ARCHIVE - APRIL 2017 (KICKOFF APRIL 3RD) - Black Flags: The Rise of ISIS - DISCUSSION THREAD

[Timmy]

4. How problematic was the decision to dissolve the Iraqi army and ban Baath Party member from positions of authority? What problems from your viewpoint did this cause?

The baath party no matter its problems was a major piece that kept the puzzle of Iraq intact. When it was dissolved it left qualified workers unemployed, created disorder, and heightened the already hostile environment. These people became disenfranchised and as we have discussed many times in this thread, when people feel left out and forgotten they are often easily manipulated and moved by anything with substance. In this case they were moved toward extremism and resentment of all things of the west.

[Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief]

Timmy - he made the argument that they tried to assassinate his father and he also felt that his father did not finish the job. Of course Saddam was a bad actor and used chemical weapons but for years they had turned a blind eye to that.

Hopefully other folks will weigh in.

[Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief]

We always on the Friday before give folks the heads up once again of the reading assignment for the next week and what will be discussed then. This the upcoming reading assignment for Week Three

Syllabus and Reading Schedule

WEEK THREE READING ASSIGNMENT - (151 through page 238 ) - 4/17/17 - 4/23/17

BOOK II - IRAQ - CONTINUED

12. "The sheik of the slaughterers" 151
13. "It's hopeless there" 161
14. "Are you going to get him" 176
15. "This is our 9/11" 193
16. "Your end is close" 2016

BOOK III - ISIS

17. "The people want to topple the regime" - 223

[Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief]

Discussion Topic:

You know what always amazes me and why the moderate Muslims are always finding that they have to explain themselves which must be very uncomfortable but in all of these instances of terrorism - the Islamic faith or an aberration of it is always front and center.

You don't find the Lutherans involved or the Amish or the Baptists or the Tibetans or the Quakers or some Roman Catholic or the Episcopalians or the Presbyterians or the Jehovah Witnesses or any other religion. Someone might say - remember Northern Ireland and that is true but that was isolated in Ireland and Britain and thankfully we found peacemakers. Here they don't want peace - they want trouble and violence and to hurt the infidels (what they call folks who are not of the Islamic faith) all over the world.

Why is that - that is what I would like to know??

[Timmy]

Good question Bentley. I wish I knew more about the faith. I can't say it's inherent with the religion because I just don't know enough. I do think that the word 'moderate' does show something though. We see moderates as good people who don't want to harm the us and radicals as the the ones who don. So it is because they follow the religion 'moderately' that they don't want to do these things? It seems like if it was a peaceful religion you should be able to follow it to the extreme and have peace but it seems the contrary it seems that those that follow the faith loosely are peaceful. Strange because in all other faiths the radicals are usually the very peaceful ones. For example priest, rabbis, cardinals, popes, monks, brothers... It just seems like you shouldn't have to follow it 'moderately' to remain peaceful if it is a peaceful religion. Maybe people use the word moderately differently then I described it and I'm incorrect about that, maybe it's just people are following a popular interpretation right now and there are peaceful radicals we just don't see.

[Leo]

Bentley wrote: "Discussion Topic:

You know what always amazes me and why the moderate Muslims are always finding that they have to explain themselves which must be very uncomfortable but in all of these instances..."

Bentley,

I used to have similar questions that are now partially resolved. I recently read a book (below) that answered most of these questions for me. The book is not written to answer these questions directly, but I felt with a little analysis of the author's statements (as a moderate Muslim) I could come to some definitive conclusions.

To answer your question directly, I would argue Muslims follow a religion (Islam, a religion of peace) that cannot have peace without subjugation (supported by the book below), does not mix well with democracies (supported by Black Flags (pg 21, halfway down) and book below), and requires moderates who abide by the major theological interpretations to tolerate extremists (supported by book below) are the main reasons the religion creates and sustains the conflict it does.

-Leo

by Omar Saif Ghobash (no photo)

[Leo]

Timmy wrote: "Why did the Bush Administration desire war so greatly with Iraq? I have my own theories but I would like to hear everyone else's."

All,

There is a theory that all war is trade based and that the desired end state of all conflict in the Middle East is to prevent any one, single entity from coming into power in the region (cannot recall the texts). I think proponents of this theory may have believed splintering of Iraq would result in the best economic and military outcome. With a splintered Middle East the world does not have to deal with a single ominous power and the market is stratified enough to cause competition within the region. Therefore, if that is the true end-state, splintering any power such as Iraq makes some sense. They were one of the most stable and prominent powers in the region and market. You could even go so far as saying this theory is supported by Black Flags when it states there was not a plan to secure and rebuild the country(pg 117-118). Maybe that was never an interest. But, I doubt they expected the result that occurred. Essentially, a new force with greater ambition and ability to become a unified Middle Eastern power emerged, which is when the target changed from Iraq to ISIS.

-Leo

[Leo]

Chapter Nine Discussion,

1. What are you thoughts about the president asking the question in the first place and about him being so focused on burying this report?

I think the President asked the question because he was hearing from every other source that the CIA was wrong, pushing an agenda, and that the administration had made, or was making, the right decisions. I think these types of comments would drive a leader to want to bury a report. There could have been other motivations, such as the President could have know he had made the wrong decisions, but I think if that had been the case the President would not have even asked the question. He would have just buried the report, or attempted to.

2. Why was Bremer trying to discredit the CIA report in your opinion?

I think there is some blame on the CIA here. The CIA had not reported a slow uptick to an insurgency (pg 116, lines 13-15). The CIA may have reported individual incidences, but they had not asserted they were connected to one group with the means to overthrow the government. Therefore, when they came out with a blatant report of an insurgency the Administration was taken back by the sudden claim (pg 116, last para) and were convinced this sudden change or realization was pushing an agenda.

3. How could a president and vice president send forces into harm's way without writing policy on force protection? Why was security not an important and critical component of the invasion?

I think securing the country or identifying force protection measures outside of what existed for general forward operations was either not an interest, the Administration assumed the military would make these plans, or the Administration assumed the government established in Iraq would provide these measures. Either way, I think the result showed a poor decision and mitigation plan was executed.

4. How problematic was the decision to dissolve the Iraqi army and ban Baath Party member from positions of authority? What problems from your viewpoint did this cause?

I am in-line with the book here. I think these actions alienated a group of persons who were used to certain power and luxuries. Once these persons no longer had access to resources, which allowed them to maintain their power and luxuries, they did everything they could to access resources that were not protected or that they thought they could coerce from others.

5. Why did Rumsfeld as the question after all of the bombings - Define insurgency?

I think are varying lay-man's definitions of insurgency even within the military. I would assume Rumsfeld was trying to assert he was technically correct that there was not an insurgency. If Rumsfeld could have done this, he may have created doubt in the President's mind about the veracity of the CIA's report and claims.

