Who, what and where is ISIL..?

[deziloooooo]

I am figuring I am not alone in wondering the above , the who, what and where. While I have a rough idea , still , a short narrative and explanation would be welcome especially since I believe a lot of our treasury will be spent in fighting the group as well as some deployment of our young people who are members of our defense organization. This wil happen very shortly on a bigger scale then what has been happening and no matter who will be our POTUS and which party too..I believe it will be continuing beyond 2016. So for those so interested..as I am, was..here is a short but pretty thorough explanation of..

america.aljazeera.com/articles/2014/9/18/isil-threat-explained.html

[mroped]

From the article I got that the ISIL is in fact more of a physical entity than tought. Is not just about having a very well defined territory but also the fact that there is a leadership structure and somewhat an economy. <br>The fact that all or almost all trafic goes at the border with Turkey it identifies a weak point. By enforcing checking and controlling that part of the border will definetly reduce their power and reach.<br>It is not as elusive as taught which means can be atacked and dismantled. I envisioned more of a need for "guerrilla" type engagements not the classic military confrontation.<br><br>What it gets me is the fact that Turkey does basically nothing to control their side of the border. USA is basically supporting the Turkish military through NATO but they don't seem to care. They are more like enabling ISIL!<br><br>

[deziloooooo]

Feb 4, 2015 15:56:14 GMT -5 deminmaine said:

They have a physical presence to be sure, but they have carved it out of war torn and disputed areas.  They are a wannabe state at best though.  They have some attributes of a state, but lack others. 

As for Turkey, it's complicated.  They have the Kurdish issue that is a pressing concern within their own borders, very much unresolved.  They are concerned that anything that strengthens the Kurds also hurts their internal situation.  I'm not excusing them- just trying to understand the why of it.  I'm sure the Turks have no more use for ISIS than anyone else.

And that is why ISIS will eventually fail.  Short a total meltdown of the Mid East, almost everyone around them is their enemy.  Half of their subjects are their enemy too.  They will not prevail.  But they will cause a lot of misery in the meantime, and inspire a lot of twisted psychos.

Your correct on one thing definitely, the Turks have a lot on their plate...There are hundred of thousands of refugees from Syria now in their country and that is a expensive undertaking just giving them basic shelter, medical and food..They are also concerned that ISIL will become active on their soil if they are seen to be a active enemy of them..ISIL. The Kurds have been a concern for decades though in that they have themselves to blame for much of the trouble between the two which kind of forced Kurds in Turkey to be more active in wanting separation and separate independent state . However, after this latest barbaric act with the Jordanian pilot added to the horrific torture and be headings that they are known for...it behooves the Turks to join all other states in a campaign to rid ourselves of these people..and that means forgoing the feuds and  disagreements with others who they have issues with..That means working with all nations..States..Syria and Assad being put on the back burner for now for example...possible some back door discussions privately to come up with a solution there once this sick regime is destroyed..

The true fact is, after the murder of the young pilot, social media outlets were inundated with comments by sickos  who found nothing wrong with the actions taken by ISIS toward the pilot..In Fact , from our standpoint , there are a lot, way to many in fact , of sick weirdos who support these people and their actions...

[djAdvocate]

this is a more conventional enemy than "terrorism".  this is an Islamic state.  it is actually something that our MILITARY is more equipped to deal with than "terrorism" (which we are not only woefully ill equipped to defeat, but actually regularly reinforce).