- public disobedience
- strikes
- growing numbers of deserters
- corruption amongst isis officials
you would think with these being the well organised military crack unit we are told they are..they wouldn't suffer from this sort of indiscipline would you?
I don't think anyone said they were a crack unit, what has been said though is that they are fanatical and able to replenish from a production line of young men who've bred to sacrifice themselves like farmers harvest crops. Having said that, weaponised fighting is practically all they've ever known, so they'll be pretty useful in the art of street gun battles, more so than their average western counter part. If the two ever squared up to each other on equal terms with equal weapons capability, your Jihadi volunteer would win.
You should be able to do the maths though and work out that something doesn't add up. If Mosul really is only defended by 1,000 corrupt deserters, don't you think that after 9 months they might have been able to wrest control of by now? Why is it necessary to train 25,000 if they're only facing 1,000 who continue to slaughter people. Wouldn't it be humane to act now? They've added the additional rider incidentally that they might not be ready by the spring and this will lead to postponement because it's too hot afterwards. That doesn't sound like an army gearing up to wipe away a bit mild resistance to me. If they were really facing such a poorly equipped enemy with such small numbers they'd turf them out relatively easily
Western journalists aren't embedded in the Islamic State, so anyone writing articles is forced to use third party accounts. We'll see.
FWIW, I don't expect the Islamic State to expand much further, and I don't think history will record them as much more than a catalyst that contributed to a rising consciousness which helped to grow more powerful adversaries. I am surprised however that they aren't in full headlong retreat by now. I certainly expected them to be. I still regard north Africa as the bigger threat. I was reading stuff months ago that their more capable fighters had started to move into North Africa anyway. True? I don't know, your guess is as good as mine on that, but I can see that it makes strategic sense, even if the land concerned is nowhere near as symbolic
There are some interesting angles though about how ISIS will finally pan out. Who is going to defeat it? The Peshmurga won't. They've already stated very clearly that they have no aspirations beyond their own mountainous homelands. They don't want to pursue ISIS onto the plains of Iraq. At the moment, there is little evidence that the Iraqi army is up to the task either. It wouldn't be beyond the realms of misguided possibility that they try and do a deal, despite the fact that ISIS can't accept the concept of Gods will being limited by man made borders. The only army that's making slow progress against them is the Syrians reinforced by Hezbollah
The problem this caliphate has (as Icebreaker has said) is that it must wage Jihad once a year, and has to carry on expansion in order to meet it's terms. I think Galloway understood this when he repeatedly called it a death cult. There is no way it can compromise, so ultimately someone has to destroy it. It might destroy itself, but that could take quitye a bit of time, and the longer it hangs around the more symbolic significance it assumes