I recommend by (David Galula) if anyone is interested in basic insurgency definitions and models of action.

6. Richer has come under a lot of fire for what he said about an Habbash letter etc., but he stated - "The fertile soil was Iraq after de-Baathification. The rain and sunshine were the ineptitude of the provisional authority and US misunderstanding of Iraqis and their culture. All of that allowed Zarqawi to blossom and grow." What are your thoughts about Richer himself (I have posted a lot of material on him, videos, newscasts, interviews)? And then after thinking about the source of this comment - do you feel that what Richer said was valid or not valid - was it more valid or less valid based upon what you know about the parties involved?

Without viewing the extra material, I think that Richer did the right thing in 2003 and that he made a clear assessment. However, if he was responsible for the lack of reporting a growing insurgency prior to the 2003 CIA report, I would think differently of him. Also, I wonder what he did with these realizations, because it appears we are still misunderstanding Middle Eastern cultures and making similar mistakes on a reoccurring basis.

7. What was Bremer's role?

Bremer appears to be the civilian authority in charge of all military operations within Iraq. I could be completely off, just my assumption. His position seems to be similar to a military civilian secretary, just over a strategic area and joint forces.

8. On pages 122 and 123 - there is a problem that has been created between the Shiites and the Sunnis and Zaydan al-Jibiri - the tribal leader has some biting comments to say about Iraq and America and took umbrage with the fact that Iraq would never be Iraq until Saddam Hussein left - their thoughts were that Iraq had been Iraq for 7000 years and that America was only 200 years old. This smacked of an undercurrent of resentment of the superpower coming into their country and even liberating them after Saddam unequivocally killed them into submission. Very strange situation and a lot of bitterness - certainly not what you would have expected. What are your thoughts?

I think it is another example of a difference in culture and perspectives between the West and the Middle East. We perceive our power to reside in our might (and some in our religious beliefs), they perceive their power to reside in their resiliency (and some in their religious beliefs).

-Leo

[Leo]

Timmy wrote: "Good question Bentley. I wish I knew more about the faith. I can't say it's inherent with the religion because I just don't know enough. I do think that the word 'moderate' does show something thou..."

All, Timmy,

I think you are correct. How we define, understand, and expect moderates to conduct themselves causes a disconnect in the logic between our understanding of how moderates should conduct themselves and how moderates in other cultures actually conduct themselves.

I agree that, as I understand moderate Muslims, they believe in peace and not harming people. However, moderate Muslims do not believe in stopping Muslims who are harming others or disturbing peace. I think this is where the logic breaks down. We expect peaceful moderates stop, or not accept, extremists. The Islamic doctrine, as I understand it, does not allow a moderate to interfere with the actions of another Muslim, even if they are committing "sins" in the eyes of the moderates through extremism.

-Leo

[Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief]

Leo,

I agree in part - let me play devils advocate here - we are a democracy which believes in a separation of church from state and believe in one rule of law for the federal government. We do not believe in sharia law and we do not believe in there being any pockets or locations where the federal government or local police officers should not be able to go. Additionally we do not normally believe in religious burkas or headgear for women but the Muslims here certainly do. The nuns gave that up years ago. We do not see the burkas on the street but we certainly see the headgear.

Are the beliefs of Muslims not in line with separation of church from state here?

Should we expect assimilation from newcomers? Of course - our country was founded on freedom of religion and that is the way it should be but our country was also founded on separation of church from state too? And one rule of law.

Are Britain, Sweden, France, Belgium and Germany having problems with assimilation within various neighborhoods and what should we expect here and how can we avoid these same situations? Should we worry that if the populace grows that they will try to change our democracy?

I question your statement about moderate Muslims not believing in stopping Muslims who are harming others or disturbing peace. Is that really true - if so that goes against our idea of community.

Also, there is no citizen that I know that would allow someone to hurt someone or if they see a murder not try to report it or call the police or the authorities. Are you saying that if a Muslim sees beheadings that they will look the other way because a Muslim is doing them. Or if a Muslim is hurting a woman that they will not report it? How do you think they feel about ISIS? Many Middle Eastern countries have come out against ISIS and they do not condone what they have done and are doing. How do you explain that? If what you are saying is true - that would be very disturbing I think.

[Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief]

Leo - I think it read that the president was being told this right along - (about the insurgents - and about the signs of a civil war egged on by foreign fighters) - but he chose it appears to ignore it. That was my take. Was the CIA perfect - not by a long shot but the analysts and targeters were working hard and trying to be accurate. I cannot account for George Tenet and what he did and what he said which was going against his own analysts' work.

by David Galula

Leo - you almost had the citation perfect but you forgot the author's link at the end. We also add the word by after the book cover.

[Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief]

Leo - I wonder if the interests of the countries gets in the way of diplomacy and doing the right thing. Do the politicians nowadays even worry about understanding the nuances of the culture? I worked for a large international company and folks who did the international deals were instructed in the various customs, nuances of the culture to not offend. Do you think a George W Bush or a Trump cares about not offending. I think Obama was sensitive - I think Clinton was and even Reagan. Bush Senior cared too. But is that a thing of the past?

[Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief]

Leo stated: "To answer your question directly, I would argue Muslims follow a religion (Islam, a religion of peace) that cannot have peace without subjugation (supported by the book below), does not mix well with democracies (supported by Black Flags (pg 21, halfway down) and book below), and requires moderates who abide by the major theological interpretations to tolerate extremists (supported by book below) are the main reasons the religion creates and sustains the conflict it does".

My response:

That really concerns me then about the spread around the world - if it is their faith first even if it means that they subjugate you - I for one do not want to subjugate anybody but on the other hand I do not want to worry about that being a hidden goal either of someone else. Do you believe that this is true?

Very concerning - everyone wants to accept other people's religions and religious preference but not if it is going to bring about your demise or the demise of democracy and your right to choose and be free to do it. It is a two way street for freedom and understanding and I certainly do not want a mullah as a person telling us in the United States what to do. Nor have pockets of our society ruled by Sharia law. That is not our culture and not who we are. We are very tolerant and welcoming too but I worry if that brings about the demise of democracy. If folks outside of their religion are not allowed to worship in the way that they want then that is intolerance on their part and I would not be comfortable with that.

[Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief]

Timmy wrote: "Good question Bentley. I wish I knew more about the faith. I can't say it's inherent with the religion because I just don't know enough. I do think that the word 'moderate' does show something thou..."

I was hoping that I understood enough from the reading too but Leo has me worried (smile). I am very hopeful in Jordan's king for example.

