Entire Leadership of ISIS Opposition Wiped Out by 'Unexplained' Explosion

originally posted by: ausername
a reply to: GargIndia

The house of Saud, and elite Saudis only ideology is wealth and power, and retaining and growing both. Their domestic agendas are designed to pacify, and control their domestic, predominantly Muslim population.

Truth is, the Saudi royalty, elite and leadership are more afraid of ISIS than other countries in the region, or the west...

imo

How do you know what you say is the truth?

In Saudi Arabia, you can be rich only through grace of the King.

The donations/funding of any organization cannot happen without State's approval.

The Saudi legal system is not like British/American system. Defying King means death.

So all the Al Qaida, ISIS funding coming from Saudi Arabia are just private donations? I say it is not possible. The King who tightly controls every aspect of life in the kingdom lets some citizens create challenge to his rule - this is wishful thinking.

The avowed goal of ISIS - creating a large Islamic State by merging several existing States in middle east is no different from Saudi's own goals.

The Turks also desire to re-establish the Turkish empire. However I sense a cooperation between Saudi and Turks.

The prediction of WWIII says that a very large and powerful Muslim state will arise in the middle-east that will set out to conquer Europe.

So let us see if that prediction comes true or not.

a reply to: GargIndia

ISIS is a particular kind of Islamic evil, that could consume the population of Saudi Sunni Muslims, a kind of militarized, outside funded independent uprising they are terrified of, for good reason. Isis has already made threats against the kingdom, and even Mecca... They can't control it, and how they approach confronting this threat, even through western proxies, could further turn Saudis against them.

But hey, believe whatever you like.

originally posted by: WeAre0ne
Yea, what a coincidence..............



It's almost as if ISIS does exactly what the US wants...........................

ISIS has only attacked two country's. Syria, and Iraq. Yeah what a coincidence indeed.

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

IS have agents all over. They purposely send troops to pretend to be moderates so they can fight along side the moderate Syrians until the time is right to martyr themselves or feed information back to IS. The problem with IS is they have no code of honor. They do not respect the rules of engagement and will do anything to their enemies so long as it helps them. Think crazy suicide jihadist xArmy size proportions. Their leaders are corrupt too as they punish regular people for the littlest things they claim are against Islam yet their leader walks around with a gold watch and their higher ups are spending time with prostitutes (temp wives they call them).

They will rise I surmise very high but will crash down even harder.

This is why you never, ever gather important individuals in one location in a warzone. Their entire country is a warzone, therefore I suppose it is impossible to gather in a safe location, which is why they should have broken down their planning groups into a smaller number of individuals, communicating between one another. I won't say that they didn't secure the area, as the meeting place could have been in a secure area, where fighting was not going on...But if your enemy has weapons capable of reaching great distances, or weapons such as suicide bombers or something else that can sneak in, that must be taken into consideration. Now if this was an accidental explosion, the fault would lie with improper ammunition storage, negligence, or improper training.

This is friction on a level I've never heard of before if caused by a mistake, as their ammunition storage, training, etc. might have looked good in design, but obviously would not have been up to par if this was the cause. I suppose this is to be expected with non-professional soldiers. This is partly why training is so important. There are so many things that keep any military machine functioning, much less functioning well, and guerilla forces with little experience cannot be expected to do everything correctly. But it is always easier to play monday morning Muslim moderate after the fact. My point is that there are many more things to a fighting force than fighting, and storing and handling different types of weaponry, again if this was the cause of the explosion, is relatively important.

If this was in a bunker then the explosion most likely came from within. The only reason I can figure that they would have been meeting in an ammunition storage facility is that they don't really have a large number of options. The best place to store any materiel is in a location that the enemy cannot easily reach, and a bunker fits this bill. And if a place can keep ammunition safe from attack then humans are relatively safe from attack as well, from an external enemy attack...Like Clausewitz said..."Everything in war is very simple...but the simplest thing is difficult." Faults are easily exposed in trying times such as war. Now whether the US or another country could benefit from eliminating these leaders it depends on how you look at it. I wouldn't put it past any country to be honest, and I suppose that if there is some government agenda that would benefit from these people not being around to fight ISIS, it becomes a little more likely that this was more than an ISIS attack or an accident. But I don't think there is really anything that points to something like this right now.

originally posted by: MrSpad
Well these guys are fighting ISIS, Assad, the Kurds/FSA and some other radical groups of whom are all also fighting each other. So it could have been anyone, alhough for the moment ISIS seems to be everyones short term focus. Long term once ISIS is done with the FSA/Kurds, Assad and the other radical groups will all go back to fighting each other.

It could of been any of these guys plus more. I do not get why everyone always assumes this is a two sided conflict. There are multiple factions and factions within those factions. It is very complicated just like everything else in this world.

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

I cant believe they were all in one place like that!

That is just absurd. DUMB.

originally posted by: AlphaHawk
Some of the replies are so predictable.

Are you all so narrow minded that you automatically assume the US is involved?

You look like mindless sheep when you just blame America for everything, how about opening your minds to other, more likely possibilities?

For example, ISIS alone, without any outside influence, could and would do this.

How about Assad? These guys had united in their fight against him, what better way to disrupt the rebels?

But no, it just has to be the US! Derp!

How rude of you to forget Israel in this one.

originally posted by: iamhobo
Maybe they used MK Ultra for something good for a change!

