Afghanistan may again become a safe haven for the Taliban and al-Qaeda. Taliban factions have markedly increased the pace of operations throughout Afghanistan following the September 28 offensive against Kunduz city. The increased tempo of Taliban operations is partly a demonstration of power by Mullah Akhtar Mansour aimed at silencing dissident commanders, as he confirmed in an October 2 interview. Senior Al Qaeda leader Hussam Abdul Raouf urged Taliban dissidents to pledge allegiance to Mullah Akthar Mansour, possibly showing their coordination. A prolonged offensive and consolidation of Taliban control in northern Afghanistan could position elements loyal to Mullah Akhtar Mansour for follow on assaults on several provincial capitals and put Taliban elements within 150 miles of Kabul. The Taliban will likely conduct increased attacks in Takhar, Badakhshan, and Baghlan provinces to extend the Northern offensive. These provinces contain key transit routes that the Taliban were able to blockade during their offensive on Kunduz city, stymieing nearly one thousand ANSF reinforcements sent from Kabul and Badakhshan provinces. The Taliban will likely try to gain and hold a permanent presence in Takhar, Badakhshan, and Baghlan provinces to consolidate their control in the north before attempting to advance on Kabul. The offensives in Jowzjan, Faryab, and Sar-e Pul, and Farah provinces may be follow on assaults by Mullah Mansour's faction as he continues to consolidate power within the Taliban ranks.
ANSF forces will face a growing challenge to their counter offensive. The ongoing northern offensive by Mansour's Taliban faction has drawn thousands of ANSF reinforcements previously stationed in other areas. Mullah Mansour's competitors from rival Taliban factions will likely attempt to launch their own offensives to maintain relevancy and establish legitimacy among the Taliban ranks. Increased attacks by these rival mTaliban factions against ANSF forces are anticipated in Helmand Province, Kandahar Province, and Zabul Province. Meanwhile ISIS's Afghanistan affiliate conducted an IED attack on ANSF forces in Nangarhar province, killing several civilians. The attack demonstrates the threat ISIS poses to ANSF forces in Nangarhar, a threat highlighted by General John Campbell in his testimony to the Senate Armed Services Committee on October 6.
The Institute for the Study of War (ISW) is a non-partisan, non-profit, public policy research organization. ISW advances an informed understanding of military affairs through reliable research, trusted analysis, and innovative education. We are committed to improving the nation's ability to execute military operations and respond to emerging threats in order to achieve U.S. strategic objectives. Visit us at www.understandingwar.org.
You’ve no doubt seen or heard the stories by now: Thousands of migrants, seeking refuge from conflicts, oppression and poverty in many parts of the world, paying smugglers and often meeting a tragic end at sea.
Refugee crises have emerged in places as far-flung as Southeast Asia – where Manmar’s minority Rohingya Muslims are seeking better fortunes abroad – and in the Mediterranean Sea. In fact, some groups say that the world is now in the midst of the worst refugee crisis to emerge since the end of World War II.
The waves of migrants who have been displaced by conflicts in the Middle East, North Africa and sub-Saharan Africa pose a particularly difficult challenge for the European Union – where political bonds have been frayed by the ongoing economic crisis.
Download this FREE map to gain a deeper understanding of the migration patterns and the unique challenges they pose for European policymakers.
Stratfor provides global awareness and guidance to individuals, governments and businesses around the world. We use a unique, intel-based approach to analyze world affairs.
Today’s target (not in a violent way) is Qasim Rashid.
Bio: (Click on images to enlarge.)
Besides that we can add writer for the Islam loving publication Salon.com.
This morning my Facebook friend and anti-Islam warrioress DeeAnne Weibe, contacted me in order to tell me that Qasim had blocked her from commenting on his Facebook page. All because she asked him a few questions on Islam. So of course I decided to chime in.
Right off the bat Qasim plays the deflection game, and attempts to get the focus off of my points on Islam and him. Thinking no one will notice.
At that point I put up links to the verses that proved my two claims on Islam. Sex slavery and child marriage.
For those who do not know the verses, here they are out in the open.