[Timmy]

Thanks for the recommended books Leo. This thread is a rabbit hole I seem to find a new book, video, article to view every time I refresh the thread. It's very valuable but I find it hard to comment on Islam for the sole reason that I am ignorant to many aspects of the religion. Leo's comment likewise confused me, I wasn't aware that Muslims felt that way. It seems like fundamentally there is something in Islam(Maybe the Quran) that is destructive or maybe it's just easily manipulated to appear that way. I'm may read those books this week, I would like to be able to give opinions about Islam not solely based from intuition and appearance.

[Timmy]

I too think that King Abdullah is a promising figure in the Middle East. I just don't know if his opinions come from a lack of Islam in his early life or from the ideals he learned from Islam. I'm curious, is King Abdullah a holy man?

[Leo]

Bentley wrote: "Leo,

I agree in part - let me play devils advocate here - we are a democracy which believes in a separation of church from state and believe in one rule of law for the federal government. We do no..."

Bentley,

From the studies on Islam that I have read: Islam, or the end or ideal state of Islam, does not allow for a separation of church and state. Sharia law and the government formed through Islamic doctrine is the only allowable form of governance. I do not have a academic reference readily available; if you find something contradictory, I'd be interested in reading it.

In the book I mentioned earlier, Letters to a Young Muslim, I think it will answer many of these questions for you. I wouldn't say moderate Muslims as a whole, but I would say the majority of moderate Muslims will not interfere with the actions of another Muslim. However, this does not keep the Islamic society from speaking out against another Muslim. And, on your questions in the last paragraph. As long as the act isn't forbidden (haram) and the justification is known to be the furtherance of Islam, most of those acts would be tolerated by a Muslim against a non-Muslim. And, a moderate would likely not interfere with an extremist committing these acts against a Muslim. They would speak out against them and not condone the acts, but not physically interfere. I think the majority of resistance extremists face are from non-Muslim groups. Or Muslim groups with ideals other than the majority (e.g., Alawites).

by Omar Saif Ghobash (no photo)

-Leo

[Leo]

Bentley wrote: "Leo - I wonder if the interests of the countries gets in the way of diplomacy and doing the right thing. Do the politicians nowadays even worry about understanding the nuances of the culture? I wor..."

Bentley,

I think the government does pay attention to the nuances of the culture. They have whole offices that give officials briefs on the nuances of cultures before meetings and the military regularly reviews cultural nuances before entering a foreign territory. However, I have seen where officials have missed these meeting because of priorities shifting and I have seen where military personnel disregard or inadvertently violate customs. What I have seen most often is that our interpretations of what is a cultural nuance is not the actual truth. I think cultures, and religions, are so varied that it is difficult to get a true clear understanding of what is accepted without an expert in each area. And, lastly, I think there are instances where officials decide that making an offense is better than not taking the action that offends.

-Leo

[Leo]

Bentley wrote: "Leo stated: "To answer your question directly, I would argue Muslims follow a religion (Islam, a religion of peace) that cannot have peace without subjugation (supported by the book below), does no..."

Bentley,

From literature and personal conversations with persons who have worked in Muslim majority countries recently and for many years, I have no reason to believe it is not true. I have an open mind and would love to be exposed to anything unbiased that proved otherwise.

-Leo

[Leo]

Timmy wrote: "Thanks for the recommended books Leo. This thread is a rabbit hole I seem to find a new book, video, article to view every time I refresh the thread. It's very valuable but I find it hard to commen..."

Timmy,

You're welcome. Just a heads-up. The insurgency book,Counterinsurgency Warfare: Theory and Practice, I recommended will likely provide little information to understand Islam. So, I would only read it if you want to understand the theories the United States military used to define and defeat an insurgency. It may provide some context to under the rise of ISIS. I doubt ISIS had this book in their back pocket as a planning guide. However as all good theories on a topic should, you will find parallels between the general theories of an insurgency rising to power and ISIS, and counterinsurgency tactics and the United State's tactics to stop ISIS.

by David Galula.

-Leo

[Leo]

Timmy wrote: "I too think that King Abdullah is a promising figure in the Middle East. I just don't know if his opinions come from a lack of Islam in his early life or from the ideals he learned from Islam. I'm ..."

All,

I tried to do a quick look, but I couldn't find the King's beliefs. I would assume from his lineage that he follows Islam, but I am not sure what branch. Again, my assumption is Sunni of which I know there to be at least three divisions within.

-Leo

[Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief]

Timmy wrote: "Thanks for the recommended books Leo. This thread is a rabbit hole I seem to find a new book, video, article to view every time I refresh the thread. It's very valuable but I find it hard to com men..."

Timmy I am with you. I was thinking about this and I think a lot of the other religions base everything on the foundation of the ten commandments - Catholicism, Protestantism, Judaism, and all of the various and sundry spin offs and all of them believe Thou shalt not kill.

Do Muslims believe in the ten commandments or not - maybe there is something inherently violent about that religion and inherently non inclusive which means that if you would unfortunately ever find yourself in the uncommon position of being subjugated - the choice would be subjugate or die.

Therefore it is possible that the Muslim religion does not allow for freedom of religion like we believe in within the United States and which we are offering them. I think that is what bothers me.

But - I like you - Timmy do NOT know that much about this faith or whatever it proposes to be or not be - because it is unlike anything I have seen or could equate with christian, spiritual or godlike values.

I know of no religion that thinks beheadings and stonings are good things and if this one does - then there is a problem and why would so many people gravitate towards a religion that would keep them in bondage to the Stone Age and adhere to evil despicable deeds.

That I cannot understand but once again I go back to the King of Jordan who appears to have and to present a more balanced view which gives me more hope than Leo's post which may be the view of some of these followers. Gosh! - I hope not but we certainly know that ISIS is evil and I hope that is not one view of Islam that we are taking away from this book.

So I would rather go with the King of Jordan's presentation of Islam and view ISIS as the horrendous aberration that it is - not as a deviation from the norm which would mean that even the norm is not that great to begin with and should be looked upon with great skepticism and protectionism.

[Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief]

Leo wrote: "Timmy wrote: "I too think that King Abdullah is a promising figure in the Middle East. I just don't know if his opinions come from a lack of Islam in his early life or from the ideals he learned fr..."

I think there will be more coming up in the book but for example his wife is quite progressive and I always view these countries in terms of how the women are treated and what they have to wear. She is quite educated, is quite open and vocal, dresses in a modern way and does not look like she is wearing fashions from the time of Jesus and is an equal partner of the King from what I can see - that in and of itself gives me hope in the King of Jordan.

[Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief]

Leo wrote: "Timmy wrote: "Thanks for the recommended books Leo. This thread is a rabbit hole I seem to find a new book, video, article to view every time I refresh the thread. It's very valuable but I find it ..."

Thank you Leo - a lot to think about and discuss.

[Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief]

Leo wrote: "Bentley wrote: "Leo stated: "To answer your question directly, I would argue Muslims follow a religion (Islam, a religion of peace) that cannot have peace without subjugation (supported by the book..."

