Why The Islamic State Announced Retaliation

Why The Islamic State Announced Retaliation

One Shaykh Abū Muhammad al-‘Adnānī ash-Shāmī, allegedly the number two of the Islamic State, gave a speech today (English translation, pdf) and asked Islamic State followers everywhere to attack the countries that promised to wage war against the IS.
https://ia801400.us.archive.org/34/items/mir225/English_Translation.pdf

Now the man may be, just like earlier instances of al-Baghdad, fictional. But that does not make the speech irrelevant.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/18/world/africa/18iht-iraq.4.6718200.html?_r=0

http://articles.latimes.com/2007/jul/19/world/fg-iraq19

One can argue that this is in attempt by the Islamic State to deter any additional attacks on it. But if that was the intend then it is likely to fail. The "west", i.e. the U.S., is much too aggressive and secure to be deterred and such threats will merely increase the push for another decade of wars. The military machine is already reeving up and by now nearly impossible to stop. The U.S. is rebuilding its former Forward Operating Base Speicher north of Tikrit as operations center for the next phases and coming escalations.http://blogs.euobserver.com/debeuf/2014/09/22/message-of-isis-please-dont-attack-us/

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/world/2014-09/21/c_127012905.htm

http://nationalinterest.org/blog/paul-pillar/the-anti-isis-campaign-the-imperatives-escalate-11326?page=show

The Obama's administration argument that the IS was a threat to the "west", and those foggy "interests" it always claims to have, was false. The Islamic State did not start this war as a war against the "west". That happened for two reasons. One is obvious - it was attacked and it had to respond:
http://edition.cnn.com/2014/09/22/world/meast/isis-threats-motivation/

Efforts to establish its version of an Islamic caliphate unsettled the wider region, prompting U.S. airstrikes aimed at stemming its advance.
The Islamic militant group has responded by beheading three of its Western hostages in recent weeks
...
The killings of Foley and Sotloff took place after the U.S. military began airstrikes against ISIS positions in Iraq ..

Now, after nearly 200 U.S. and French airstrikes against it, a real threat of retaliation for these has been made.

To probably the surprise of many readers I had argued for airstrikes. But I was quite specific. Those airstrikes should have been against the heavy equipment the IS seized from the Iraqi and Syrian armies. It is that mountain of heavy equipment, not the running loons, that make IS dangerous to everyone in the Middle East.

It would take the U.S. air-force supported by special operation groups on the ground only a few weeks to reduce the Islamic State to an infantry force incapable of larger geographic actions.

This video of the recent IS attacks on the (Kurdish) Syrian city of Kobane show the IS fighters successfully using main battle tanks and several pieces of heavy artillery. The Syrian air-force for now stopped that attack on the city by destroying a bridge which the attackers needed. But it is the heavy equipment (and the ammunition for it) that needs to be destroyed.
http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/syrian-air-force-destroys-isis-supply-bridge-saa-advances-al-hasaka/



But back to that speech. Shaykh al-Adnani claims another reason for his call to war:
http://blogs.euobserver.com/debeuf/2014/09/22/message-of-isis-please-dont-attack-us/

The starting point of the psychology of ISIS is one of humiliation. The West has humiliated Muslim in all their ‘crusades’. Adnani especially mentions Iraq. The psychological goal of the Islamic State is clearly one of revenge for these humiliations, the feeling that the ‘crusaders’ finally fear them (again).

Allah has given you might and honor after your humiliation.

This feeling of humiliation is combined with one of betrayal. Sunnis have been under attack in Iraq and in Syria and nobody came to help them. Adnani concentrates on Syria, where the West didn’t seem to care about what happened there.

Its sentiments were not stirred during the long years of siege and starvation in Shām, and it looked the other way when the deadly and destructive barrel bombs were being dropped. It was not outraged when it saw the horrific scenes of the women and children of the Muslims taking their last breaths with their eyes glazed over due to the chemical weapons of the nusayriyyah – scenes which continue to be repeated everyday, exposing the reality of the farce of having destroyed chemical weapons belonging to its nusayrī (alawite) dogs, the guardians of the jews. America and its allies were not emotionally moved or outraged by any of this. They closed their ears to the cries of distress from the weak, and turned a blind eye to the massacres carried out against the Muslims in every one of those lands for years and years.

They see the Islamic State as the only real protector of Muslims in Syria and Iraq. And they seem to be surprised by the fact that their barbaric attitude did upset the rest of the world.

The IS has fallen for, or is just repeating, "western" propaganda. There is no difference between a "barrel bomb" and any "western" bombing device. The difference was only made up in the media to put a bad light on the Syrian government. The "chemical attacks" were also very likely false flag operations. But IS has eaten that up.

More important - the motivation of the foreign fighters that came to support the IS and its followers elsewhere has, to a large part, been created by "western" propaganda against the Syrian government. Would someone from Europe, largely secure in his/her environment, ever have thought of joining the IS if the "western" media had abstained from demonizing the Syrian government? I believe the answer is in most cases no.

I believe, like Marcy Wheeler, that the rise of IS in the last few years was a somewhat unintended creation of the "west" caused by letting the Saudi prince Bandar run the military part of the anti-Syria campaign. The people who run IS would have existed and would have fought without that campaign but on a much smaller base.http://www.emptywheel.net/2014/09/22/the-covert-operation-undermining-us-credibility-against-isis/

But another reason for the rise of the IS was the "western" media campaign that demonized the Syrian president and the Syrian government. That campaign now serves as justification for IS to retaliate. The "western" politicians and think tanks who drove that campaign are responsible for the blowback that was announced today and that is coming home soon.