I guess, then, you support a full on invasion by the US, or sharia a law coming soon to you?
The moderates opposing ISIS were/are the only hope to stopping this, and probably to saving Islam and its history from becoming known as the way a brutal law was wielded upon the people, destroying their sovereignty…..
tetra

originally posted by: WeAre0ne
Yea, what a coincidence..............

This happens right after 'Russia Warns US Against Strikes on ISIS in Syria'. Now I bet the US gets a welcoming party in Syria.

It's almost as if ISIS does exactly what the US wants...........................

This is what I am thinking. It is highly unlikely that the leaders of these groups would have lowered their guards and allowed someone they didn't trust to get this info. So my best guess is that if the U.S. was behind this, then they had a mole, someone from the area, for yeas and years. Pretty much a Muslim sleeper agent born in the area waiting for the right moment. This person would have to be a very high ranking member of this group even to just know where the meeting was taking place.

For all intent and purposes this sleeper agent is still imbedded, alive and kicking.

I would rule out any air strikes as that would lead many people to point fingers at the U.S. having more direct evidence of it's involvement in this incident.

It is also possible, something perhaps no one has thought yet, that instead of the U.S. being involved that Russia could have been the "puppet master" behind this "incident" as a way to "dare and lure" the U.S. in a conflict with ISIS.

Russia has "plausible deniability" since they already warned the U.S. to try to get involved with ISIS, and this incident happened not long after daring the U.S. to "do something".

originally posted by: AnteBellum
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

What a coincidence!
Well with them gaining more and more control of Syria it will be easier for the US to invade unobstructed now. Less people the US government has to argue with. . .

The U.S. government was going to invade Syria to take on Assad's regime, now you are making it sound like they want to invade it to take on the Rebels (which they do)

It's just confusing. But this means that moderate Rebels (that the U.S. may have allied with) are hit hard.

originally posted by: AlphaHawk
Are you all so narrow minded that you automatically assume the US is involved?

You look like mindless sheep when you just blame America for everything...

Derp!

History...

Derp!

The legacy of covert U.S. involvement in the seven successful coups below (not to mention a number of U.S. military interventions against hostile regimes and U.S.-supported insurgencies and failed assassination attempts, including a plan to kill Fidel Castro with an exploding cigar), has made the secret hand of the United States a convenient bogeyman in today's political tensions. Even now, despite waning U.S. influence in Cairo, conspiracy theories suggesting that both the Muslim Brotherhood and the military-backed government are in cahoots with the United States abound in Egypt.
Here's a brief history of the confirmed cases of the CIA's globe-spanning campaign of coups.
Iran, 1953...
Guatemala, 1954...
Congo, 1960...
Dominican Republic, 1961...
South Vietnam, 1963...
Brazil, 1964...
Chile, 1973...

Not to mention direct military intervention or overthrow in: Hawaii, Iran, Afghanistan, Iraq, Korea, Japan, Germany, Philippines, Panama, Honduras, Nicaragua, Cuba, Honduras, China, Haiti, Puerto Rico, Syria, Indonesia, Cambodia, Laos, Angola, Grenada, Somalia, Yugoslavia, Libya... I'm sure I've missed a couple dozen more.

But we don't blame the USA for all these things... more the Globalists and Corporations that control the US politicians.

Oh yeah, and sometimes we were able to paint ourselves as the good guys as we "projected our interests and spread democracy" (even though we aren't a democracy and many times set up dictators like Sadam and or extremists like the Muslim Brotherhood).

Most of it was done for "political interests" i.e. corporate masters.

Whatever man, I don't believe any of this skata.

a reply to: pianopraze

So...no actual evidence that they're involved in this specific case then..?

ISIS receives military advice and support from Academi.

What bothers me is that something is very wrong - either with the information or how this explosion took place. It seems to have needed some form of infiltration but who is the question ? What bugs me is that you are then in the 'league above ISIS and this includes dubious parties such as Saudi and Israel, Russia, Turkey USA, UK and who ever is interested in that damn pipeline.

This misery created by greed needs to be stopped and the people at the top of these corporations or bosses themselves need to be identified and pictured everywhere so they can become known for their actions and embarrassed to be accountable. Syria is a mess and diplomacy which doesn't exist where raw greed exists should have been used to ask Assad if the pipeline could cross Syria and Assad paid to ensure its security. If he said no then enough money or other benefit for Syria needed to be paid to help him say yes - anything rather than the misery those Syrian families have suffered.

Where are our values these days? - if you asked the consumers who need the resource from the pipeline, I doubt many would have voted for what had happened to the Syrian people.

originally posted by: ausername
a reply to: GargIndia

ISIS is a particular kind of Islamic evil, that could consume the population of Saudi Sunni Muslims, a kind of militarized, outside funded independent uprising they are terrified of, for good reason. Isis has already made threats against the kingdom, and even Mecca... They can't control it, and how they approach confronting this threat, even through western proxies, could further turn Saudis against them.

But hey, believe whatever you like.

The Saudi bombed the WTC still USA loves Saudis. Why is it so. I did not see any Iraqis bombing the WTC, but Iraq was conquered by USA and millions of Iraqis are dead due to that.

The public face of ISIS is not necessarily what it is inside. This the interesting way of functioning as this organization gives vent to Muslim masses yet channels their anger to the benefit of Saudis.

Why ISIS is operating in Syria/Iraq and why not in Saudi or Turkey or UAE?

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

I am starting to think this latest round of war is all about money and weapons.

I got flamed years back for posting a thread that stated: War was good for the economy.

oh and big pharma.

money, weapons and drugs.