So would I Leo - so would I.

[Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief]

Leo if what you are saying is true - From the studies on Islam that I have read: Islam, or the end or ideal state of Islam, does not allow for a separation of church and state. Sharia law and the government formed through Islamic doctrine is the only allowable form of governance. I do not have a academic reference readily available; if you find something contradictory, I'd be interested in reading it.

Then if the above is true - these folks do not belong in a democracy period especially if they are still practicing Islam - they should stay where they can have those things but it is not here. Sharia law in my opinion is not the law of any democracy I know of nor should it be allowed to be a sidebar ANYWHERE here or in Britain, France, Belgium. That is why assimilation has been a non entity in these segments and why they have come out against the burka, the hijab and everything else that represents this mentality and belief system. It is not what our governments believe in - period the end. It is not our government and if this is what they want - I guess move on.

Everybody that I know does not believe in any ban on any religion. But if this is a religious mentality that wants to make a theocracy out of our republic whose basic premise is separation of church from state so that we can offer freedom of religion to anybody AND TO THEM MIND YOU - then there is a definite philosophical and legal difference in our legal arguments from theirs.

I do not want my descendants to have to wear hijabs or sport long beards or go to the beach dressed like they came out of the movie - the Ten Commandments with Charleston Heston.

That is not freedom of religion to me but more of a sect or cult like expression going back to the stone age. Nobody wears kerchiefs anymore or covers their head in church - what about a woman's hair is so offensive - same hair as on those horrendous beards you see them (the males) sporting. I might add in viewing ISIS that they do not look that clean either - what happened to the old adage - cleanliness is next to godliness.

But I digress - there are fundamental differences and they walk around sporting them making it impossible to assimilate and of course that is just my humble viewpoint. And by the way we have not had prohibition for decades - something else they believe in.

I have my fingers crossed that a lot of them have moved beyond these ancient beliefs that might have been fine during the time of the Crusades but even Christianity has become more forward thinking.

[Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief]

Just as an aside - when all of the Jewish cemeteries were desecrated this past year - it was Muslim communities which came out and took up donations to fix the cemeteries and even offered to do the physical work of protecting them and fixing them up - getting them back to normal.

Those acts give hope.

[Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief]

Deep Dive - Chapter 10

The title is Revolting is exactly what we what

Discussion Topics:

1. Is this what Islam is all about - revolting is exactly what we want? Or not? Present your views based upon what you have observed in the Middle East news and in the interviews with various Middle Eastern leaders or your own personal interactions or your own views and opinions. Why does ISIS believe that what they do is going to move and influence Muslims around the world? Shouldn't Muslims be in horror at what they are witnessing. Are they? These are questions that I think many folks around the world are asking - where are those who are speaking out and saying - not in our name?

2. For example if a Roman Catholic or a Lutheran decided to get a gang together and go kill Egyptians because a long time ago this was a Christian country and they want to take it over on behalf of the memory of Byzantine King Constantine, the ancient Crusaders and have their own Christian caliphate - I would be appalled as would I believe almost 100% of other Christians and Lutherans and we would speak out and be horrified and try to do something about it. And I believe the Vatican and the Pope would speak out too. Of course that has not happened but this is an example of what is happening on the Muslim side. Do Muslims silently sympathize - if so then why do they emigrate to Democratic countries who have zero sympathy for these views, do not embrace Sharia law or oppression of women and have absolute separation of church from state and have bars where drinking takes place and look with disapproval at hijab and burkas or whatever the women have to wear in 90 degree weather. It would seem that these things would not be to their liking. Is there something that we are missing or is there something we do not understand?

3. Is it a good sign that the Middle Eastern countries also view these thugs called ISIS as a threat to their own country and to their own authority and have banded together to fight ISIS? If so, then how is ISIS still being funded by various individuals and groups within these same countries? How or why are these folks not being rounded up for funding terrorism and arrested? Are they? Maybe some of you know more than I do about these situations from your other readings? If you have other questions or opinion or opposing views, please post them as well.

4. Britain (the BBC) has decided to use satire which is a British tradition to help fight terrorism - what do you think of this approach? Your thoughts? Leave it to the British (smile).

Real Housewives of Isis: 'They want Muslims to be offended, but we aren’t' - BBC2 sketch has been criticized as ‘morally bankrupt’ but many say satire is British tradition and can help fight terrorism - https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-ra...

More:
http://www.rollingstone.com/tv/news/w...
http://www.arabnews.com/node/1034756/...
http://metrocosm.com/support-isis-mus...

5. This book might be worth a read. Is there a way to combine the power of the world’s mightiest military with the agility of the world’s most "revolting" terrorist network?

Team of Teams: New Rules of Engagement for a Complex World

by Stanley McChrystal (no photo)

Synopsis:

What if you could combine the agility, adaptability, and cohesion of a small team with the power and resources of a giant organization?

THE OLD RULES NO LONGER APPLY . . .
When General Stanley McChrystal took command of the Joint Special Operations Task Force in 2004, he quickly realized that conventional military tactics were failing. Al Qaeda in Iraq was a decentralized network that could move quickly, strike ruthlessly, then seemingly vanish into the local population. The allied forces had a huge advantage in numbers, equipment, and training—but none of that seemed to matter.

TEACHING A LEVIATHAN TO IMPROVISE
It’s no secret that in any field, small teams have many ad­vantages—they can respond quickly, communicate freely, and make decisions without layers of bureaucracy. But organizations taking on really big challenges can’t fit in a garage. They need management practices that can scale to thousands of people.

General McChrystal led a hierarchical, highly disci­plined machine of thousands of men and women. But to defeat Al Qaeda in Iraq, his Task Force would have to acquire the enemy’s speed and flexibility. Was there a way to combine the power of the world’s mightiest military with the agility of the world’s most fearsome terrorist network? If so, could the same principles apply in civilian organizations?

A NEW APPROACH FOR A NEW WORLD
McChrystal and his colleagues discarded a century of conventional wisdom and remade the Task Force, in the midst of a grueling war, into something new: a network that combined extremely transparent communication with decentralized decision-making authority. The walls between silos were torn down. Leaders looked at the best practices of the smallest units and found ways to ex­tend them to thousands of people on three continents, using technology to establish a oneness that would have been impossible even a decade earlier. The Task Force became a “team of teams”—faster, flatter, more flex­ible—and beat back Al Qaeda.

BEYOND THE BATTLEFIELD
In this powerful book, McChrystal and his colleagues show how the challenges they faced in Iraq can be rel­evant to countless businesses, nonprofits, and other or­ganizations. The world is changing faster than ever, and the smartest response for those in charge is to give small groups the freedom to experiment while driving every­one to share what they learn across the entire organiza­tion. As the authors argue through compelling examples, the team of teams strategy has worked everywhere from hospital emergency rooms to NASA. It has the potential to transform organizations large and small.


