'm not saying is that those countries can't get there or that we shouldn't put in the effort to get them in that position. It's just the political calculus and odds are not for the betting variety.
Shock Therapy didn't work not because of a lack of democratic culture in the nations it was used on, but because it is an anti-democratic oligarchical strategy that is more about neo-colonialism than trying to create democracy. Heck, in Chile they overthrew the democratic elected government and installed a fascistic dictator (Pinochet) in order to gain the ability to apply the Shock Therapy. But yes, fostering democracy in the middle east is difficult and laborious work. And it is work that not only should we not be doing, we can't do. It has to be done by the people in that region themselves. People like the YPG/J, who we have partnered with in Syria. They've been doing all the yeoman's work of fostering democracy where they go -- we've just been providing aid and air support. That is how you foster democracy somewhere. You find a group actually already doing so, and aid them. Heck, the U.S. would be doing a lot more toward fostering democracy and secular humanism in the regions if they simply stayed out of the way completely. Stop supporting nations that support terrorists like Saudi Arabia and Turkey, stop overthrowing secular democracies like we did in Iran, and stop aiding religious extremists who have the same enemies as us like we did in Afghanistan and indirectly in Libya and Syria.
Agreed. I'm saying the proposed benefits to shock therapy as prescribed to post ussr Russia and post Saddam iraq were already doomed to fail even without the back room wheeling and dealing. And also agreed there is a distinct cognitive dissonance with what the us says and does but I'm not sure what a workable answer is as long as there's something the world crucially needs out of that region.