And, forbidden to you are, wedded women, those with spouses, that you should marry them before they have left their spouses, be they Muslim free women or not; save what your right hands own, of captured [slave] girls, whom you may have sexual intercourse with, even if they should have spouses among the enemy camp, but only after they have been absolved of the possibility of pregnancy [after the completion of one menstrual cycle]; this is what God has prescribed for you (kitāba is in the accusative because it is the verbal noun). Lawful for you (read passive wa-uhilla, or active wa-ahalla), beyond all that, that is, except what He has forbidden you of women, is that you seek, women, using your wealth, by way of a dowry or a price, in wedlock and not, fornicating, in illicitly. Such wives as you enjoy thereby, and have had sexual intercourse with, give them their wages, the dowries that you have assigned them, as an obligation; you are not at fault in agreeing together, you and they, after the obligation, is waived, decreased or increased. God is ever Knowing, of His creatures, Wise, in what He has ordained for them.
Yes friends, Islam clearly allows sex slavery and Qasim tried to cover for it.
Child marriage. (For those new to the subject, the following verse speaks of the iddah, which is the waiting period a Muslim female must wait to be remarried. The words clearly state Islam allows prepubescent marriage. To those with morals that is pedophilia.)
Koran 65:4
And [as for] those of your women who (read allā’ī or allā’i in both instances) no longer expect to menstruate, if you have any doubts, about their waiting period, their prescribed [waiting] period shall be three months, and [also for] those who have not yet menstruated, because of their young age, their period shall [also] be three months — both cases apply to other than those whose spouses have died; for these [latter] their period is prescribed in the verse: they shall wait by themselves for four months and ten [days] [Q. 2:234]. And those who are pregnant, their term, the conclusion of their prescribed [waiting] period if divorced or if their spouses be dead, shall be when they deliver. And whoever fears God, He will make matters ease for him, in this world and in the Hereafter.
But this is not the first time he has tried to cover for those two repulsive actions. He also did so on Twitter.
To further expose the Muslim lawyer as the liar he is, here is a screenshot in which he says he is all for free speech.
But guess what? He deleted my entire exchange with him. Because my comments were above the first post visible here.
Judge Logan: Qasim Rashid, the charges against you are liar, and protector of depravity.
The terrorists did not need permission from Hamas leaders to murder the first Jews they ran into. The inflammatory rhetoric of Abbas and Palestinian Authority (PA) officials and media outlets was sufficient to drive any Palestinian to go out and murder Jews.
Instead of condemning the murder of the Jews, the PA denounced Israel for killing the two Palestinians who carried out the Jerusalem attacks.
The Palestinian Authority and its leaders are in no position today to condemn the murder of any Jews, simply because the PA itself has been encouraging such terrorist attacks through its ceaseless campaign of incitement against Israel.
The PA is playing a double game: it tells the world that it wants peace and coexistence with Israel; meanwhile it incites Palestinians against Israel, driving some to set out with guns and knives to murder Jews.
Although Abbas has repeatedly stated during the past few years that he does not want another intifada against Israel, his statements and actions show that he is doing his utmost to spark another wave of violence, in order to invite international pressure on Israel.
Official Palestinian Authority media outlets incite Palestinians, from a young age, to murder Jews. (Image source: Palestinian Media Watch)
The Palestinian Authority (PA) and its leaders, including President Mahmoud Abbas, cannot evade responsibility for the latest wave of terror attacks against Israelis in Jerusalem and the West Bank.
True, in the end it turned out that Hamas was behind the murder of Eitam and Naama Henkin in front of their four children, but there is no ignoring the fact that the anti-Israel incitement of Abbas and other Palestinian leaders in Ramallah paved the way for the terrorists to carry out this and other attacks.
The incitement, which has been around for many years, intensified after the arson attack that killed three members of the Dawabsha family in the West Bank village of Duma in July.
Linda Stasi, writing for the New York Daily News, appears to be one of those intellectually dishonest progressive socialist democrats who remain totally clueless about human nature, individual responsibility, and the role of the state in dictating the course of people’s lives.
Stasi: State Department must list gun-loving NRA as terrorist organization -- NEW YORK DAILY NEWS
After more than 87,000 people in the U.S. have been killed from gun violence, it's time to label the NRA for what it really is: a terrorist organization.