Stanley McChrystal


General Stan McChrystal (Photo credit: David E. Alvarado, ISAF Public Affairs)

More:
http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-wa...

[Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief]

Deep Dive - Chapter 10

Where we begin:

Zarqawi decides to write to his reluctant pen pal - Osama Bin Laden who really (from what we are reading) was not too keen on him either and certainly was not that interested in hearing from Zarqawi since he was not interested in meeting with him four years earlier.

Excellent article:
GEN McChrystal On ISIS: Four Tips From Someone Who Actually Knows How To Fight Terrorists
http://havokjournal.com/national-secu...

McChrystal says "Right now, ISIS is VERY appealing to a large number of angry, violent, dispossessed people. Only by giving them an idea they care more about, whether that is an idea that gives them a better vision for the future, or one that gives them a bleak outlook if they hold on to one they currently have, we’re not going to make positive permanent change if we neglect the ideological battle.

Discussion Topic:

1. What do you think about what McChrystal says in the article and in the videos?

More:
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/gen-stanl...

Gen. McChrystal weighs in on ISIS
http://www.cnn.com/videos/tv/2015/05/...

Discussion Topic:

1. Napoleon was asked what kind of enemy he would want to fight against and he said a coalition - so we are not fighting ISIS as a team of teams. McChrystal does not think we are a team on this. What are your thoughts?

More:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VBa1E...

General McChrystal On Killing Al Zarqawi
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xy9KA...

HBO History Makers Series with Stanley A. McChrystal
WATCH FULL VIDEO

As part of the HBO History Makers series, Stanley A. McChrystal, former commander of the United States and International Security Assistance Forces Afghanistan and Joint Special Operations Command's premier military counterterrorism force, discusses his experiences in Afghanistan.

Link: http://library.fora.tv/2011/10/06/HBO...

Source(s): Havoc Journal, CBS News, CNN, Channel 4 News, Hudson Union Society, Fora TV, Council on Foreign Relations

[Timmy]

Question 5:
Satire is a risky tool. I heard a great podcast a while ago about satire and its effectiveness. I believe it was on The Revisionist History by Malcolm Gladwell called the Satire Paradox. It explained how satire can actually have the the reverse effect on your intended message. SNL for example uses satire too lightly I believe. Everyone finds their skits funny even if you're on the other side of the intended message. For example when Tina Fey was doing Sarah Palin republicans found it hilarious because it wasn't harsh enough it's purpose was comedy rather then having an effect on the viewer. I believe in Israel there is a left wing satire show that's very effective die to its brutal nature. It's funny but they don't hold back and they want people to understand their message. So it really depends if the show is a comedy based satirical show then I think it could potential have the reverse effect it could normalize and glamorize terrorist. Honestly I would listen to Gladwell's podcast episode it is worth the listen, only 30 minutes.

[Timmy]

Question 1:
I think a lot of middle eastern leaders seem very progressive compared to there citizens. I think some of that has to due to there level of education and there desire to become a globally accepted nation. I don't think it has much to do with their Islamic beliefs. It seems like they know it not in their best interest to be radical because then they will be shut out of the western world. Maybe the leadership is shifting away from Islam and becoming more like western governments. It does seem like the a lot their citizens aren't in alignment with that viewpoint though. The government in Saudi Arabia
and Jordan seem like they are becoming more like western governments, I can't speak of other nations just because I don't know much about them. The disconnect between the government and the citizens or at least some of the citizens beliefs seems massive though. I do believe that the Middle East although lagging behind most of the world is slowly moving toward western thoughts, I will admit it is a very slow process. Does that mean leaving Islam behind? I don't know. If it is fundamentally against democracy and tolerance of others then I would have to say yes. So maybe as the Middle East becomes more modernized Islam will fade away, not unlike Europe and the US. Religion seems to become less prominent in the average citizens life as societies advance.

[Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief]

If you have the links to the podcast episodes - place them in the glossary.

I guess we will have to wait and see but the trailer did not make being an ISIS housewife very appealing. (smile)

[Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief]

Timmy - an interesting post on religion in general.

I think one thing that is interesting is that many of these Middle Eastern leaders were educated in the West and educated well. They got an opportunity to interact with others globally and understand by seeing and experiencing plus being educated. That does give credibility to McChrystal's quote in message 229 about what we are dealing with. There are huge unemployment numbers in these areas, dire conflict, not many great schools and many of these folks did not have the opportunities to be educated and see what their rulers have seen. Now I have to say that there are very educated dark souls who have been very educated who have gotten involved in this mess called ISIS but predominantly that has not been the case.

[Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief]

Another book to consider:

My Share of the Task: A Memoir

by Stanley McChrystal (no photo)

Synopsis:

"General McChrystal is a legendary warrior with a fine eye for enduring lessons about leadership, courage, and consequence." -Tom Brokaw

Stanley McChrystal is widely admired for his hunger to know the truth, his courage to find it, and his humility to listen to those around him. Even as the commanding officer of all U.S. and coalition forces in Afghanistan, he stationed himself forward and frequently went on patrols with his troops to experience their challenges firsthand. In this illuminating New York Times bestseller, McChrystal frankly explores the major episodes and controversies of his career. He describes the many outstanding leaders he served with and the handful of bad leaders he learned not to emulate. And he paints a vivid portrait of how the military establishment turned itself, in one generation, into the adaptive, resilient force that would soon be tested in Iraq, Afghanistan, and the wider War on Terror.

"A compelling account of his impressive career." -The Wall Street Journal

"This is a brilliant book about leadership wrapped inside a fascinating personal narrative." -Walter Isaacson, author of Steve Jobs

Stanley McChrystal retired in July 2010 as a four-star general in the U.S. Army. His last assignment was as the commander of the International Security Assistance Force and as the commander of U.S. forces in Afghanistan. He is currently a senior fellow at Yale University's Jackson Institute for Global Affairs and cofounder of the McChrystal Group, a leadership consulting firm. He and his wife, Annie, live in Virginia.

