ISIS Wants a Truce
Source: The Daily Beast/Newsweek
After months of being targeted by U.S.-led airstrikes, losing ground in Iraq and suffering defeat in a weeks-long assault to capture the Syrian border town of Kobani, is the Islamic State flagging and putting out feelers to see if a truce might be possible? Or is it just seeking to sow confusion in the ranks of its opponents and to undermine their unity and resolve by raising the idea of negotiations?
Intriguingly, the Islamic State, also known as ISIS or ISIL, floated the idea on Tuesday of a negotiated truce in the latest issue of the militants’ English-language magazine Dabiq, via an article written by one of the group’s remaining Western hostages, British photojournalist John Cantlie.
As if to underline the significance of the talk of a truce, and presumably to ensure it is understood as being endorsed by the Islamic State’s leadership, there is an editor’s note to the Cantlie article, saying while no truce can be permanent with infidels, a temporary one could be possible. “A halt of war between the Muslims and the kuffār can never be permanent, as war against the kuffār is the default obligation upon the Muslims only to be temporarily halted by truce for a greater sharia interest,” the anonymous editor announces.
Read more: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/03/31/isis-wants-a-truce.html
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
truthisfreedom
(23,155 posts)
NoJusticeNoPeace
(5,018 posts)Plucketeer
(12,882 posts)Human nature being what it is, these idjits need to duke it out to the bitter, bloody end. Only THEN can SOME semblance / façade of peace come to the fore.
Renew Deal
(81,873 posts)
lark
(23,156 posts)Why would any country give them a break, after all their repeated atrocities?
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)
Yupster
(14,308 posts)A recognized Islamic state seems like a really bad idea and awful for the people under their occupation.
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)Getting the fighting to stop is an important objective.
I mean, we prop up the Saudis and gave weapons to the Bahrainis even as they were gunning down Arab Spring protesters. If we can condone that, I suppose we could allow the Islamic State to exist if it means fewer refugees, fewer children in burn wards, and fewer broken families.
lark
(23,156 posts)They just want to take a break and come back bigger and badder than ever, therefore more atrocities would be committed after a short rest break.
Itchinjim
(3,085 posts)cosmicone
(11,014 posts)Mow them all down ... to every last one of them. They are just a waste of oxygen and food.
Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)Court in the Hague would be a good idea.
gcomeau
(5,764 posts)That's called a "surrender". Which, yes, is what needs to happen to end this.
Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)I don't think Daesh is a group that we could call a truce with.
George II
(67,782 posts)....by guys holding knives and wearing masks.
Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)If they refuse then hunt them down and kill them in combat or bomb them from the air. Killing prisoners of war is a Warcrime.
red dog 1
(27,857 posts)I feel sorry for the captured British photojournalist; however,what he was ordered to write was pure bullshit, IMO
These cowardly IS bastards need to be wiped off the face of the Earth, by whatever means possible.
sharp_stick
(14,400 posts)This is a group that has to be wiped out, the sooner the better.
gcomeau
(5,764 posts)"Hey everybody, we're totally going to keep warring on you forever and ever but we're losing at the moment so could we call a time out to catch out breath before we go back to attacking you when we're a little better prepared?"
"Sure, take your time, let us know when you're ready to resume slaughtering people and we'll pick things back up again."
Uh-huh... right.... sounds like a good deal...
LiberalLovinLug
(14,176 posts)That's what I heard too
muriel_volestrangler
(101,361 posts)
randr
(12,415 posts)they have shown others!
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,714 posts)NT
gcomeau
(5,764 posts)Iraq and Syria, sure. And they were. The amount of territory they captured in those countries demonstrates that clearly.
As for the years to eradicate part, are you under the impression they're eradicated? Because last I saw they still control very large chunks of Iraq and Syria.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,714 posts)The legitimacy of some of those states are on such shaky ground it doesn't take much of a threat to become an existential one...
And this soon to be well publicized ass whuppin isn't conducive to their recruitment efforts...Nobody like a loser, even wannabe terrorists.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(99,714 posts)A government that can not provide for the security of its citizens is not a legitimate government.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)And your logic boils down to legitimacy being decided by "might makes right." Is that your intent?
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,714 posts)I just walked from my greater Los Angles apartment to McDonalds to get a Diet Coke. If I had to be concerned about getting blown to hell by a car bomb, snatched off the street and held for ransom, or getting robbed by a group of marauders I would say my government lacks legitimacy...