One terrorist group is responsible for more civilian deaths since December 2012 (the Sandy Hook massacre) than Al Qaeda, Boko Haram, Hamas and the Taliban. Yet it is the only nearly-state sponsored terrorist group that is not listed by the U.S. State Department as such.
It is the National Rifle Association and for their unending lobbying that’s kept a lid on gun control we now have 428 times more American deaths by gun than deaths by foreign terrorists.
Those murdered Americans killed by our own lunatic gun slingers include terrified children calling for their mothers, teachers begging for the lives of their students, students begging for not just their own lives but the lives of their classmates, moviegoers looking for escape, bystanders cheering for athletes, athletes trying to be the best they can be as the worst we ever could have imagined struck them down in cold blood.
Therefore the NRA should take its rightful place on the State Department list of terrorist organizations, because its influence is more of an immediate threat to the lives of our citizens than foreign terrorists.
Although the NRA is not an officially state-sponsored organization it is the supporter of the state with its massive member and lobbyist donations to our elected officials.
Perhaps if Linda Stasi was intellectually honest, she might note that no law can contain criminals or crazies and in the absence of guns, evildoers would turn to other means such as edged-weapons, fire, explosives, vehicles, or other devices. And, the best and only way to stop an evildoer on a rampage is to kill them before they kill or injure you.
Perhaps if Linda Stasi was intellectually honest, she might also condemn the progressive socialist democrats, particularly the environmentalists, who so demonized the pesticide DDT using junk science that millions of people around the world died or suffered greatly.
Perhaps if Linda Stasi was intellectually honest, she might also condemn the progressive socialist democrats, particularly the feminists, who empowered Planned Parenthood as a killing field for innocent children who were viable in the womb.
Perhaps if Linda Stasi was intellectually honest, she might also condemn the progressive socialist democrats for creating public policies that ensured the destruction of nuclear families and the absence of male influence on young boys to teach them right from wrong. These same young boys who turned into killers and gangbangers. Or whose public policies created a permanent underclass of victims dependent on state-provided entitlements in return for their vote.
Perhaps if Linda Stasi was intellectually honest, she might also condemn the progressive socialist democrats who govern the majority of the inner cities where gun-related death is a daily occurance and is responsible for the majority of gun-related death, excluding suicides and accidents, in the nation. Especially those politicians who refuse to label minority gangs as domestic terrorists and sit idly by while more people may die in a weekend than do in a single mass killing event. Some might say that Linda’s sense of proportionality is skewed to fit her political agenda?
Perhaps if Linda Stasi was intellectually honest, she might also point to the uncounted lives that were saved – including men, women, and children – by someone who used a weapon to protect themselves, their families, or members of the community. But, these are the stories that are never told in the mainstream media nor are they counted among official statistics.
But Linda Stasi does not appear to be intellectually honest, so she parrots the progressive socialist democrat line that it is the gun, not the individual, that is responsible for the majority of gun-related deaths. And, somehow, the organization that teaches responsible gun ownership and usage is to blame for the ill-will and bad intentions of evildoers.
Bottom line …
Progressive socialist democrats in the media appear to be totally clueless when it comes to self-defense and the Second Amendment. And, an organization that upholds, protects, and defends our Constitution should not and can not be vilified or held responsible for the actions of individuals who act out of their own accord.
I learned gun safety from my father, reinforced by every NRA-sanctioned range master I have ever met.
I am a life member of the NRA (Benefactor Level) and thank heavens they are there to protect me from people like Linda Stasi and the progressive socialist democrats who would see me disarmed and unable to protect myself, my family, and others; groveling and begging for mercy while a criminal or crazy, who did not respect or adhere to the law, operated with impunity in a gun-free zone to kill or injure us.
Linda Stasi has defamed the character of the NRA and its members. For this she should apologize and be held accountable, not for her beliefs or her words, but for the fact that she is assisting the progressive socialist democrats to create a world where nobody is safe or secure; from criminals, crazies, or tyrannical politicians.
U.S. President Barack Obama, right, and Russia's President Vladimir Putin at the United Nations headquarters on Sept. 28, 2015. PHOTO: ASSOCIATED PRESS
David Petraeus testified last month to the Senate Armed Services Committee on U.S. policy in the Middle East. Regarding Syria, the former general and CIA director urged a credible threat to destroyBashar Assad’s air force if it continues to bomb its own people. He also recommended “the establishment of enclaves in Syria protected by coalition air power, where a moderate Sunni force could be supported and where additional forces could be trained, internally displaced persons could find refuge, and the Syrian opposition could organize.”