My gut tells me that Obama made a big mistake in letting go of McChrystal and many people like myself felt that this was the case from the time it happened. And I greatly admired President Obama - but not one of Obama's finest days

Gen. Stanley McChrystal: The Good, Bad, and Ugly
Link: https://youtu.be/OA0yXWAAais

Stanley McChrystal - Retirement Speech (Complete)
AmericanRhetoric.com
Link: https://youtu.be/jKbj-V44fT4

Stanley McChrystal: Listen, learn ... then lead
TED
https://youtu.be/FmpIMt95ndU

General Stanley McChrystal on Leadership
On January 11, 2013, retired US Army General Stanley McChrystal, former commander of the International Security Assistance Force and US Forces in Afghanistan, spoke candidly about lessons in leadership to more than 200 students and alumni in the TRIUM Global Executive MBA Program (http://www.triumemba.org/), an alliance among NYU Stern, the London School of Economics and Political Science, and HEC School of Management in Paris
Link: https://youtu.be/Tdr3fIy_GWs

Stanley McChrystal: Leadership is a Choice
Stanford Graduate School of Business
Link: https://youtu.be/p7DzQWjXKFI

Tom Brokaw, General Colin Powell & General Stanley McChrystal: The State of Our Returning Vets
Chicago Ideas
https://youtu.be/F7sJhwZ0HYg

General Stanley McChrystal - My Share of the Task
Pritzker Military Museum & Library
https://youtu.be/M7k9hZDCj8I

Stanley McChrystal, McChrystal Group, Keynote Interview at The Montgomery Summit 2016
MontyTV (The Montgomery Summit)
https://youtu.be/rsSceei_7KI

Leadership Lessons from a Four-Star General - MLC Interview with General Stanley McChrystal
MIT Leadership Center
https://youtu.be/bnao6C05f8Y

Stanley McChrystal on the Changing ISIS Battlefield
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/videos...

More:

McChrystal Gives Blessings to Brad Pitt's 'War Machine'
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/videos...

Stanley McChrystal on Collaboration & Communication
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/videos...

America’s Global Leadership: What’s at Stake in 2016?
http://www.usglc.org/events/americas-...

Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal on Leadership
https://youtu.be/xFaK1GXekjA

Source: CBS News, American Rhetoric, TED, Stanford, Chicago Ideas, Youtube

[Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief]

I think some of our questions and discussions center a lot on Islam and whether it is fundamentally peaceful or not.

I thought I would add this debate that Oxford had - a real live debate between two opposing arguments - a) that Islam was peaceful or b) Islam was not peaceful - Watch and see what you think.

Islam Peace Debate

First - Matthew Handley | Islam Is A Peaceful Religion | Oxford Union
OxfordUnion
https://youtu.be/KWOLzYY_ZtY?list=PLO...

Second - Anne-Marie Waters | Islam Is Not A Peaceful Religion | Oxford Union
https://youtu.be/VQjZHFnmADQ?list=PLO...

Third - Adam Deen | Islam Is A Peaceful Religion | Oxford Union
https://youtu.be/Ik41uzfc_so?list=PLO...

Fourth - Daniel Johnson | Islam Is Not A Peaceful Religion | Oxford Union
https://youtu.be/2MDlZk89oaQ?list=PLO...

Fifth - Mehdi Hasan | Islam Is A Peaceful Religion | Oxford Union
https://youtu.be/Jy9tNyp03M0?list=PLO...

Sixth - Peter Atkins | Islam Is Not A Peaceful Religion | Oxford Union
https://youtu.be/MkxakWfz59o?list=PLO...

[Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief]

Christopher Hitchens and Tariq Ramadan Debate: Is Islam a Religion of Peace?

https://youtu.be/mMraxhd9Z9Q

Source: Youtube - 92Y

[Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief]

RICHARD DAWNS takes on ISLAM on Al Jazeera TV

https://youtu.be/Cv3wTRLh7Xk

Source: Youtuve - 92Y

[Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief]

Discussion Topics:

1. Regarding 235, 236 and 237 - what are your thoughts and opinions?

2. Did you learn or change your mind regarding your point of view? In what ways?

3. How do these viewpoints change how you interpret ISIS and their role in the Middle East? And this book?

[Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief]

Stanley McChrystal:

Discussion Topics:

1. What are your views on his style of leadership and the role he played in Afghanistan and Iraq and in terms of tracking down ISIS and Zarqawi?

2. What are your thoughts on McChrystal himself? It appears to me that he landed on his feet despite the setback that President Obama afforded him. Did Obama make a big mistake? Why or why not?

[Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief]

Stanley McChrystal recommended viewing the The Battle of Algiers - (here it is with English subtitles) and the reading of Modern Warfare.

The Battle of Algiers (English Subtitles)
Link to movie: https://youtu.be/f_N2wyq7fCE



And Reading;

Modern Warfare: A French View of Counterinsurgency

by Roger Trinquier

Synopsis:

This volume in the Praeger Security International (PSI) series Classics of the Counterinsurgency Era reveals how French officers who served in Indochina, like the author, Roger Trinquier, fought fierce rear-guard actions against ideologically motivated insurgents in the 1940s and 1950s to a far greater extent than their American counterparts later faced in Vietnam. The lack of coherent strategic direction from Paris in the chaotic years of the Fourth Republic left the military with the task of making political decisions in the field. With the original introduction by Bernard B. Fall and a new foreword prepared by Eliot A. Cohen.

McChrystal said, "We fundamentally do not understand what is going on outside the wire."

Discussion Topics:

1. What did McChrystal mean?

2. How did McChrystal feel about torture?

3. What was the army's own cluelessness about the Iraqi culture and why did the insurgency's message hold such potency and sway? How could they combat that?

4. Why did McChrystal choose this book and that movie? What did he hope were the lessons learned?

[Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief]

Deep Dive - Chapter 11 - "It would surpass anything al-Qaeda did"

Jordan Militants confess to chemical plot

AMMAN, Jordan — Al-Qaida plotted bombings and poison gas attacks against the U.S. Embassy and other targets in Jordan, two conspirators said in a confession aired Monday on Jordanian state television.

Azim al-Jayousi, identified as the head of the Jordanian cell of al-Qaida, appeared Monday in a 20-minute taped program and described meeting Jordanian militant Abu-Musab al-Zarqawi in neighboring Iraq to plan the foiled plot.

A commentator said the plotters wanted to kill “80,000” Jordanians and had targeted the prime minister’s office, intelligence headquarters and the U.S. Embassy.

Another Jordanian suspect, car mechanic Hussein Sharif Hussein, was shown saying al-Jayousi asked him to buy vehicles and modify them so that they could crash through gates and walls.

U.S. officials have offered a $10 million reward for al-Zarqawi’s capture, saying he is a close associate of al-Qaida chief Osama bin Laden and is trying to build a network of foreign militants in neighboring Iraq to work on al-Qaida’s behalf. His whereabouts are unknown.

A Web site known for publicizing messages from Muslim extremists on Monday carried a purported claim of responsibility from al-Zarqawi for suicide boat attacks against Gulf oil terminals Saturday that killed three Americans and disabled Iraq’s biggest terminal for more than 24 hours.