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)I don't believe you've thought real hard on this, in your rush to blanket declare Arab states as "illegitimate." I'm curious as to what you think Iraq should do, being as it is literally just out of a thirty-five year period of destruction wrought on it by our nation (both directly and by proxy)
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,714 posts)Of course there will always be examples of bad guys preying on innocent people but if the government can't provide security for its citizens it lacks legitimacy. That's actually the first obligation of government ; to protect the innocent from the bad guys, because they have the monopoly of force , not the bad guys.
The first obligation of the state is to provide for the safety of its citizens. In the absence of that civil society is impossible.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)Say the Us invades Mexico. mexico has no real ability to stop us, and so cannot adequately protect its people from our aggression. ergo, Mexico is illegitimate, by your argument.
Again. i don't think you've put a lot of thought into this, and you just wanted to declare Iraq and Syria "illegitimate."
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,714 posts)If muggings, kidnappings, and car bombings are current occurrences in Mexico or any nation I would argue that nation lacks legitimacy.
The whole notion of the social contract theory is the person who enters into it gives up some rights to get others. I give up my right to hit my neighbor over the head with a club and take his stuff in return for the right to have the government whom I entered into a contract with to protect me from having somebody hit me over the head and take my stuff...
Ensuring the safety of its citizens is the first obligation of civil society and is not region dependent.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)Because criminals perpetrate criminal acts within our borders?
Interesting theory. Maybe you ought to write someone in Congress.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,714 posts)So then the United States is illegitimate...
Because criminals perpetrate criminal acts within our borders?
Interesting theory. Maybe you ought to write someone in Congress.
If kidnappings, car bombings, and explosions were part of everyday life for most Americans, large areas of land were not under government control, and the government was incapable of an effective response I would say the United States government has/is been rendered illegitimate because the first responsibility of the sovereign is to provide for the safety of its citizens, in the absence of which civil society is impossible.
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)You're consistently post-qualifying your original premise with subjective assessments.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,714 posts)My original premise:
The first obligation of government is to provide for the safety of its citizens... The Iraqi government is doing a poor job of it by most metrics. That's an empirical observation. There is nothing remotely subjective about that...
That's why non partisan and independent organizations like Fund For Peace have Iraq, Syria, and Yemen On "High Alert", ergo;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_Fragile_States_Index
http://global.fundforpeace.org/aboutus
To put my premise in terms ordinary folks can understand; if one hundred year old Joe is in the hospital with congestive heart failure it isn't going to take much to kill the old fella... That's the condition some nation states find themselves in. The governments of Iraq, Yemen, and Syria are so fragile it doesn't take much to throw them in chaos.
GusBob
(7,286 posts)Some very loud mouths in these parts that think they know foreign affairs better than PBO
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,714 posts)GusBob
(7,286 posts)Unlike the very loud mouths around here that think they know foreign affairs better than PBO, you are willing to admit that maybe you may be wrong?
These loud mouths would *never* do that
Response to GusBob (Reply #30)
GusBob This message was self-deleted by its author.
Romeo.lima333
(1,127 posts)louis-t
(23,297 posts)Assholes.
Chemisse
(30,817 posts)I can't imagine why they would suddenly want to call a halt to it.
I don't see a need for a truce, unless they want to surrender the territory they've claimed.
DetlefK
(16,423 posts)1. "Temporary truce" means "We will attack you again later." The basque terrorists ETA have been doing this for decades.
bombings/murder/kidnappings -> truce -> bombings/murder/kidnappings -> truce -> bombings/murder/kidnappings -> truce ... until Spain had enough of that shit.
2. A truce would allow ISIS to establish its own civil society in Iraq/Syria, making it even harder to root them out later.
tabasco
(22,974 posts)They all must die.
Dawson Leery
(19,348 posts)they want peace. Drop dead! The Kurds handed ISIS their collective ass.
From Iraq to Indiana, from the halls of Likud headquarters to the pews of the megachurches, religious fundamentalism must be defeated on all levels.
customerserviceguy
(25,183 posts)We've seen it all over the Mideast.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)it's kind of the definition of truce. A temporary cessation of hostilities.
customerserviceguy
(25,183 posts)But I have to say, the Mideast has raised it to an art form.
Red1
(351 posts)the allies, especially the usofa..to make a difficult decision.
Let the gruesome murders slide and they will stand down from the
head severing stuff..which most assuredly could continue.
Or yeah, like someone said..april fuls..
randome
(34,845 posts)[hr][font color="blue"][center]"The whole world is a circus if you know how to look at it."
Tony Randall, 7 Faces of Dr. Lao (1964)[/center][/font][hr]
Terrorists.
Corey_Baker08
(2,157 posts)Such a rarity on DU to see an entire thread with dozens and dozens of post all in agreement on the same issue! Lets Keep It Up!