But Barack Obama does not agree. At his Friday press conference, the president described such views as “mumbo-jumbo,” “half-baked ideas,” “as-if” solutions, a willful effort to “downplay the challenges involved in the situation.” He says the critics have no answers to the questions of “what exactly would you do and how would you fund it and how would you sustain it.”
America’s greatest living general might as well have been testifying to his shower drain for all the difference his views are going to make in this administration.
So it is with this president. It’s not enough for him to stake and defend his positions. He wants you to know that he thinks deeper, sees further, knows better, operates from a purer motive. His preferred method for dealing with disagreement is denigration. If Republicans want a tougher line in Syria, they’re warmongers. IfHillary Clinton thinks a no-fly zone is a good idea, she’s playing politics: “There is obviously a difference,” the president tut-tutted about his former secretary of state’s position, “between running for president and being president.”
You can interpret that jab as a sign Mr. Obama is urging Joe Biden to run. It’s also a reminder that Mr. Obama believes his Syria policy—the one that did nothing as 250,000 people were murdered; the one that did nothing as his own red lines were crossed; the one that allowed ISIS to flourish; the one that has created the greatest refugee crisis of the 21st century; the one currently being exploited by Russia and Iran for geopolitical advantage—is a success.
That’s because the president’s fundamental conviction about American foreign policy is that we need less of it—less commitment, less expense, less responsibility. Winston Churchill once said that the U.S. could not be “the leading community in the civilized world without being involved in its problems, without being convulsed by its agonies and inspired by its causes.” Mr. Obama sees it differently. He is the president who would prefer not to. He is the Bartleby of 21st century geopolitics.
As for what a serious Syria policy might look like, the U.S. proved it was capable of creating safe havens and enforcing no-fly zones in 1991 with Operation Provide Comfort, which stopped Saddam Hussein from massacring Kurds in northern Iraq the way he had butchered Shiites in southern Iraq.
This is how we wound up preventing what might otherwise have been a refugee crisis that would have rivaled the current exodus from Syria. It’s how we got an Iraqi Kurdistan—the one undisputed U.S. achievement in the Middle East in the past 25 years. It’s how we were later able to stop ISIS from swallowing northern Iraq and eastern Syria whole.
Reprising that formula in Syria won’t be simple, but what’s the alternative? John Kerry wants another grand conference in Geneva so the warring parties can settle their differences in a civilized way. Will ISIS be invited to the table? Donald Trump says that if the Russians “want to hit ISIS, that’s OK with me”—except the Russians are hitting U.S.-backed rebels instead of ISIS. There’s a view that staying out of Syria is the best way to get bad guys on all sides to fight their way to mutual extinction. But the lesson of the Syrian war is that chaos does not annihilate the forces of jihad. It turbocharges them.
“It is frequently said that there is no ‘military solution’ to Syria,” Gen. Petraeus said in his testimony. “This may be true, but it is also misleading. For, in every case, if there is to be hope of a political settlement, a certain military and security context is required—and that context will not materialize on its own.” Is this, too, mumbo-jumbo?
In the meantime, note what Vladimir Putin, lectured by Mr. Obama for getting Russia “stuck in a quagmire,” is achieving in Syria.
For a relatively trivial investment of some jet fighters and a brigade-sized support force, Moscow extends its influence in the eastern Mediterranean, deepens a commercially and strategically productive alliance with Iran, humiliates the U.S., boosts Mr. Putin’s popularity at home, and earns a geopolitical card he can play in any number of negotiations—Ukraine, gas contracts, Mr. Assad’s political future, you name it. If things don’t work out, he can pull up stakes within a week without much loss of money, lives or prestige. It’s a perfect play.
I spent some time staring at press pool photos of Mr. Obama and Mr. Putin at their recent encounter at the United Nations. The Russian seems to gaze at the president the way a good chess player approaches an inferior opponent—somewhere between delighted and bored by the intellectual mismatch. We’ve got 16 more months of this to go.