“I have pledged loyalty to Abu-Musab to fully be obedient and listen to him without discussion,” al-Jayousi said in the Jordanian television segment. He said he first met al-Zarqawi in Afghanistan, where al-Jayousi said he studied explosives, “before Afghanistan fell.” He said he later met al-Zarqawi in Iraq, but was not specific about when.
The videotape also showed still photographs of al-Jayousi and nine other suspects. The commentator said four of those pictured had been killed in clashes with security forces.

Al-Jayousi said he received about $170,000 from al-Zarqawi to finance the plot and used part of it to buy 20 tons of chemicals. He did not identify the chemicals, but said they “were enough for all the operations in the Jordanian arena.”

Images of what the commentator said were vans filled with blue jugs of chemical explosives were included in the broadcast.

Hussein, the car mechanic, said he met al-Jayousi in 1999 but did not clearly say when the terror plans were laid out.

The bearded Hussein, looking anxious, said al-Jayousi told him the aim was “carrying out the first suicide attack to be launched by al-Qaida using chemicals” and “striking at Jordan, its Hashemite (royal family) and launching war on the Crusaders and nonbelievers.
Officials said they had arrested the suspects in two raids in late March and early April. Last week, officials said four other terror suspects believed linked to the same conspiracy were killed in a shootout with police in Amman.

Government officials have said the suspects plotted to detonate a powerful bomb targeting Jordan’s secret service and use poison gas against the prime minister’s office, the U.S. Embassy and other diplomatic missions. Had the bomb exploded, it could have killed at least 20,000 people and wrecked buildings within a half-mile radius, the officials have said.

No trial date has been set in the case.

Airing suspects’ confessions before their trial is unusual in Jordan. In 1998, six men accused of affiliation with a militant group confessed on television to planting a bomb that exploded outside an Amman hotel. Five years later, a court found them innocent.

The unusual move may be an attempt to answer critics who claim the government has exaggerated the terror danger to justify tightening security. Officials in Jordan, a moderate Arab nation with close ties to the United States and a peace treaty with Israel, say the kingdom has been repeatedly targeted by al-Qaida and other militant groups.

Video:
Jordan combats terrorism - April 26: NBC's Lisa Myers obtained a tape of four suspected terrorists who confessed to police about possible attacks on Amman, the capital.

http://www.nbcnews.com/video/nightly-...

Discussion Topics:

1. What are your thoughts after watching the actual news footage of the plans for this attack detailed in Chapter 11? What are your thoughts on Jayousi who kept his family close amid boxes of C-4 military explosives?

2. Why was Zarqawi so interested in gaining acknowledgment from al Qaeda and Bin Laden yet so intent on trying to surpass Bin Laden in notoriety and scope?

[Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief]

Remember the Week three assignment and have a Happy Easter.

WEEK THREE READING ASSIGNMENT - (151 through page 238 ) - 4/17/17 - 4/23/17

BOOK II - IRAQ - CONTINUED

12. "The sheik of the slaughterers" 151
13. "It's hopeless there" 161
14. "Are you going to get him" 176
15. "This is our 9/11" 193
16. "Your end is close" 2016

BOOK III - ISIS

17. "The people want to topple the regime" - 223

[Leo]

Bentley wrote: "Just as an aside - when all of the Jewish cemeteries were desecrated this past year - it was Muslim communities which came out and took up donations to fix the cemeteries and even offered to do the..."

Bentley, I concur with messages 225, 226.

All,

Chapter 10 Discussion:

I'm going from memory, so please correct me if I misstate any particulars.

1. Is this what Islam is all about - revolting is exactly what we want? Or not?

If I understood it correctly, revolting was exactly what ISIS wanted. It created a toxic environment that created a worse situation for the United States military and oppressed ISIS's least supportive Islam sect (Sunni). This revolt essentially created a war between the factions the United States needed unified to as the counterinsurgency. I'm going to have to thumb through my limited counterinsurgency library to see if this is a published theory that an insurgent is likely to use. I know that the strength and legitimacy of the government fighting an insurgency is one of the greatest factors to success as counter-insurgent.

Present your views based upon what you have observed in the Middle East news and in the interviews with various Middle Eastern leaders or your own personal interactions or your own views and opinions. Why does ISIS believe that what they do is going to move and influence Muslims around the world?

My limited understanding of contemporary Middle-Eastern leaders has given me the view that they are not zealots for Islam. For this reason, they are often targeted by the radical factions. When Islam was at its height in the Middle East the rulers were devout Muslims (Saladin, Muhammad, Rashidun, Umayyad (think I am missing one)). Based on this fact, zealots believe it is necessary to return to these levels of devotion for Islam to assume the position it should have in the world. Further, ISIS believes others will see the progress their sacrifice makes as positive for Islam and join the cause. As the zealots population and power grows, it will be easier to deal with the kafir (unbelievers).

Are they?

Yes. To what extent, I am not sure. But, their actions are mobilizing impressionable Muslims all over the world. The most influenced members within their societies that I am aware of are within their educational systems. I believe a well educated populace is less susceptible to influence from any movement similar to ISIS. However, what is far worse is an educational system that supports these movements. All accounts I have of Muslim education systems are from Muslims. These persons have stated that this is the place where they experienced the most hatred for the West and were expected to harbor ideals aligned with groups similar to ISIS. Circling back to a previous question above, this may be why most leaders in the Islamic world are not zealots. Many are educated in universities outside of the Middle East. However, I am not sure where they elementary or secondary education takes place, which I think may have more influence than post-secondary education on some people.

Shouldn't Muslims be in horror at what they are witnessing. These are questions that I think many folks around the world are asking - where are those who are speaking out and saying - not in our name?

Yes, and I think they are. However, as stated previously, I am not sure what the majority is willing to do about it.

2. For example if a Roman Catholic or a Lutheran decided to get a gang together and go kill Egyptians because a long time ago this was a Christian country and they want to take it over on behalf of the memory of Byzantine King Constantine, the ancient Crusaders and have their own Christian caliphate - I would be appalled as would I believe almost 100% of other Christians and Lutherans and we would speak out and be horrified and try to do something about it. And I believe the Vatican and the Pope would speak out too. Of course that has not happened but this is an example of what is happening on the Muslim side. Do Muslims silently sympathize - if so then why do they emigrate to Democratic countries who have zero sympathy for these views, do not embrace Sharia law or oppression of women and have absolute separation of church from state and have bars where drinking takes place and look with disapproval at hijab and burkas or whatever the women have to wear in 90 degree weather. It would seem that these things would not be to their liking. Is there something that we are missing or is there something we do not understand?

I think they immigrate for opportunity and freedom. Also, they have these same establishments and issues in Islamic countries. Because the oppressive culture Islam creates, there are issues (issues from the Islamic perspective, not mine) with drug abuse, alcoholism, violence, and homosexuality. I think that Zarqawi is an example of this. Throughout these times of expression in their life, the person remains tied to Islam. It is my opinion that if the person decides to become religious again, they naturally return to Islam. Now, that they have returned with committing these past sins they have to make up for it with devout dedication, which some express through becoming a zealot whether they are still residing in the Middle East or not.

3. Is it a good sign that the Middle Eastern countries also view these thugs called ISIS as a threat to their own country and to their own authority and have banded together to fight ISIS? If so, then how is ISIS still being funded by various individuals and groups within these same countries? How or why are these folks not being rounded up for funding terrorism and arrested? Are they? Maybe some of you know more than I do about these situations from your other readings? If you have other questions or opinion or opposing views, please post them as well.

I have a limited perspective on the subject of internal opposition to ISIS, but I think that most of the organizations opposing Islam are either do not identify as a traditional Muslim organization, have ulterior motives, or are Muslim and have opposing tactical views of Islam with the same end goals.

4. Britain (the BBC) has decided to use satire which is a British tradition to help fight terrorism - what do you think of this approach? Your thoughts? Leave it to the British (smile).

I do not think satire is a good approach. Muslims take their religion seriously and that is the reason they are at war. To discredit their beliefs and religion only adds momentum to their cause.

-Leo

[Leo]

Timmy wrote: "Question 5:
Satire is a risky tool. I heard a great podcast a while ago about satire and its effectiveness. I believe it was on The Revisionist History by Malcolm Gladwell called the Satire Paradox..."

I'll check it out. Post the link if you have it or one exists. I'll post it, if I find it.

-Leo

[Leo]

Leo wrote: "Timmy wrote: "Question 5:
Satire is a risky tool. I heard a great podcast a while ago about satire and its effectiveness. I believe it was on The Revisionist History by Malcolm Gladwell called the ..."

Too easy here is the link, I am not sure what the glossary is and not sure this will work as a link:

http://revisionisthistory.com/episode...

-Leo

[Leo]

Timmy wrote: "Question 1:
I think a lot of middle eastern leaders seem very progressive compared to there citizens. I think some of that has to due to there level of education and there desire to become a global..."

Timmy,

Couldn't agree more. I think education is the heart of many issues. Personally, education has changed my viewpoints more than anything other than experience which has only been surpassed by the combination of the two. Unfortunately, the only education some people have access to is very biased and creates or hardens issues rather than promoting free thought and analysis as I believe it should.

-Leo

[Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief]

Leo and Timmy - I have to take exception to your fear that satire is not a good idea. Both McChrystal and Hitchens believe that there is power in satire and humor. But I fully understand why you say that.

It actually is a good idea - because if Islam is the religion of peace as some of these moderates say it is - then it should be able to handle humor and satire without dire consequences as does every other religion known to man has and every other political being.

Being able to move a discussion from fear and violence - to laughter and peaceful banter allows everyone to relax and to look at the foibles of whatever it is that is being discussed - there are no perfect beings or perfect anything. Everything is imperfect.

But what is true is that humor is not blasphemous or some horrible entity and if a religion is indeed peaceful - there should be no backlash.

Now what you are saying out of fear and/or knowledge of what usually happens is realism as to what to expect next and because of those expectations can we actually say that the religion of Islam is really peaceful? Or not?

This is a rhetorical question. But laughter and satire and humor are never bad entities - violence as retribution to laughter, humor and satire is however.

Not sure what your feeling are on this idea.

[Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief]

This is the third week's reading assignment which we are now beginning. You can discuss anything discussed in the previous pages up through page 238 without using the spoiler html - if you quote from the book going beyond these pages - then spoiler html is a must and/or you must post on the glossary thread.

WEEK THREE READING ASSIGNMENT - (151 through page 238 ) - 4/17/17 - 4/23/17

BOOK II - IRAQ - CONTINUED

12. "The sheik of the slaughterers" 151
13. "It's hopeless there" 161
14. "Are you going to get him" 176
15. "This is our 9/11" 193
16. "Your end is close" 2016

BOOK III - ISIS

17. "The people want to topple the regime" - 223

Chapter Overview and Summaries

BOOK II - IRAQ - CONTINUED

12. "The sheik of the slaughterers"

Chapter 12 discusses the slaughter and deep humiliation of David Berg by Zarqawi which emphasizes the orange jumpsuits worn by the Iraqi prisoners and is intent on sowing fear among everyone else.

13. "It's hopeless there"

Ford returns to the Green Zone and is not a happy camper about what he sees. Zarqawi even offends those who use to be close to him like Magdisi. Bin Laden who did not like the Jordanian decided to join forces to stop the Iraqi elections.

14. "Are you going to get him"

Shiites will vote, the Kurds will vote but the Sunnis were too afraid of being treated in a violent way at the polling booth. Zawahiri felt that Zarqawi was hurting the al Qaeda brand. Zarqawi turned from being deferential to al Qaeda and became brazen and emboldened. Finally McChrystal - forever watching - sees Zarqawi make a mistake.

15. "This is our 9/11"

The bombing of the Radisson sent chills throughout the Muslim populace - this was not right. The king of Jordan said - "This is our 9/11 - This changed our optic."

16. "Your end is close" 2016

McChrystal waited and waited until they could sniff out Zarqawi's safe house by watching the spiritual advisor. The wait paid off.

BOOK III - ISIS

17. "The people want to topple the regime"

Poor Robert Ford was staring out of the windows of the embassy in Damascus, Syria focused on the embassy gates. Great unrest ensued and the Syrian police did nothing. Then abruptly just the way that it started - the police now suddenly re-engaged and did their jobs. Assad stood firm and was not leaving and termed the protestors - radical islamists.

[Bentley, Group Founder, Leader, Chief]

Folks we begin the reading for week three - before I begin the deep dives - please put forward some of your questions, ideas and opinions on the chapters assigned for this week's reading or before.

[Leo]

Bentley wrote: "Folks we begin the reading for week three - before I begin the deep dives - please put forward some of your questions, ideas and opinions on the chapters assigned for this week's reading or before."

Week Three,

I've only got a couple of thoughts at this point. The first one is just something that came to me when reviewing related material and comparing it to what we've read so far.

Did McChrystal learn his theories for management from ISIS or did he have these theories before walking into Iraq? The idea of a shared purpose and consciousness seems to be present in ISIS ideology. So, maybe there is a concurrent question. Was there a shared purpose and consciousness within ISIS? Or, did chance just happen to bring two leaders together as adversaries who knew how to motivate people well and they happened to do so similarly? I thought Zarqawi was just getting lucky in all the strategic successes. As we progress through the book, it seems many of these successes were calculated, deliberate decisions.

A point I'd like to bring up is how ISIS was able to use extreme measures against innocents to promote their agenda successfully. However, the United States received negative backlash even for using a taser on a known ISIS affiliate. This illustrates the difficulty of being a counterinsurgent, especially on foreign soil.

-Leo